It doesn't work... Blog Post

[drop bear]

I agree you can make people who are not really aggressive very aggressive, I'm not sure that's a good thing for them or society as a whole

Depends on what you consider aggressive. You can train elements that are perceived as aggression and still produce functional people.

 

[drop bear]

it doesn't matter what you train for you can only reach your potential

and 90% of people have a lower potential than the other 10%

And that ten percent may not be developing theirs so it increases your odds somewhat in a street fight.

 

[Buka]

My wife trained BJJ, she was 126 pounds.
Fortunately nobody told her she couldn’t beat men twice her size.

True, she’s an evil, aggressive woman, but still.

 

[Martial D]

My wife trained BJJ, she was 126 pounds.
Fortunately nobody told her she couldn’t beat men twice her size.

True, she’s an evil, aggressive woman, but still.

We have a BJJ black belt who also happens to be a 120 pound girl.

I'm a blue belt man that weighs 200 pounds.

I can sometimes stalemate her, but she armbars and chokes the hell out of me on the regs.

BJJ is for real.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

No. Mental toughness, discipline and warrior ethos. These things that translate to sheer aggression. Are developed by training.

They are not some magical side factor.

I never said anything about them being magical. You're projecting what you want me to say, again.

 

[drop bear]

I never said anything about them being magical. You're projecting what you want me to say, again.

If aggression is part of training then why can't we account for it?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

If aggression is part of training then why can't we account for it?

During normal classes, folks won’t typically (hopefully) experience the sheer animal aggression of an attack. That was my whole point.

 

[drop bear]

During normal classes, folks won’t typically (hopefully) experience the sheer animal aggression of an attack. That was my whole point.

You have never rolled with a white belt then?

 

[Buka]

I'm of the opinion that in order to deal with aggression you have to have experienced it first, both receiving and giving. It's like getting punched hard in the face - the first time that happens to a Martial Artist should not be in a real world fight.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

If aggression is part of training then why can't we account for it?

Chinese wrestling is a style that emphasizes on aggression. You act like a tiger and trying to eat your opponent alive.

The difference is you don't wait for opportunity. You create opportunity, attack, attack, and still attack.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

You have never rolled with a white belt then?

I've never had one go all-out on me. I've had them do some stupid stuff, even get more aggressive than necessary, but never had one just lose their mind that way. Probably any who headed in that direction got put with some senior student who could control them.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I'm of the opinion that in order to deal with aggression you have to have experienced it first, both receiving and giving. It's like getting punched hard in the face - the first time that happens to a Martial Artist should not be in a real world fight.

Yeah. I'm still working on how to get more of it into training from time to time, for folks not interested in competition (where it would be easier to find, I think).

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Chinese wrestling is a style that emphasizes on aggression. You act like a tiger and trying to eat your opponent alive.

The difference is you don't wait for opportunity. You create opportunity, attack, attack, and still attack.

That's good aggression, but not the "animal aggression" I was speaking of.

 

[JP3]

We don't train for average.

I can understand that. For Jobo, I didn't indicate that the lighter/smaller-framed person would come in and be able to "mix it up" witht he bigger stronger athletes. There is direct advantage in being bigger, faster, stronger we all get that.

Note I wrote "survive on the ground." Not "win on the ground," which is a totally different measuring stick. TO be able to maintain a point of control, even if it is moving from position to position, or location on the opponent's body to another location, avoiding getting strikes raining down on a vulnerable & unprotected body part (face, head, throat, ribs, belly, kidneys ... groin on guys).... while all the while the opponent is trying to do exactly that... that's what I'm trying to indicate by "survive ont he ground." When int hat mode, you aren't going to win anything, except to be able to live another day.

 

[jobo]

I can understand that. For Jobo, I didn't indicate that the lighter/smaller-framed person would come in and be able to "mix it up" witht he bigger stronger athletes. There is direct advantage in being bigger, faster, stronger we all get that.

