Self defense needs to be grounded in truth to be ethical.

[skribs]

I agree. Except that in a self defense situation, you are not getting out of a "wrist grab." You are trying to get away from someone determined to control you, who happens to have grabbed your wrist first. Yes, the drill you teach will work, for most people if most other people grab their wrist. But, if you then change the situation, and ask the guy grabbing to keep the person there, start by grabbing the wrist... you get $50 if you can keep the other guy right here for 3 minutes, by any means... then things change. Then they start responding by grabbing the other hand, grabbing the waist, tackling... anything except for "let me hold your wrist while you try to get out." Best counter for someone breaking a wrist grab... immediately grab them again.

In my Hapkido class, I've found it very hard to set up a wristlock offensively, because of how easy it is to break those grips. What I would be teaching would be something that would take minimal training in order to apply, and achieve a basic result of breaking the grip. That gives them a chance to run away or to fight back. A much better chance than if they're stuck in that grip.

If teaching grip breaks isn't ethical, I don't know what is. I don't know what else can be taught as quickly to be used effectively.

Correct. So, what is ethical to teach a beginner for self defense? Upon leaving your class, your student gets assaulted in the parking lot. Should they be trying the palm heel to the chin, that they just learned? Should you as the instructor be making them believe that shot has power, when you know that a beginner does not have power? Note that this goes for any technique, as you point out. There is not a technique that you can teach a beginner in a short seminar, to use for real when his life depends on it.

The same could be said for a self-defense class, then. If you've had your first class (which is usually an hour long) and you get jumped, should you be prepared to defend yourself? You're setting too high a standard of the seminar.

 

[skribs]

This is exactly the instructor mentality wab25 is talking about. Yes, in the moment and environment of a classroom workout you can teach the mechanics of the skill. That in no way means the skill is imprinted well enough to be used effectively in a real world self defense situation.
Time and repetition. It takes tons of time and repetition.

Some skills take less time and repetition to build to a competent level than others. Pulling your arm out of a wrist grab is a lot quicker to learn than how to properly execute a throw or a wristlock.

 

[dvcochran]

Some skills take less time and repetition to build to a competent level than others. Pulling your arm out of a wrist grab is a lot quicker to learn than how to properly execute a throw or a wristlock.

For every three people who grab your wrist One of them you will Not be able to break the grip with a singular skill. They are just too strong.

 

[wab25]

This is it. This is the post where I decide you're not worth investing any more time into.

First, ask him what he means by this statement:

There is so much more back of house that went in to that defend a punch and throw than people understand.

I know what part you are disagreeing with... but understanding what he meant by that first statement, will put context into the one you disagree with.

For instance, the way I take that statement is that for MMA fights, certainly all the ones you see on TV, the fighter knows who he is fighting. He watches video of his previous fights, and learns the tendencies and what he is good at. That punch that was blocked, setting up the throw, was not a surprise... it was something he trained for, for weeks before the fight. He had sparring partners doing their best to imitate that punch. A game plan was set up, for how to draw out that punch, when the fighter wanted it, so he could respond the way he trained. The TMA fighter, that does not do this type of pre fight training, will have a hard time pulling off the same combo... because he does not know that guy's tendencies.

If I got that wrong, please inform. But I think there is some context, for what is being said here. I am not saying to agree with him... but find out the context first.

 

[Tez3]

Gerry got what I meant. I was trying to use the word ethical in the sense that the OP was.

I was talking about the OP not you.

Teaching a beginner to respond to a gun being pulled them, by shouting "BANG!!!" while putting their finger in the barrel is not ethical.

It's not correct but if the person teaching that believes honestly it is correct you cannot say it's not ethical.

Correct. So if an instructor were to teach a self defense seminar, what are the ethical steps that need to be taken, to insure that you are not teaching rubbish self defense?

'Ethical steps' we are teaching people to hurt others, whatever the reason, ethics don't come into this, only practical effective techniques.

The OP posted this thread with the intent to post up that only MMA is the answer. Ethics Shmethics, it's the usual TMA doesn't work only MMA does schtick.

 

[Buka]

If you use kick to counter punch (leg is longer than arm), it doesn't matter which arm that your opponent throws (left or right). It also doesn't matter what kind of punch that your opponent throws (jab, or cross, or ...).

After your kick, it will be your opponent's term to worry about how to deal with your punch.

If I want to develop a dependable SD skill, to use kick to stop all punches will be my #1 choice.

While I love kicking, I prefer being in close when I fight. What we used to call "fighting in the kitchen".
Oh, sure, I may kick to close distance when that particular scenario presents itself, or let him kick in order to try and stop me, but I've always done both, and that's what works for me.

A lot of my students do exactly as you've shown, because it works for them. And that's a good thing....for them. Me...I'll be waiting in the kitchen.

 

[skribs]

First, ask him what he means by this statement:

I know what part you are disagreeing with... but understanding what he meant by that first statement, will put context into the one you disagree with.

For instance, the way I take that statement is that for MMA fights, certainly all the ones you see on TV, the fighter knows who he is fighting. He watches video of his previous fights, and learns the tendencies and what he is good at. That punch that was blocked, setting up the throw, was not a surprise... it was something he trained for, for weeks before the fight. He had sparring partners doing their best to imitate that punch. A game plan was set up, for how to draw out that punch, when the fighter wanted it, so he could respond the way he trained. The TMA fighter, that does not do this type of pre fight training, will have a hard time pulling off the same combo... because he does not know that guy's tendencies.

