- Joined
- Feb 11, 2003
- Messages
- 9,998
- Reaction score
- 206
Shoot them.
As I've said in other threads, I think this is a very valid point. It seems that most of us accept that we will "fight the way we train." This being the case, I think that we have to concede that most MMA'ers are going to be better prepared than most TMA'ers simply because they train with a higher level of contact and intensity.cfr said:This thread originated with "how to apply SD to an MMA'er", and my point all along has been to not assume an MMA'er will play by the rules on the street (seriously, go back and look and my first few replies). This was then met with "they will fight how they train", which got me on this tangent of "so will TMA'ers".
I like that!...I'm stealing it (with due credit of course )...It's all about how bloody minded you're willing to be when the time comes.
There is many a black belt who is dead today because he had the technical proficiency to earn the blackness in his belt, but who, when the time came on the street, didn't have the necessary blackness in his HEART.
As I've said in other threads, I think this is a very valid point. It seems that most of us accept that we will "fight the way we train." This being the case, I think that we have to concede that most MMA'ers are going to be better prepared than most TMA'ers simply because they train with a higher level of contact and intensity.
They may be following their "rules," but their rules call for beating the snot out of someone with boxing combos, slamming each other to the floor with a variety of takedowns (wich ain't gonna be healthy for the recipient), and doing their best to rip pieces off, choke each other out, and G&P once they're on the ground. In contrast we have the majority of TMA people who spend their time doing touch-contact sparring, working their techniques, and performing what amounts to little more than a complex dance. The fact that their "rules" allow for eye, throat, and groin attacks is, IMO, pretty meaningless since they're usually going through the motions without the requisite "warrior-mindset."
As I've said in other threads, I think this is a very valid point. It seems that most of us accept that we will "fight the way we train." This being the case, I think that we have to concede that most MMA'ers are going to be better prepared than most TMA'ers simply because they train with a higher level of contact and intensity.
They may be following their "rules," but their rules call for beating the snot out of someone with boxing combos, slamming each other to the floor with a variety of takedowns (wich ain't gonna be healthy for the recipient), and doing their best to rip pieces off, choke each other out, and G&P once they're on the ground. In contrast we have the majority of TMA people who spend their time doing touch-contact sparring, working their techniques, and performing what amounts to little more than a complex dance. The fact that their "rules" allow for eye, throat, and groin attacks is, IMO, pretty meaningless since they're usually going through the motions without the requisite "warrior-mindset."
I like that!...I'm stealing it (with due credit of course )
EXACTLY!"You will NOT rise to the occasion, you will default to the level of training you have mastered."
I don't recall saying TMAer's wouldn't do the same.....if you've trained a crescent kick to solve all your problems, you'll keep trying it until taken to the ground and submitted if it fails. Likewise, if you've never trained an eye-gouge, it's unlikely you'll suddenly innovate it in the middle of a fight.Just for the record, I have not once said "you won't really fight how you train" or anything like it. A few of you seem to be suggesting that I diasagree with the "fight how you train" concept, that which I don't.
However, there seems to be a mindset that only MMA'ers will fall into this problem, and TMA'ers won't. Why is that?
On paper, an MMA'er would play by sport rules, and a TMA'er would chamber his punch to his hip, stop his strike an inch before the target, etc.. But the world is not on paper. Anyone who has the ability to think outside the box a bit during his training can change it up a bit to overcome these issues, despite what he's traning in.
Also, someone said "I touch the eyes" which is probably great training, but how many of us do this (either MMA or TMA)? Also, how many of us bite, scratch, strike to vitals, etc., during training? Probably not too many of us (again, regardless of which camp your in). Now before anyone spouts their supreme wisdom with something like "you couldn't do those things in training or you'd lose training partners", let me assure you I am already aware of that. :wink2:
What about 'everyone fights like they train' seems to have been missed?This thread originated with "how to apply SD to an MMA'er", and my point all along has been to not assume an MMA'er will play by the rules on the street (seriously, go back and look and my first few replies). This was then met with "they will fight how they train", which got me on this tangent of "so will TMA'ers".
HEAR, HEAR!So just go through your school/gym based training in your "off hours" and go through how you'd "spice up" what youve learned. It's all about how bloody minded you're willing to be when the time comes.
There is many a black belt who is dead today because he had the technical proficiency to earn the blackness in his belt, but who, when the time came on the street, didn't have the necessary blackness in his HEART when the time came on the street.
HEAR, HEAR!
R. Lee Ermey's drill instructor in 'Full Metal Jacket'
'It's a hard-heart that kills!'
In order to destroy an enemy, you have to WANT to destroy an enemy! Conflict is taking the heart and soul to a dark place.....good people reserve that darkness for only deserving special occassions, but anyone who truly wants to defend themselves against bad people have to learn to harness the darkness.
HEAR, HEAR!
R. Lee Ermey's drill instructor in 'Full Metal Jacket'
'It's a hard-heart that kills!'
YIKES!!In california?
yeah, uhh...good luck with that.
I think it's the same in HI.
Most places "a reasonable fear for your life" is enough to use force to stop it. I know each state's penal code is different, however, many have this concept expressed.Guess I'll get back into the fray here...
So my humble advice is, wait until you are actually attacked, and then beat them so they never forget it. And always be the first to call the police once the threat is ended.
Most places "a reasonable fear for your life" is enough to use force to stop it. I know each state's penal code is different, however, many have this concept expressed.
Waiting until your attacked isn't the best option, IMO. You might just get cold conked.:bangahead:
There's a reason that justification of the use of force has not been quantified as black letter law. Let's take the same bad guy; a 5' 10", 230 lb Hells Angel, about 25 years old. No weapons displayed or involved (as unlikely as that is). Now let's look at a couple of potential victims: a 22 year old US Navy SEAL, a 32 year old male typical "weekend warrior" in decent shape, a 42 year old MMA champion (think Randy Couture), a 45 year old female police officer who's also a competitive athlete, and a 75 year old retiree. Each of them would be justified in using a different level of force against the same attack, like a grab and punch combo, from that biker... Some may not be justified in using anything but empty hands, while others would be probably be justified in using lethal force!This language is the exact problem with this kind of law. It is too ambiguous. What is "a reasonable fear" is up to the interpretation of the police and the jury. In California at least I have personal knowledge and experience that words alone most often will not do to reach that threshold.
That's the problem with a too liberal legislature, IMO. However, words don't cause damage; but if the person is holding something that can do damage, or is a MOOSE, why then the circumstances are quite different.
Better to be judged by twelve than to be carried by six.