In order for something to work...?

[JR 137]

The question is what is the difference between submitting someone and crippling them?

In grappling, applying just enough force to allow them tap/submit vs. applying the technique and going straight for the break.

In striking, hitting hard enough to back them up or knock them down without knocking them out cold and or stomping on a "beaten" opponent.

Using stuff with the sole intent of making your opponent lose his/her will to fight without causing too much harm beyond a psychological wake up call.

Basically, a form of warning shots.

Not at all a difficult question IMO. Now back to your (as a whole) regularly scheduled ramblings ...

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Dbear, I don't understand the question.

I think Drop Bear's point was that submitting someone happens because they "give up" before you complete the break, etc. We use tapping out (as many dojos do) with locks and such, and teach the students how to finish it. In many cases, I show them that "in the street", I wouldn't wait for the person to submit, I'd just crack the wrist, etc.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I think that is interesting point because of another implication.. for me in my art anyway, while there may in many techniques be an implicit "brutality" since that is the word @Paul_D used in op, that implicit brutality need not ALWAYS be called upon and can be ramped up or ramped down concomitant with the situation.. For me I like it best when every one walks away .. if I can also allow a person to save some face there is less likelihood they will seek a recompense, this was a too frequent occurrence where I used to live..

Interesting point though x

Agreed. I think it's useful to have a range of force within a given technique. If a cousin gets drunk and decides to "find out what I've got" at a family reunion, I don't want to break anything on him (well, on most of them). A pissed-off guy in a bar would probably be another matter. I'd like to use the same techniques in both places, so many of my techniques can be finished more than one way: an easy takedown, a hard takedown, a pin, a stomp, etc.

 

[Buka]

I realize the difference, I'm pretty sure everybody does. I just don't understand why the question was asked.

 

[drop bear]

I realize the difference, I'm pretty sure everybody does. I just don't understand why the question was asked.

Because the difference between submitting someone and crippling them is not very much. So on the street someone tries to mug you you take him down and lock him up. Now you either hold him there or cripple him.

Life or death fight or a fight over not much. Same thing.

 

[Paul_D]

Can you provide a link to those stats please? I work in crime statistics and would like to see what the data is like and it's sources.

I don't have them to hand, but you can find them on Iain Abernethy's forum, as he analysis them most years when they are released.

 

[Paul_D]

Some great replies guys & gals, thank you very much. Very very interesting

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Because the difference between submitting someone and crippling them is not very much. So on the street someone tries to mug you you take him down and lock him up. Now you either hold him there or cripple him.

Life or death fight or a fight over not much. Same thing.

I had choked someone on the street before. It was not self-defense but I tried to defend for someone else. When my opponent said, "Please don't kill me." I let go my choke and he ran away. The choke can end with the fight is over, nobody will get hurt, and everybody will live happy ever after.

 

[Rayrob]

I had choked someone on the street before. It was not self-defense but I tried to defend for someone else. When my opponent said, "Please don't kill me." I let go my choke and he ran away. The choke can end with the fight is over, nobody will get hurt, and everybody will live happy ever after.

I had the oposite experience when a rather violent neanderthal neighbour decided to carry out a completely unprovoked attack on me. He was unaware that I had trained in a variety of martial arts over quite a few years. I knocked seven bells out of him. He begged me to stop and I did. He then went for round two. I never made the same mistake again. It's over when I say it's over, my call. Fortunately in this instance I came out unscathed but it could have ended up very differently.

 

[JP3]

I like simple, simple is easiest to remember and easiest to use.

But brutal? Doesn't need to be brutal, as Bill pointed out. Of course, the lack of a need to be brutal is skill-level based. Guys and gals who are approaching a half centry in an art, just about any art, can deal witht he guy who raises his hand on the street in any number of simple, quick and efficient ways, and I would wager that most of them are not brutal. But, someone who has only been doing judo for 6 months may not know those options even exist.... so they launch forward with a left rising block which turns into a grapple and blasts the guy with a simple osotagari and thus ruins his day witht he pavement cracking the back of his head/neck. Hopefully,t hey don't kill the guy. Simple? Sure. Brutal? About as brutal and devastating as it can get... but maybe that person's only real, reflex-trained option.

 

[FriedRice]

In order for something to work in a live situating i.e. the battlefield, or “the street” (So we are not talking competition/points scoring here, just to clarify). It has to fill two criteria:

The list is missing "full powered strikes coming at your face" to test out it's effectiveness.

 

[Paul_D]

The list is missing "full powered strikes coming at your face" to test out it's effectiveness.

Why would you wait until someone starts hitting you before you defend yourself?

If you are familiar with the rituals of violence and can recognise predatory behaviour, or if an aggressive person is giving you all of the verbal and physical indicators, you don't wait.

 

[FriedRice]

Why would you wait until someone starts hitting you before you defend yourself?

If you are familiar with the rituals of violence and can recognise predatory behaviour, or if an aggressive person is giving you all of the verbal and physical indicators, you don't wait.

You misunderstood what I meant...meaning that, your training should include your training partner throwing full power strikes and kicks in trying to KO you while you do the same, to test out your skills, aggression, ability to take damage, to continue while hurt, etc.

