Martial Sport VS Self Defense

[hoshin1600]

Your assumption that I knew nothing of SD course was premature and inaccurate though.

actually i didnt assume,,i only asked the questions.

calling a thread "dumb" or "stupid" is what I object to.

i agree with the sentiment, however it does get old when people discount others and offer "DO MMA" as an answer for everything.

(price should be) Comparable to an MA class.

yes in some instances. if it is local and ongoing i would agree. however if its someone like Rory MIller who traveled across the country to be there he deserves more for his travel and hotel costs plus the fact that your taking up 100 % of his time where the local guy probably went to his regular job earlier in the day.

Yes, I do. An SD instructor rents mat space at the Dojo I go to and I've seen many of his courses.

then you will have to admit there are good programs and bad ones just like there are good MA and mcdojo's. which one is at your club?
my contention with your comment is that you lump all programs together and determine them to all be crap. i will openly admit, a good amount ARE crap but you cant put everyone in the same bucket. it is better to dissect them into attributes and discuss each fraction on its own merits. making points as to what is good and what is bad.

if you had said your local SD class teaches an 8 hr course and the curriculum is 90% martial art skills taught poorly and your of the opinion that these skills are only retained for a short time, thus making the class ineffective .....you would have my full agreement. but that is not really what you said.

 

[Anarax]

i agree with the sentiment, however it does get old when people discount others and offer "DO MMA" as an answer for everything.

I've never said "DO MMA", but I understand your frustration with such a comment.

yes in some instances. if it is local and ongoing i would agree. however if its someone like Rory MIller who traveled across the country to be there he deserves more for his travel and hotel costs plus the fact that your taking up 100 % of his time where the local guy probably went to his regular job earlier in the day.

I can see your point, a world renowned instructor who traveled far to teach probably should charge more. Who is actually paying for him and other financial factors should play into it as well.

then you will have to admit there are good programs and bad ones just like there are good MA and mcdojo's.

It's not the quality(yes there's a gradient of good/bad techniques with SD courses) of techniques taught that I am skeptical of. It's not having ongoing training nor having an outlet(dojo) to practice the SD techniques. A course that's a few hours long isn't enough to develop muscle memory nor condition people to deal with the psychological stress of altercations.

my contention with your comment is that you lump all programs together and determine them to all be crap.

Not what I said at all. It's the lack of ongoing training, sharpening and refining of techniques that I don't agree with.

 

[hoshin1600]

Not what I said at all. It's the lack of ongoing training, sharpening and refining of techniques that I don't agree with.

but what you did say was....

one reason why I don't believe in these one day "disarming" or "Real Self-Defense" courses that cost at least $50 a class. A lot of people who attend these courses are untrained and think they're gaining something that they'll use is a real life situation

from this comment the presumed meaning is that short term training is crap.

now lets take a different view.
your basing your opinion on a presupposition that it is the martial art skills that are important. then deducing that since there is not enough time to gain "muscle memory" of these skills that the class is useless.
deep within this thought is an underlying assumption that either i am unaware of this fact or that i dont care and am just taking peoples money. (thus the $50 remark)

i would argue that i am not ignorant and the martial arts skills (in short term training) is NOT what is important and not the goal of the class.

there is always a fine line between what a student needs vs what they want. my priority in short term training is to have the student evaluate their susceptibility to being a victim. what are their daily life choices like that either increase or decrease the probability of being a victim. i want them to be aware of the percentages based on their life choices and learn how to make corrections. next important is , i want them to have the confidence to follow their gut feeling and respond in an appropriate manner, to get a sense for when things are not right. situational awareness and pre attack indicators. there is a lot more but this will give the idea. but....all that stuff is not fun. people want to enjoy the class and be active. so to fill that "want" i teach the martial art skills. i teach it in a way that coincides with natural reactions so that it will have a better chance to actually work because a hammer fist is instinctual and really doesnt need to be trained but it helps the student understand and have confidence in how much power they can actually generate. i know full well that the time restrictions will not allow them to be proficient in martial arts, and to a lessor degree this is the point i want them to innately understand for themselves. this might lead them to further training. but the martial arts is more for fun and what is expected by them and i teach it so that i can use it as a vehicle to give them what they need.

 

[hoshin1600]

i would also add that if a SD class is focused on 4 or 5 different ways to break a wrist grab, then strike back with a palm heel to the chin then knee to the groin. and...WHAT TO DO IF....
then that class is a mcdojo SD class and the instructor is lacking in an actual SD curriculum and is just teaching martial arts as a default substitute for actual SD and self protection knowledge.

