Judo or Taekwondo for best self defense?

[Headhunter]

The only issue I have with this is that it is VERY limited, even in the US, from a legal point of view. If someone is not armed you can be in a world of trouble if you go for a gun as your first line of defense.

Agreed I've said it multiple times if you use a gun on someone you either kill them or seriously injure them. But with martial arts you can put them down without doing to much damage

 

[Dirty Dog]

I agree but with the exception that I don't really consider "concealed carry" a martial art. But should you be adamant that it is, then I would suggest it must be subject to the same rigorous long term training as other martial arts, along with verifiably agreed upon competition. I don't think either of those really occur at this point within the general population.

In my experience, those of us who routinely carry do train regularly. And there are groups such as the International Practical Shooting Confederation that deal with competition and even issue ranks.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Agreed I've said it multiple times if you use a gun on someone you either kill them or seriously injure them. But with martial arts you can put them down without doing to much damage

Not true. Not true at all. In about 75% of encounters in which a gun is used, it isn't even fired. So it serves it's purpose of personal defense without inflicting any injury whatsoever.

 

[Juany118]

I wasn't aware there was a martial art that trained in use of weapons of opportunity. What arts do that to the exclusion of other techniques? Sounds interestingly Bourne.

I can only go on my personal experience. But as I was trained in TKD, those with sufficient skill, including speed and power, became quite formidable. I understand that is not learned in a day. But the OP did not ask for what art could be learned in a week or two. I think you are not being fair with striking arts which teach in that old way. Modern arts may not always do that from what I have seen. But even those might still have some effectiveness.

As to grappling arts, again, I can only go with the art I learned, which was the Hapkido I studied. To be effective, one does have to be quick and accurate. Mediocrity will get you in trouble. You are constantly in training and learning new techniques. Many times a new technique will require applications from an older technique. If that older technique was not properly learned, the new one won't be either. And while some techniques may allow one to power through, if you rely on power alone, you are subject to a resisting opponent being able to escape.

Filipino Martial Arts; Kali, Arni's, and Escrima, teach the use of palm sticks, bastons, and often flexible weapons. These techniques are easily transferred to numerous weapons of opportunity and many instructors will point this out.

As for my comment on striking it's more about how resilient humans are. For an exclusive striking art to work in a practical (meaning end it, or escape asap) I'm you need more training because you need to hit smaller, more easily protected, targets. It still works btw, and I think striking with grappling is the best option as it provides flexibility (the WC I study has both, as does the FMA along with the weapons), I just think if you have to chose between JUST empty hand striking or JUST grappling, grappling is a better choice.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Filipino Martial Arts; Kali, Arni's, and Escrima, teach the use of palm sticks, bastons, and often flexible weapons. These techniques are easily transferred to numerous weapons of opportunity and many instructors will point this out.

As for my comment on striking it's more about how resilient humans are. For an exclusive striking art to work in a practical (meaning end it, or escape asap) I'm you need more training because you need to hit smaller, more easily protected, targets. It still works btw, and I think striking with grappling is the best option as it provides flexibility (the WC I study has both, as does the FMA along with the weapons), I just think if you have to chose between JUST empty hand striking or JUST grappling, grappling is a better choice.

This (partly influenced by my foray into FMA) has been my adjustment to weapons training. I teach now from the standpoint of how to make use of weapons likely to be handy. So, I am building a curriculum around kubotan-type techniques, FMA-type stick techniques, and a bit of bo/jo work. At some point, I'll probably add in some measure of flexible weapons work, though that's more an intellectual pursuit, to me.

 

[oftheherd1]

In my experience, those of us who routinely carry do train regularly. And there are groups such as the International Practical Shooting Confederation that deal with competition and even issue ranks.

That's an interesting point. I know there are people to regularly train, and hang out with others who do. I don't know what percentage people like you are of the population that carry weapons, legally or not legally.

Of course I don't know what the population percentage of those who study MA for defense is against those who study for other reasons than self defense, compared to those who don't study any form of self defense.

Interesting questions.

 

[oftheherd1]

Filipino Martial Arts; Kali, Arni's, and Escrima, teach the use of palm sticks, bastons, and often flexible weapons. These techniques are easily transferred to numerous weapons of opportunity and many instructors will point this out.

As for my comment on striking it's more about how resilient humans are. For an exclusive striking art to work in a practical (meaning end it, or escape asap) I'm you need more training because you need to hit smaller, more easily protected, targets. It still works btw, and I think striking with grappling is the best option as it provides flexibility (the WC I study has both, as does the FMA along with the weapons), I just think if you have to chose between JUST empty hand striking or JUST grappling, grappling is a better choice.