 

[Paul_D]

You misunderstood what I meant...meaning that, your training should include your training partner throwing full power strikes and kicks in trying to KO you while you do the same, to test out your skills, aggression, ability to take damage, to continue while hurt, etc.

Sorry, misunderstandings are far to easy with the written word.

That would help yes, but I wouldn't say its a "must".

If you are going to teach self defence to the elderly for example you're not going to bring in sparring partners to hit them full force in the face to try and knock them out as not everyone's self defence needs are the same. They are less likely to end up in a "fight" than a 20 year old male out drinking on a Saturday night.

SD needs should be tailored to the types of violence most likely to be encountered by the individual.

 

[FriedRice]

That would help yes, but I wouldn't say its a "must".

If you are going to teach self defence to the elderly for example you're not going to bring in sparring partners to hit them full force in the face to try and knock them out as not everyone's self defence needs are the same. They are less likely to end up in a "fight" than a 20 year old male out drinking on a Saturday night.

SD needs should be tailored to the types of violence most likely to be encountered by the individual.

You're right, I should have said that it would be for the most advanced people but even then.... only if they want to go to that level. Because in general, most people won't go through that level of brutality in real life....and ending up more likely to get brutalized more in the gym. Self Defense for me personally is to train hard, but also carry as many legal weapons as possible, so that would be my 9mm, a really big folding knife and spray.

And you're especially right about the proper programs tailored towards the elderly. Like some old lady with osteo setting in, is probably going to break a hip doing 50 burpees, let alone getting hit in the face at full power, even if she thinks she was tough some 30 years ago.

 

[dmsaint]

I wouldn't study a martial art based on whether or not it works in combat...that would be the most irrelevant reason.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I wouldn't study a martial art based on whether or not it works in combat...that would be the most irrelevant reason.

I don't think that would be the most irrelevant reason for some people. Of course, if by "combat" you mean war, I'll side with you on this one.

 

[szorn]

There has been quite a bit discussed here from self-defense to sport applications.

The thing to remember is that self-defense is different than martial arts. While martial arts in the typical sense offer numerous benefits, realistic self-defense isn't always one of them. Even when self-defense is emphasized within an art it generally requires months to years to effectively develop an appropriate skill level for use in real situations. Having said that, it's important to note that many times potentially violent situations can be dealt with in a non-physical manner. This includes mind-set, awareness, escape, and de-escalation among other things. These are things that are often neglected in traditional and semi-traditional martial arts. Another thing often neglected in martial arts, as mentioned by Paul_D, is the adrenal response. Regardless of what we think we will do or how we train, if it doesn't take the adrenal response into consideration there is often a low rate of success for many of these techniques, tactics, and strategies. An adrenal response is something that we all experience. While the degree of intensity may vary from person to person due to numerous factors (including proper training) it unfortunately is not something that we can eliminate or ignore in our training. And until those preferred techniques are actually trained through the adrenal state, the likelihood of them working as intended is pretty low.

The discussion of control holds, locks, and chokes is pretty interesting. However, the question to ask is whether or not these skills would actually be applicable in the majority of "self-defense" situations. Remember, I previously mentioned awareness, escape, and de-escalation. These are things that generally should be tried prior to resorting to physical skills, unless the level of threat demands an immediate physical response (cornered or trapped by the assailant or ambushed). That being the case, what kind of legitimate situation would require the use of locks or control holds? If the intended victim believes that the level of threat is not high enough to warrant a high level response then obviously he/she could use more appropriate options such as de-escalation. Also, while a choke hold can be an appropriate response for a high level threat, especially a lethal threat but it's obviously not something that should be used for threats that could be effectively dealt with in a non-physical manner. Anytime force is used on the neck and throat it can be considered use of lethal force. It's also not a technique I would teach haphazardly under the heading of "self-defense".

While I understand the reluctance by some to use the term "brutal" it does make sense from a mind-set perspective. That said, I have used the term "savagely" to assist students in understanding the appropriate mind-set for dealing with explosive violence. The term used is not as important as the mind-set it should convey.

Steve

 

[Phobius]

Chokes are not dangerous, at least not the BJJ kind. Instead they are effective and will knock you out but in no way dangerous.

If anything should be done to not harm your opponent chokes would be my best bet. Saying otherwise and I have to ask, have you been choked out? I think many BJJ artists have had that experience as part of some ritual or other. None of them died.

Oh and not all submissions will cripple an opponent if continued. Some like chokes will not have that crippling effect so while they are in some cases the same to some extent, it is far from always.

 

[Hanzou]

Chokes are not dangerous, at least not the BJJ kind. Instead they are effective and will knock you out but in no way dangerous.

If anything should be done to not harm your opponent chokes would be my best bet. Saying otherwise and I have to ask, have you been choked out? I think many BJJ artists have had that experience as part of some ritual or other. None of them died.
.

Yeah, you have to really wonder where these beliefs are coming from. Depending on the tightness of a choke, you can put someone out in a matter of seconds, but you would have to hold a choke FAR past that point in order to do serious harm to them, or kill them. They also work regardless of size, so women can effectively choke out a much larger men That's what makes them great tools for self defense.