Note I wrote "survive on the ground." Not "win on the ground," which is a totally different measuring stick. TO be able to maintain a point of control, even if it is moving from position to position, or location on the opponent's body to another location, avoiding getting strikes raining down on a vulnerable & unprotected body part (face, head, throat, ribs, belly, kidneys ... groin on guys).... while all the while the opponent is trying to do exactly that... that's what I'm trying to indicate by "survive ont he ground." When int hat mode, you aren't going to win anything, except to be able to live another day.

if we are talking about street attacks, surviving is winning, there's no judges to declare a winner, anyout come other than you being turned into a blooded mess is a victory, your objective was achieved, his wasn't

that strategy being successful is rather dependent on one of two things happening, one, someone breaks the fight up, two your attacker gets bored/frustrated with the lack of progress and gives up.

there a strong case that the longer it goes on, the more chance there is of his physical advantages paying off, which means you do need to be able to inflict enough damage to stop him, if you are to leave with minimum damage to yourself

 

[JP3]

if we are talking about street attacks, surviving is winning, there's no judges to declare a winner, anyout come other than you being turned into a blooded mess is a victory, your objective was achieved, his wasn't

that strategy being successful is rather dependent on one of two things happening, one, someone breaks the fight up, two your attacker gets bored/frustrated with the lack of progress and gives up.

there a strong case that the longer it goes on, the more chance there is of his physical advantages paying off, which means you do need to be able to inflict enough damage to stop him, if you are to leave with minimum damage to yourself

 

[JP3]

there a strong case that the longer it goes on, the more chance there is of his physical advantages paying off, which means you do need to be able to inflict enough damage to stop him, if you are to leave with minimum damage to yourself

I'm getting the impression that you are somehow thinking that I'm not agreeing with you, Jobo, because what you just said doesn't bear on what I said in relation tot he O/P.

To me your point is that bigger, stronger & faster people win more than smaller slower and weaker people, regardless of what they do to train themselves up. I can generally agree witht hat, except for your aforementioned outliers.

My point was that in my opinion a smaller, weaker person can make better progress, faster, towards being able to street defense skillset in BJJ for their initial term of practice than in aikido. That was it. Can you get there with aikido? I propose that you can, provided that you've got an real understanding in another couple sets of MA paradigms... but that takes way more time to get rounded out than the premise in the O/P. Some would stayt hat the "primary" SD art used wouldn't be aikido int hat sense, and arguments could be made either way and nobody would be either right or wrong. Kotegaeshi in aikido can be done as a wrist lock, a throwing technique or in jutsu fashion to directly destroy the wrist. Hapkido teaches the same technique, and the aim (with my training in HKD at least) was not to throw but to destroy the wrist (which is why the throws get "taken." Which is itself a whole another discussion that's going on in that other thread. So, when the bad guy swings and your hands fly up in the way and you end up with an arm, and then you slip and fall on the arm, which appens to land between you and the ground int he lock position and it goes "pop" were you doing aikido, or hapkido gravity-jutsu? Who knows and who cares. You got lucky, the technique fell into position and the effect took place. Does the label mnatter at that point, except to perhaps explain what happened later on to someone who was not there so they can grasp the events? I don't think so.

Back to O/P. BJJ better to start with, IMO.

 

[jobo]

I'm getting the impression that you are somehow thinking that I'm not agreeing with you, Jobo, because what you just said doesn't bear on what I said in relation tot he O/P.

To me your point is that bigger, stronger & faster people win more than smaller slower and weaker people, regardless of what they do to train themselves up. I can generally agree witht hat, except for your aforementioned outliers.