OK, I can see that. For some reason, I was conceptualizing an art that taught when threatened, to look for anything that could be used as a weapon in the environment your are in, such as kitchen knives, hammers, ball point pens, sticks, or whatever. Somehow, I always envisioned the Filipino MA more as something taught from an assumption you would be carrying some kind of stick at all times. My lack of knowledge I guess.

I don't know about every art, but in the TKD I studied, the goal was to inflict injury when we struck or kicked. In the Hapkido I studied, we often used strikes, to initiate defense when that was appropriate, or more likely, as a follow up to a grapple that had left an opponent vulnerable to a strike or kick.

 

[Juany118]

OK, I can see that. For some reason, I was conceptualizing an art that taught when threatened, to look for anything that could be used as a weapon in the environment your are in, such as kitchen knives, hammers, ball point pens, sticks, or whatever. Somehow, I always envisioned the Filipino MA more as something taught from an assumption you would be carrying some kind of stick at all times. My lack of knowledge I guess.

I don't know about every art, but in the TKD I studied, the goal was to inflict injury when we struck or kicked. In the Hapkido I studied, we often used strikes, to initiate defense when that was appropriate, or more likely, as a follow up to a grapple that had left an opponent vulnerable to a strike or kick.

On FMA yeah. Here is actually a nice short video that explains things regarding weapons of opportunity in the FMA context.

As for the TKD issue, that applies to all striking arts. What I mean is this. To properly strike the knee, groin, head or vital points in the torso (like the liver and kidneys) for "quick drops", takes A LOT of training. The human body can absorb surprising amazing amount of blunt impact damage. I have struck people multiple times in "green zones" (non vital areas) with batons, full size mag lights etc with little effect due to adrenaline and the like (they definitely felt it afterwards though). With grappling though, even if you can't get them in that perfect armbar that could be a joint break/dislocation, you can immobilize and get really good pain compliance with a shorter learning curve than a near exclusive striking game.

Primarily striking arts are good, don't get me wrong. I am just saying if you are looking at it from a pure time efficiency point of view. In my experience ones that are balanced or grappling biased get you "street effective" faster, not necessarily "better" over all.

 

[Dirty Dog]

That's an interesting point. I know there are people to regularly train, and hang out with others who do. I don't know what percentage people like you are of the population that carry weapons, legally or not legally.

Of course I don't know what the population percentage of those who study MA for defense is against those who study for other reasons than self defense, compared to those who don't study any form of self defense.

Interesting questions.

I doubt there's any way to get numbers. But...

The gun owners I know fall into two basic groups.
Those who own guns and those who carry guns.
Of those who carry guns, the vast majority train regularly, and a few participate in competitions.
Pretty much exactly the same way I'd describe the people I know who practice martial arts.
There are those who train for non-self defense (own guns) and those who train for defense (carry guns). Of those who train for self defense, the vast majority train regularly and a few participate in competitions.

 

[oftheherd1]

I doubt there's any way to get numbers. But...

The gun owners I know fall into two basic groups.
Those who own guns and those who carry guns.
Of those who carry guns, the vast majority train regularly, and a few participate in competitions.
Pretty much exactly the same way I'd describe the people I know who practice martial arts.
There are those who train for non-self defense (own guns) and those who train for defense (carry guns). Of those who train for self defense, the vast majority train regularly and a few participate in competitions.

When I have time I may try to look for numbers on that, but like you, I doubt there will be any verifiable or trustable numbers. Most likely empirical such as yours would be more accurate.

 

[oftheherd1]

On FMA yeah. Here is actually a nice short video that explains things regarding weapons of opportunity in the FMA context.

As for the TKD issue, that applies to all striking arts. What I mean is this. To properly strike the knee, groin, head or vital points in the torso (like the liver and kidneys) for "quick drops", takes A LOT of training. The human body can absorb surprising amazing amount of blunt impact damage. I have struck people multiple times in "green zones" (non vital areas) with batons, full size mag lights etc with little effect due to adrenaline and the like (they definitely felt it afterwards though). With grappling though, even if you can't get them in that perfect armbar that could be a joint break/dislocation, you can immobilize and get really good pain compliance with a shorter learning curve than a near exclusive striking game.

Primarily striking arts are good, don't get me wrong. I am just saying if you are looking at it from a pure time efficiency point of view. In my experience ones that are balanced or grappling biased get you "street effective" faster, not necessarily "better" over all.

I see what you are saying. I am just not sure I completely agree. But I have no doubt you have a lot more experience on the street using different strikes and techniques than I do.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I have had serious interest in Judo ...

You also need to train Judo in no jacket environment. You will need to find a new set of "contact points".

 

[Earl Weiss]

Which art is best for practical self defense between the two? Also what arts blend well with both of these styles? I don't want to hear it's whichever art you love that works best... I want real answers and opinions. Thanks!

