How to fight back if someone pushes you down?

[wingchun100]

Thank you though. You quickly reminded me why I am glad MT saw fit to install an ignore button. And no, I am not ignoring you because I am a wimp and you argued me into a corner. I'm ignoring you because you are condescending and judgmental, and honestly just plain rude.

 

[Hanzou]

She didn't say what to do if she was pinned down. If she had followed my reply with "what if I am pinned," then I could have said things to that too.

Mansplaining. Please. Not everything has to be a feminist rant from you. And the statement that you think you have to "explain" it to me is condescending. I gave a list with the honest intent of offering helpful suggestions. The only one who read the "typical male" thing into it was you.

Is this the kind of stuff you recommend WC?

Cause that's the kind of stuff being taught by quite a few TMAs.

And yeah, it's all bad.

 

[wingchun100]

Is this the kind of stuff you recommend WC?

Cause that's the kind of stuff being taught by quite a few TMAs.

And yeah, it's all bad.

Yeah I guess only what your style teaches is what would work. [emoji4]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hanzou]

Yeah I guess only what your style teaches is what would work. [emoji4]

My style definitely teaches what works. However, it isn't the only style that can.

However, what is shown in that Wing Chun video doesn't work, and actually has a very good chance of getting you seriously hurt. That arm bar "escape" is especially dangerous.

 

[drop bear]

My style definitely teaches what works. However, it isn't the only style that can.

However, what is shown in that Wing Chun video doesn't work, and actually has a very good chance of getting you seriously hurt. That arm bar "escape" is especially dangerous.

It is an example of methodology. The guy attacks and then doesn't move. Because of that the coach there can do any old thing and all his technical mistakes are forgiven. He does not get good feedback. Which is kind of the reason you have a partner in the first place.

Honest resisted training pretty much breaks that cycle from the get go. And the instructor would only loose his arm once to realise

A. why you go the other way out of that arm bar.

B. why you avoid that move at all if you have old man shoulders.

I think it is less about style there and more about a trend to be avoided.

So the arm bar escape done more right. Just in case anybody wanted to know.

And factoring in that your partner is not just going to lay there like a chump.

 

[wingchun100]

@drop bear For the first time, it seems like we are kind of sort of thinking along the same lines.

That is all I dropped in to say.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Is this the kind of stuff you recommend WC?

Cause that's the kind of stuff being taught by quite a few TMAs.

And yeah, it's all bad.

Not all bad, at least the parts I watched. It wouldn't work against someone skilled at those attacks they're simulating, but looks like it would be effective against someone who thinks they know how to do those things (or someone who sorta knows how or is just being sloppy). The counters he's demonstrating appear to be (hard to tell without hearing his explanations) designed to take advantage of some pretty elementary mistakes. The roll-out from the arm bar is a good example. I've had people make that sort of mistake. Someone with a solid BJJ background wouldn't leave that opening, but it does happen with ill-trained people. Maybe possible with a fairly new BJJ practitioner who is intoxicated, too.

I think it's really likely poorly-executed versions of those attacks will show up more often, as a result of people watching a lot of MMA and trying to figure out how to do stuff off YouTube.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It is an example of methodology. The guy attacks and then doesn't move. Because of that the coach there can do any old thing and all his technical mistakes are forgiven. He does not get good feedback. Which is kind of the reason you have a partner in the first place.

Honest resisted training pretty much breaks that cycle from the get go. And the instructor would only loose his arm once to realise

A. why you go the other way out of that arm bar.

B. why you avoid that move at all if you have old man shoulders.

I think it is less about style there and more about a trend to be avoided.

So the arm bar escape done more right. Just in case anybody wanted to know.

And factoring in that your partner is not just going to lay there like a chump.

Well, the partner just sitting there is pretty much necessary if you're going to demonstrate any move and be able to stop and talk about it along the way. We can't assume that's the only way they train these things, just because that's how he works when he demonstrates it.

 

[Hanzou]

Not all bad, at least the parts I watched. It wouldn't work against someone skilled at those attacks they're simulating, but looks like it would be effective against someone who thinks they know how to do those things (or someone who sorta knows how or is just being sloppy). The counters he's demonstrating appear to be (hard to tell without hearing his explanations) designed to take advantage of some pretty elementary mistakes. The roll-out from the arm bar is a good example. I've had people make that sort of mistake. Someone with a solid BJJ background wouldn't leave that opening, but it does happen with ill-trained people. Maybe possible with a fairly new BJJ practitioner who is intoxicated, too.

I think it's really likely poorly-executed versions of those attacks will show up more often, as a result of people watching a lot of MMA and trying to figure out how to do stuff off YouTube.

I disagree. The overall technique was poor, and many of those counters simply wouldn't work if the person on top is larger than the person on the bottom.

That silliness with him grabbing his opponent's wrist and stopping punches is complete nonsense. The idea that someone on top of you is going to simply stop at your hips and not attempt to advance in order to pound your face in is also nonsense. If it was easy to control an advancing opponent on top by simply lifting your knees up, closed guard wouldn't be be necessary.