My point was that in my opinion a smaller, weaker person can make better progress, faster, towards being able to street defense skillset in BJJ for their initial term of practice than in aikido. That was it. Can you get there with aikido? I propose that you can, provided that you've got an real understanding in another couple sets of MA paradigms... but that takes way more time to get rounded out than the premise in the O/P. Some would stayt hat the "primary" SD art used wouldn't be aikido int hat sense, and arguments could be made either way and nobody would be either right or wrong. Kotegaeshi in aikido can be done as a wrist lock, a throwing technique or in jutsu fashion to directly destroy the wrist. Hapkido teaches the same technique, and the aim (with my training in HKD at least) was not to throw but to destroy the wrist (which is why the throws get "taken." Which is itself a whole another discussion that's going on in that other thread. So, when the bad guy swings and your hands fly up in the way and you end up with an arm, and then you slip and fall on the arm, which appens to land between you and the ground int he lock position and it goes "pop" were you doing aikido, or hapkido gravity-jutsu? Who knows and who cares. You got lucky, the technique fell into position and the effect took place. Does the label mnatter at that point, except to perhaps explain what happened later on to someone who was not there so they can grasp the events? I don't think so.

Back to O/P. BJJ better to start with, IMO.

there's so many threads in a similar vein , i loose track of what ive posted in which.

my point of view on this, whilst not ag
actually disagreeing with you view is subtly different,

to my mind the ma which will be most effective for sd is the one, that demands the highest level of fitness from you, if that isn't aikido( and it probably isn't), then your correct, but for the wrong reasons, if you tie aikido in to a strength and fitness program, then it suddenly becomes more viable, the more you close the gap or preferably over take would be attacker the more viable it become

i help out at a boxing gym from time to time and last time there was a slip of a girl, about 17 throwing 200lb about like it was nothing in the weight room and throwing punches like hammers on the pads, whilst having movement like a ghost. i though '' she going to give someone a very nasty surprise one day'' take the strength and fitness away and she just another vulnerable young girl

or my own experience that i outlined in one thread or another that lau gar kung fu was ''deadly'' for sd, which was much mocked my martial D. and it was when i did it, the fitness training was brutal, the free fighting at the end even more brutal, take those away and maybe its not so deadly after all

 

[drop bear]

if we are talking about street attacks, surviving is winning, there's no judges to declare a winner, anyout come other than you being turned into a blooded mess is a victory, your objective was achieved, his wasn't

that strategy being successful is rather dependent on one of two things happening, one, someone breaks the fight up, two your attacker gets bored/frustrated with the lack of progress and gives up.

there a strong case that the longer it goes on, the more chance there is of his physical advantages paying off, which means you do need to be able to inflict enough damage to stop him, if you are to leave with minimum damage to yourself

Not if you wanted to create a manageable self defense method.

Instead you would create scenario victories. So say a person grabs you. Then you would win if you release that grab. Which would bring you to a new scenario that you would try to win that.

Keep winning those scenarios and you have a good chance of winning the situation.

But it means you can create this flexible method that will allow you to adapt to an uncertain situation.

Then it is a case of just setting objectives rather than relying on fixed objectives.

So instead of saying. "there a strong case that the longer it goes on, the more chance there is of his physical advantages paying off,"

You could either set an objective to scramble and escape or Mabye to grind and stall until help arrives. And have the tools to achieve either outcome.

 

[jobo]

Not if you wanted to create a manageable self defense method.

Instead you would create scenario victories. So say a person grabs you. Then you would win if you release that grab. Which would bring you to a new scenario that you would try to win that.

Keep winning those scenarios and you have a good chance of winning the situation.

But it means you can create this flexible method that will allow you to adapt to an uncertain situation.

Then it is a case of just setting objectives rather than relying on fixed objectives.

So instead of saying. "there a strong case that the longer it goes on, the more chance there is of his physical advantages paying off,"

You could either set an objective to scramble and escape or Mabye to grind and stall until help arrives. And have the tools to achieve either outcome.

it's a fact, or at least a very likely out come, once you start avoiding facts and most scenario based training does that, then your starting to move into fantasy land.

many many years ago my friend returned from his army training and insisted on showing me his self defence skills," come up behind me and grab me round the n3ck"he said, "dont let go "he said and "il show you a throw "he said.

so I did just as he asked, a mins or so later he passed out, when he came to, he said" no not that hard or it doesn5 work" "do it again only this time dont choke me"
so I did and this time just pulled him backwards on to th4 floor.

eventually I got bored and let him throw me" see I told you it worked" he said