I would stick with striking for the following reasons (Which is not to say grappling skills should be ignored.)
1. Grappling poses issue if you tie up with someone and they can access a bladed weapon when your vision can't really see that is happening. Striking distance allows you to see what is going on with their hands.
2. Striking distance allows you more opportunity to perceive, position yourself and respond to threats from other people.
3. Striking distance and positioning may provide better opportunity for escape.
4. Grappling with someone has a higher potential for ending up on the ground where you will be vulnerable to other attackers.

As far as blending goes, there is lots of stuff branded as TKD. For SD stay away from any that exclude punching to the head since that is a frequent attack used by predators and may be an optimal offense as well.

As has been stated above a lot depends on the school. "Judo" was designed for sport but any good teacher will show all the "Illegal" stuff you can use for SD. Ju Jitsu as an art really doesn't have illegal stuff except for competition rules.

 

[drop bear]

I would stick with striking for the following reasons (Which is not to say grappling skills should be ignored.)
1. Grappling poses issue if you tie up with someone and they can access a bladed weapon when your vision can't really see that is happening. Striking distance allows you to see what is going on with their hands.
2. Striking distance allows you more opportunity to perceive, position yourself and respond to threats from other people.
3. Striking distance and positioning may provide better opportunity for escape.
4. Grappling with someone has a higher potential for ending up on the ground where you will be vulnerable to other attackers.

As far as blending goes, there is lots of stuff branded as TKD. For SD stay away from any that exclude punching to the head since that is a frequent attack used by predators and may be an optimal offense as well.

As has been stated above a lot depends on the school. "Judo" was designed for sport but any good teacher will show all the "Illegal" stuff you can use for SD. Ju Jitsu as an art really doesn't have illegal stuff except for competition rules.

I don't think a lot of those striking grappling distinctions are real things.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Instead of

- punching on your opponent's face,
- break his nose,
- pay his medical bill, and
- go to jail for it,

you can

- lock your opponent's arm,
- choke him,
- pin both of his arms against his body,
- head lock, under hook, over hook, ... and tie your opponent's body.
- ...

and ask him if he wants peace. If he says yes, you can let go and both of you will live happy ever after.

 

[JR 137]

Instead of

- punching on your opponent's face,
- break his nose,
- pay his medical bill, and
- go to jail for it,

you can

- lock your opponent's arm,
- choke him,
- pin both of his arms against his body,
- head lock, under hook, over hook, ... and tie your opponent's body.
- ...

and ask him if he wants peace. If he says yes, you can let go and both of you will live happy ever after.

He says yes, he wants peace. You let go, trusting a scum bag who tried to attack you; and you get sucker punched in the nose, jaw, or nuts. Or worse.

Knock him out, break his arm, or whatever else tickles your fancy. Just make sure he can’t come back at you.

Dojo kun:
We do not train to be merciful here. Mercy is for the weak. Here, in the streets, in competition. A man confronts you, he is the enemy. An enemy deserves no mercy.

 

[Juany118]

He says yes, he wants peace. You let go, trusting a scum bag who tried to attack you; and you get sucker punched in the nose, jaw, or nuts. Or worse.

Knock him out, break his arm, or whatever else tickles your fancy. Just make sure he can’t come back at you.

Dojo kun:
We do not train to be merciful here. Mercy is for the weak. Here, in the streets, in competition. A man confronts you, he is the enemy. An enemy deserves no mercy.

View attachment 21167

Self defense can't always be about that, there will always be a bigger stronger guy who for all your striking will look at you and laugh. So it's not about throwing the guy down and letting go, trusting they will let you go. It's about not being trapped by pride and when you get that guy down having the self awareness use the opening you created and know it is "time to run away.". If that isn't an option, proper leverage overcomes strength. So you hold on, keeping them restrained, even if you can break/main them, until the boys in blue show up.

 

[RealityCheck]

I wouldn't choose either of the two options, but if I have to, I would say Judo.

TKD, although it does have some pros (speed, flexibility), it is primarily based on point sparring, and even when that is not the case, it relies heavily on techniques that you would not be able to use if restricted to an enclosed space (such as a train carriage or an elevator).

Judo is able to be used in enclosed spaces and has a lot of techniques that don't require a large amount of fine motor skills to pull off.

That being said - my preference is to get a solid base in MMA, and then move on to combatives in order to learn how to deal with the pre and post-conflict phases of the altercation, as well as weapons, multiple attackers etc.

 

[Headhunter]

Instead of

- punching on your opponent's face,
- break his nose,
- pay his medical bill, and
- go to jail for it,

you can

- lock your opponent's arm,
- choke him,
- pin both of his arms against his body,
- head lock, under hook, over hook, ... and tie your opponent's body.
- ...

and ask him if he wants peace. If he says yes, you can let go and both of you will live happy ever after.

And what's stopping him attacking you again once you let go of him

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

And what's stopping him attacking you again once you let go of him

If he wants to go to hell, you can always help him.