 

[Anarax]

but what you did say was....



from this comment the presumed meaning is that short term training is crap.

now lets take a different view.
your basing your opinion on a presupposition that it is the martial art skills that are important. then deducing that since there is not enough time to gain "muscle memory" of these skills that the class is useless.
deep within this thought is an underlying assumption that either i am unaware of this fact or that i dont care and am just taking peoples money. (thus the $50 remark)

i would argue that i am not ignorant and the martial arts skills (in short term training) is NOT what is important and not the goal of the class.

there is always a fine line between what a student needs vs what they want. my priority in short term training is to have the student evaluate their susceptibility to being a victim. what are their daily life choices like that either increase or decrease the probability of being a victim. i want them to be aware of the percentages based on their life choices and learn how to make corrections. next important is , i want them to have the confidence to follow their gut feeling and respond in an appropriate manner, to get a sense for when things are not right. situational awareness and pre attack indicators. there is a lot more but this will give the idea. but....all that stuff is not fun. people want to enjoy the class and be active. so to fill that "want" i teach the martial art skills. i teach it in a way that coincides with natural reactions so that it will have a better chance to actually work because a hammer fist is instinctual and really doesnt need to be trained but it helps the student understand and have confidence in how much power they can actually generate. i know full well that the time restrictions will not allow them to be proficient in martial arts, and to a lessor degree this is the point i want them to innately understand for themselves. this might lead them to further training. but the martial arts is more for fun and what is expected by them and i teach it so that i can use it as a vehicle to give them what they need.

What I'm saying is a student attending a SD course that is a few hours long will not develop the muscle memory nor psychological conditioning of applying MA techniques in a live scenario. Having them perform a choke defense against a training partner in the course? Okay. Have them apply a choke defense against someone on the street that is stronger and 100% committed on killing you? Probably not. A huge premise of MA training is committing years of your life to conditioning your mind and body to naturally use techniques you have practiced countless times. Me knowing how to do a choke defense is easy. Me doing a choke defense in a live scenario is a different story.

Teaching people to not walk down dark alleys, keep your valuables out of sight and other important precautions are great. What I object to is giving people false confidence with Martial Arts techniques, convincing them that they'll be able to use a MA technique they practiced a few times in a live scenario. Judging by your post that's not what you do, but there are SD instructors that do.

i would also add that if a SD class is focused on 4 or 5 different ways to break a wrist grab, then strike back with a palm heel to the chin then knee to the groin. and...WHAT TO DO IF....
then that class is a mcdojo SD class and the instructor is lacking in an actual SD curriculum and is just teaching martial arts as a default substitute for actual SD and self protection knowledge.

Though this isn't exactly what I'm referring to, it's close.

 

[Steve]

I think the 1st report was accurate and it showed the problem that in the past police where trained to shoot targets but put into a gunfight their ability was lacking.

This report is a little misleading in that it solely looks at shooting at strictly a static target whereas now (at least in my area) training has focused more on actual gunfighting (drawing, firing while moving, using cover and/or concealment, close quarter gun battles, force on force training, dynamic targets, etc...)

I grew up with guns (hunting, target, and trap shooting) prior to going into law enforcement, I could probably out shoot many new officers straight out of training when it came to shooting targets. I had 10+ years of firearm experience as opposed to many officers that the academy was the first time they ever handled a gun. What I did not have is experience in tactics and gunfighting.

I hope that put into a dynamic force on force gunfight that officers would have a much higher accuracy rate and rate of fire than the average citizen.


In the end, its how you train. We do a lot of force on force training with simunitions so you get that resistance training and experience gunfighting.

so can you point me to the current accuracy rate? I'm interested in seeing how cops are doing now .

 

[Steve]

So, your entire distinction is the location.

Errr... No .

 

[hoshin1600]

What I'm saying is a student attending a SD course that is a few hours long will not develop the muscle memory nor psychological conditioning of applying MA techniques in a live scenario. Having them perform a choke defense against a training partner in the course? Okay. Have them apply a choke defense against someone on the street that is stronger and 100% committed on killing you? Probably not

i agree but what your missing is that , that kind of stuff is just filler thrown in to the class for fun. something to peek their interest to maybe continue training. without the MA stuff the class would be very dry and not exciting enough to get people off the couch.
but again like i said if that is the actual total of the class then its a poorly taught class.

so its a matter of intent on why someone is teaching that stuff.

 

[Anarax]

so its a matter of intent on why someone is teaching that stuff.

That's part of it, but when dealing with the untrained it's the responsibility of the teacher to give context to the class. It's important they know that MA training is a lifelong endeavor and they'll need a lot of additional training if they want to use the course techniques in live situations. Just putting "filler"in but them not having context for the techniques and training is a recipe for disaster.

 

[CB Jones]

so can you point me to the current accuracy rate? I'm interested in seeing how cops are doing now .

No

Just pointing out that the 1st report showed a problem and since then there has been a shift in training.

What we need is the same study from 1998-2006 re-done to see if current training has improved it and I don't know if it is being done or not. It would be interesting to see the results.

 

[drop bear]

why are they stupid? i think you answered your own question in a round about way.
questions for you...
how many SD classes have you taken? do you know what is actually taught in these classes? what should the value of a SD be and how should it be priced? why do you think there is nothing to be gained from them if you dont actually know what is covered in the cirriculum? you openly admit you dont understand it ,,but then that doesnt stop you from having an opinion on something you dont understand.
see ...thats why the conversation is stupid. i dont mean to pick on you personally its just common that people have opinions on something they have no knowledge of and lump small sections of valid concerns into a big pot and call it all worthless and then retort with ...DO MMA.