We also shouldn't excuse sloppy technique and bad instruction by saying that "maybe" they'll work on an untrained opponent. What if your opponent isn't untrained? What if those techniques don't work because they're based on half baked principles and you trained them with a compliant partner?

That armbar escape is especially dangerous because it initiates after the arm is being hyper extended. You should be initiating the escape before you reach that point as shown in Drop Bear's vid.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I disagree. The overall technique was poor, and many of those counters simply wouldn't work if the person on top is larger than the person on the bottom.

That silliness with him grabbing his opponent's wrist and stopping punches is complete nonsense. The idea that someone on top of you is going to simply stop at your hips and not attempt to advance in order to pound your face in is also nonsense. If it was easy to control an advancing opponent on top by simply lifting your knees up, closed guard wouldn't be be necessary.

We also shouldn't excuse sloppy technique and bad instruction by saying that "maybe" they'll work on an untrained opponent. What if your opponent isn't untrained? What if those techniques don't work because they're based on half baked principles and you trained them with a compliant partner?

That armbar escape is especially dangerous because it initiates after the arm is being hyper extended. You should be initiating the escape before you reach that point as shown in Drop Bear's vid.

My point was that each of those counters can actually be useful in the context of a specific mistake. I can't tell if that's what he was talking about there (perhaps responding to a specific scenario), or if he didn't understand that a mistake would be necessary for each of those to work. For instance, with the arm bar escape, if the person trying to apply the arm bar doesn't lock down the base, there's no hyper-extension, which can leave that opening. If he thinks that's a valid escape to a proper application of the technique, he's wrong. If he's teaching that you can escape that way from a bad arm bar, maybe he isn't. I say 'maybe' because I'd have to experiment with that movement to see how much of an opening you'd need for it to be safe. In my mind, I'm picturing a couple of fundamental errors that could make that safely available, but I might be mis-imagining the torque point you'd run into by going that way.

 

[drop bear]

Well, the partner just sitting there is pretty much necessary if you're going to demonstrate any move and be able to stop and talk about it along the way. We can't assume that's the only way they train these things, just because that's how he works when he demonstrates it.

We can for two reasons.

If the partner ever hung on to that arm bar then old mate would never got to the point where he thought that was an actual defence. Plus the other less obvious tragic performances.

And just because you dont see a guy training in a terrible manner on you tube does not mean he doesn't train that way. So we can assume he trains any way that fits our agenda.

 

[drop bear]

My point was that each of those counters can actually be useful in the context of a specific mistake. I can't tell if that's what he was talking about there (perhaps responding to a specific scenario), or if he didn't understand that a mistake would be necessary for each of those to work. For instance, with the arm bar escape, if the person trying to apply the arm bar doesn't lock down the base, there's no hyper-extension, which can leave that opening. If he thinks that's a valid escape to a proper application of the technique, he's wrong. If he's teaching that you can escape that way from a bad arm bar, maybe he isn't. I say 'maybe' because I'd have to experiment with that movement to see how much of an opening you'd need for it to be safe. In my mind, I'm picturing a couple of fundamental errors that could make that safely available, but I might be mis-imagining the torque point you'd run into by going that way.

No.

Just no.

That is outright grasping for a silk purse out of a pigs ear.

If someone does the worlds worst arm bar. The correct technical escapes still work. Having a messed up escape trained in to your arsenal to counter a messed up arm bar is physically worse than just screwing up. Because at least someone can fix your screw ups.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

We can for two reasons.

If the partner ever hung on to that arm bar then old mate would never got to the point where he thought that was an actual defence. Plus the other less obvious tragic performances.

And just because you dont see a guy training in a terrible manner on you tube does not mean he doesn't train that way. So we can assume he trains any way that fits our agenda.

I never assumed he doesn't train that way. And, sure, you can argue from an assumption (by saying, "assuming he trains that way..."), which is a reasonable way to make a point. It's not reasonable, however, to simply assume he trains that way because of a demonstration.

I do agree that the person assisting in the demo could put more appropriate tension in most of those pause points. Most students aren't very good at that, though. They relax too much when they pause. I often have to stop while demonstrating a technique and coach the student on what the tension should be at that point, rather than just working with a flaccid arm, as if my attacker fell asleep mid-attack.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

No.

Just no.

That is outright grasping for a silk purse out of a pigs ear.

If someone does the worlds worst arm bar. The correct technical escapes still work. Having a messed up escape trained in to your arsenal to counter a messed up arm bar is physically worse than just screwing up. Because at least someone can fix your screw ups.

That's a reasonable argument.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

It wouldn't work against someone skilled at those attacks they're simulating, but looks like it would be effective against someone who thinks they know how to do those things (or someone who sorta knows how or is just being sloppy). The counters he's demonstrating appear to be (hard to tell without hearing his explanations) designed to take advantage of some pretty elementary mistakes. The roll-out from the arm bar is a good example. I've had people make that sort of mistake. Someone with a solid BJJ background wouldn't leave that opening, but it does happen with ill-trained people. Maybe possible with a fairly new BJJ practitioner who is intoxicated, too.