If I got that wrong, please inform. But I think there is some context, for what is being said here. I am not saying to agree with him... but find out the context first.

I've been in several of these discussions with him lately. He's gotten more and more into what I call the "MMA Cult". Which is the belief that MMA is sacred, and all other forms of martial arts are bullshido.

Don't get me wrong, I think MMA is great. But this dogmatic approach that if it isn't MMA, it's completely worthless, is not suitable to discussion. Talking with him is like talking to a wall. Even if you post video evidence of what you're talking about, he'll still find excuses as to why it's not suitable evidence.

If I trained MMA, maybe we could have meaningful discussions. But since I train TKD and HKD, all I'm going to get from him is derision and contempt.

 

[wab25]

If teaching grip breaks isn't ethical, I don't know what is.

It's not that teaching grib breaks is unethical. Teaching things like weapon disarms to beginners is unethical in my opinion. But, basic strikes and grip breaks are not by definition, unethical. For the simple things, its how you teach them in the self defense class that makes them ethical or not. Teaching them to stand there and break the grip... teaches them to stand there and break the grip and wait for the attacker to grab them again. How do you go from the drill, to something useful on the street in that 2 hour block?

The same could be said for a self-defense class, then. If you've had your first class (which is usually an hour long) and you get jumped, should you be prepared to defend yourself? You're setting too high a standard of the seminar.

The problem is that most beginners take the class expecting to take out Chuck Norris on the way home, should he attack them from the bushes. I like Gerry's idea of lowering that bar and helping folks get a more realistic understanding of the problem. I certainly wouldn't want to raise the bar any higher than the students already have it when they show up.

I sometimes think that if I can get them to simply appreciate the complexity of the problem of "self defense" and inspire them to do their own research and start some sort of regular training... I feel like that is a win.

 

[skribs]

For every three people who grab your wrist One of them you will Not be able to break the grip with a singular skill. They are just too strong.

67% is a D, which is technically a passing grade. That's 2/3 of grabs they can avoid that they couldn't before. I'd call that a win.

It's all about triage. What is the most effectiveness you can get with the time you have to teach it?

 

[dvcochran]

67% is a D, which is technically a passing grade. That's 2/3 of grabs they can avoid that they couldn't before. I'd call that a win.

It's all about triage. What is the most effectiveness you can get with the time you have to teach it?

I cannot follow that train of thinking. My point was simply that thinking a Singular drill is always going to work is fools gold. Everyone needs to be trained with this mindset.

 

[skribs]

I cannot follow that train of thinking. My point was simply that thinking a Singular drill is always going to work is fools gold. Everyone needs to be trained with this mindset.

To clarify: you don't understand my train of thought, or you don't agree with it?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

While I love kicking, I prefer being in close when I fight.

If you train how to kick, it will make no sense that you don't use it in fighting. Even just low roundhouse kick can give trouble to most attackers. If you also add in knee stomp, it's possible that you can keep your opponent away from your kicking range.

 

[dvcochran]

To clarify: you don't understand my train of thought, or you don't agree with it?

If I don't confidently think a skill is going to work more than 1/2 of the time, it is going to be Way back in my bag of tricks.
That said, I want my mindset to be one that is prepared for the 1/2 that does Not work.

 

[Buka]

If you train how to kick, it will make no sense that you don't use it in fighting. Even just low roundhouse kick can give trouble to most attackers. If you also add in knee stomp, it's possible that you can keep your opponent away from your kicking range.

I've trained in every aspect of the fighting arts that I've ever known of. And truth be told, I know more about kicking than anyone I've ever met.

But we all do what we like to do. Don't you agree?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

But we all do what we like to do. Don't you agree?

Agree! I have never liked front keel kick. IMO, it's a bit shorter than the front toe push kick.

 

[dvcochran]

I had three knockouts from heel kicks to the chin from about 10" away. One of those kicks where flexibility and opportunity are huge factors.

 

[skribs]

I think for most people, the heel is better for lower targets (i.e. the thigh or knee), and the ball of the foot is better for higher targets (solar plexus or chin). If you're faster and more flexible, the heel becomes a more viable target higher up. It's also a more viable target close in.

Then there's the instep when kicking up to the groin or the chin.

 

[drop bear]

I don't think I want self defence to be 'ethical', that would mean I'd have to try not to hurt the person that was trying to hurt me and mine and I'm afraid I'd want very much to hurt a person who as doing that.

Ethical means morally good or morally correct and that's not what self defence is about, we can all be morally good/correct and teach rubbish self defence or we could be horribly sinful people and teach good effective self defence, morals don't come into it in the slightest.

Ethical as in it does what it says it does.

 

[drop bear]

I agree with what you say in application. But I have Never been asked to do a self defense seminar like that.

No. Almost nobody does. Because people don't really understand how self defense works.

 

[drop bear]

This is it. This is the post where I decide you're not worth investing any more time into.

You're saying techniques that are taught in TMAs that also work in MMA don't work in the TMA because it's not MMA. You're so far down that road you can't have any rational discussion about anything, unless it has to do with MMA.

Yeah pretty much. So if you and maywhether have a jab sparring competition. Even though you are both doing the same technique. Maywhether will beat you up.

This is not because maywhether is magic but due to a bunch of back of house elements that are vital to making that technique work.

And so should you jump in the ring and get bashed. Even though you are both doing primarily the same technique. There are elements you are not doing that will loose you the fight.

This is also generally why TMA gets handled in MMA. Because they don't focus on a bunch of vital stuff that wins fights.

You will notice when TMA that does well. They have addressed these issues.