Exept when people teaching self defence courses dont have knowledge of self defence. Then they teach other people have no knowledge of self defence. Then basically nobody does any self defence to find out if the course has taught them anything.

I mean at least if you do MMA you Do MMA. By people who understand MMA and Do MMA themselves.

This is one of the huge disconects between training and aplicaction.

So self defence courses are stupid if you don't know at the end of the training if you have gained any skills..

Hey I am all for do self defense from instructors who do self defence. But who really does self defence?

 

[hoshin1600]

Exept when people teaching self defence courses dont have knowledge of self defence. Then theach other people have no knowledge of self defence. Then basically nobody does any self defence to find out if the course has taught them anything.

we could also turn this around and say : Except when people teaching MMA course dont have any knowledge of self defense. then teach other people who are under the assumption that it is effective as self defense.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Errr... No .

What else is it, then? I gave you a single technique applied in two locations. You said one is training and one is not. What is different other than the location?

 

[drop bear]

we could also turn this around and say : Except when people teaching MMA course dont have any knowledge of self defense. then teach other people who are under the assumption that it is effective as self defense.

What knowledge of self defence?

This I think is the issue. Everyone has pretty much the same grounding in self defence as everyone else.

A ballet dancer who defends herself has the same authenticity as a black belt who defends herself.

Because nobody actually does self defence.

Where do you think this knowledge is coming from that separates a knowledgeable self defence instructor from a MMA fighter or even a ballerina?

 

[drop bear]

So, what's the difference between a hip throw in a dojo and in a competition?

The same difference between walking across a plank a foot off the ground.

And walking across one a hundred feet off the ground.

Which is still location. But it is really not.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The same difference between walking across a plank a foot off the ground.

And walking across one a hundred feet off the ground.

Which is still location. But it is really not.

okay, so that assumes a high stress level for the competition that isn’t in the dojo. That not entirely unfounded. While not everyone finds competition stressful, and some folks find observation stressful, regardless of the venue, there is a higher stress level for most folks. I just don’t see where is application and the other isn’t, which appears to be Steve’s assertion.

 

[drop bear]

okay, so that assumes a high stress level for the competition that isn’t in the dojo. That not entirely unfounded. While not everyone finds competition stressful, and some folks find observation stressful, regardless of the venue, there is a higher stress level for most folks. I just don’t see where is application and the other isn’t, which appears to be Steve’s assertion.

Not really aplication. But it is a very complicated idea.

I like the scientific method idea a bit better.

And put sparrting as hypothosis and competition as experiment.

 

[hoshin1600]

Not really aplication. But it is a very complicated idea.

I like the scientific method idea a bit better.

And put sparrting as hypothosis and competition as experiment.

I like the scientific method myself.
I would say however that there are certain inherent flaws and limitations on competitive sparring if you are applying that as the "experiment" for self defense. In SD training we use scenario training rather than competitive sparring. The two have completely different formats and what constitutes a "win". In competitive sparring each participant MUST remain engaged with the other for the duration of the "experiment". Reality and SD does not hold this as a rule. Both parties can withdraw at anytime. AND withdrawal is the primary goal for the non assailant participant. I would set the "experiment" up so the the combatants fight in a similar way to competition but the non assailant participant has the primary goal to reach a "safety point" like a doorway. Or place a gun on the ground 20 ft away and the two must fight to get the gun and subdue the other with it.
The complexity level of SD training is higher than just sparring. It's a matter of taking sparring and applying it to format where a "win" has more dimensions to it.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Not really aplication. But it is a very complicated idea.

I like the scientific method idea a bit better.

And put sparrting as hypothosis and competition as experiment.

What has that to do with the difference between a hip throw in resistive sparring in a dojo versus resistive sparring in a competition?

 

[CB Jones]

I like the scientific method myself.
I would say however that there are certain inherent flaws and limitations on competitive sparring if you are applying that as the "experiment" for self defense. In SD training we use scenario training rather than competitive sparring. The two have completely different formats and what constitutes a "win". In competitive sparring each participant MUST remain engaged with the other for the duration of the "experiment". Reality and SD does not hold this as a rule. Both parties can withdraw at anytime. AND withdrawal is the primary goal for the non assailant participant. I would set the "experiment" up so the the combatants fight in a similar way to competition but the non assailant participant has the primary goal to reach a "safety point" like a doorway. Or place a gun on the ground 20 ft away and the two must fight to get the gun and subdue the other with it.
The complexity level of SD training is higher than just sparring. It's a matter of taking sparring and applying it to format where a "win" has more dimensions to it.

I look at it as whether you train SD or competition fighting you are learning individual skills and techniques and how to combine and utilize them in a fight. How well you do this will be different for every individual depending on the individual.