I think it's really likely poorly-executed versions of those attacks will show up more often, as a result of people watching a lot of MMA and trying to figure out how to do stuff off YouTube.

It does make sense to train defenses against the untrained version of common street attacks (haymaker, headlock, tackle, etc) because

• those techniques are extremely common in real world violence
• even the untrained versions can be dangerous if you're not used to them
• the defenses against those attacks are easier to learn than the defenses against their trained equivalents, but they make a good starting point for learning the principles which will apply against the more sophisticated versions

In contrast, an untrained armbar is both less common and less dangerous. Bozos who think they know Jiu-Jitsu because they watch the UFC aren't really much of a threat. If you're going to bother learning an armbar defense at all, it makes more sense to learn a real defense against the real technique.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I did not have time to read all the replies. However, there are many vulnerable areas you can reach when someone is that close: eyes, ears, nose, the hollow of the throat, or even reaching your hand down to squeeze the family jewels (although you would then need to keep your other hand up in case he tried to punch to get you off him).

Having said that, no amount of replies on here can replace training with an experienced teacher.

Really? That's mansplaining, we do know there are various places we can attack if necessary however the attackers also know this and will go to some lengths to safeguard themselves usually by making sure the person they intend to abuse cannot move their arms or their legs, they pin them down. As I assume you aren't female you haven't the foggiest idea what it's like to be pinned down by a man heavier and stronger than you who intends to have sex with you whether you agree or not. Many men get pinned down in martial arts but none with that intent and in that way, it makes it very difficult to fight back but women do try you know and don't need to be told there are 'targets' they can attack.

I'd say it's less mansplaining and more "never-grappled-and-doesn't-know-how-it-works-splaining". I've had guys explain the same kind of ideas to me and my avatar pic makes it pretty clear that I'm not female, so I think it's less about gender and more about not knowing how things work on the ground.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I'd say it's less mansplaining and more "never-grappled-and-doesn't-know-how-it-works-splaining". I've had guys explain the same kind of ideas to me and my avatar pic makes it pretty clear that I'm not female, so I think it's less about gender and more about not knowing how things work on the ground.

I agree with this. I've even been taught some of those things, and I can see where they could actually come up when some knucklehead knocks you down and you have to work from there, but not if said knucklehead has some reasonable training.

The issue is that folks who haven't done any significant groundwork look at those "fixes" and think, "These wouldn't be legal in contests, so they won't be guarding against them. However, most of those (eyepokes, groin strikes, etc.) require the same access that a valid competition technique would require, and the ground-grappler is trained to avoid those. Thus, by accident, he is automatically guarding against those non-competition techniques. I'm not saying there aren't exceptions, but they are far fewer than an offhand examination would imply.

 

[wingchun100]

First of all, I HAVE grappled. Second, I have enough knowledge to know what does and does not work on the ground even if I don't grapple on a regular basis. My suggestions were more about what to do to prevent things before it even gets to the ground. The best way to handle being on the ground is to not get there. Some people ask, "How would WC defend against an arm bar?" And I say, "Don't let the guy get you in one!" Because once it is locked in, then it's a very tough spot.

 

[wingchun100]

I agree with this. I've even been taught some of those things, and I can see where they could actually come up when some knucklehead knocks you down and you have to work from there, but not if said knucklehead has some reasonable training.

The issue is that folks who haven't done any significant groundwork look at those "fixes" and think, "These wouldn't be legal in contests, so they won't be guarding against them. However, most of those (eyepokes, groin strikes, etc.) require the same access that a valid competition technique would require, and the ground-grappler is trained to avoid those. Thus, by accident, he is automatically guarding against those non-competition techniques. I'm not saying there aren't exceptions, but they are far fewer than an offhand examination would imply.

Most kuckleheads don't have training though. How many people out there do you think have taken martial arts classes for longer than, say, a month? And out of those, how many are dedicated enough to be any good?

Regardless, I am glad that at least some people around here have brains in their heads and don't see this as man/woman issues...when there aren't any.

 

[Hanzou]

Most kuckleheads don't have training though. How many people out there do you think have taken martial arts classes for longer than, say, a month? And out of those, how many are dedicated enough to be any good?

That's a very dangerous mind set to have. There are hundreds of thousands of young men in the US who practice wrestling in high school. That is martial arts training, and if you're on a wrestling team you're going to be good at it. There are even boxing programs in many US high schools where young men learn boxing. I would argue that a man who wrestled or boxed in all four years of high school is more dangerous than someone who earned a black belt in a traditional martial art. When you get to the collegiate level, that gap gets even wider.

Even outside of that, how many young men in the US are practicing American football where they learn how to tackle someone?

Those type of athletes tend to be bigger and stronger than the average male. They tend to be FAR bigger and stronger than the average female, and again there are hundreds of thousands of them out there. Some are well adjusted individuals, and some of them aren't. A bunch of eye pokes and throat jabs isn't going to stop a trained wrestler from efficiently slamming you on a hard surface, which can knock you out on impact or worse.

You may like to roll the dice with your personal safety, but I don't.