Thoughts on the "what martial art should I take for self-defense" question

[Tez3]

What can make you to think this way?

Do you agree that,

no training < 1 year training < 5 years training < 10 years training?

I might agree if I understood what you meant.

 

[Gweilo]

I might agree if I understood what you meant.

I think he was saying, do you really believe, someone who has had training is a better person than those with none

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I think he was saying, do you really believe, someone who has had training is a better person than those with none

The reason that we train is because we want to be stronger than average people.

If we have

- punched 10,000 time on heavy bag, our punch will be stronger than those who has no heavy bag training.
- kicked 10,000 time on heavy bag, our kick and our shin bone will be stronger than those who has no heavy bag training.

This has nothing to do with any MA style. It only has to do with the time that we have spent.

 

[Gweilo]

The reason that we train is because we want to be stronger than average people.

If we have

- punched 10,000 time on heavy bag, our punch will be stronger than those who has no heavy bag training.
- kicked 10,000 time on heavy bag, our kick and shin bone will be stronger than those who has no heavy bag training.

This has nothing to do with any MA style. It only has to do with the time that we have spent.

I agree with you, I was just translating

 

[drop bear]

If he does you still are not going to agree, but I will point out, if you throw and hold the arm, wrist etc, as long as you have contact, the next techniques should be seamless.

He is not going to show though. They never do.

I mean people constantly wonder why mma with its wealth of evidence is considered more important than someone saying they can arm bar everyone in their dojo.

Where I don't understand how objectively anyone could consider both with equal weight.

 

[drop bear]

A technique mentioned by DB earlier, the Berimbolo, is a good example, by remaining in contact, you can negate your intitial move, and counter this move, by staying in contact, I found a Bjj vid to show my point.

More importantly it looks ludicrous. If you saw that in a drill you would discount that as woo woo rubbish.

The only thing that separates that from pressure point KOs is the actual evidence that it works.

 

[Gweilo]

Where I don't understand how objectively anyone could consider both with equal weight.

Because most TMA has been proven for centuries on battlefeilds (which is what they are designed for), some military styles are still being proved in modern day, to claim these arts have no evidence is proof of 2 things, your misunderstanding, and arrogance. I and others have stated, we really respect and enjoy mma, yes what you do works in your niche area, and yes lots of it will work in a sd senario, but to label other arts as useless, because they do not fit in with you, or your style, or your sport has become the norm with mma types, they seem to be brain washed into a cult like state of omnipotence.

 

[Gweilo]

More importantly it looks ludicrous. If you saw that in a drill you would discount that as woo woo rubbish.

One of them is a current black belt in bjj, the other a 2x world champ, theres that omnipotence I was speaking about.

 

[Tez3]

I think he was saying, do you really believe, someone who has had training is a better person than those with none

Ah thank you.
My point was absolutely nothing to do with training versus no training, it was about boastful people who say you have to be macho to survive.

 

[drop bear]

Because most TMA has been proven for centuries on battlefeilds (which is what they are designed for), some military styles are still being proved in modern day, to claim these arts have no evidence is proof of 2 things, your misunderstanding, and arrogance. I and others have stated, we really respect and enjoy mma, yes what you do works in your niche area, and yes lots of it will work in a sd senario, but to label other arts as useless, because they do not fit in with you, or your style, or your sport has become the norm with mma types, they seem to be brain washed into a cult like state of omnipotence.

Yeah because you can see MMA working. You can collect real data and even test it. You can't see for example standing arm bars working as well. I know i asked and nobody could provide it.

I mean what would you prefer. Something that actually works or some tale about ancient battle fields.

I mean check this out. Please show me your proven on the battlefield martial art. So like this.

 

[drop bear]

One of them is a current black belt in bjj, the other a 2x world champ, theres that omnipotence I was speaking about.

Actually who was demonstrating that doesn't really matter.

It is if there is evidence of the method working.

Which in the case of berimbolos there is.

In the case of standing arm bars there isn't.

 

[dvcochran]

Ah thank you.
My point was absolutely nothing to do with training versus no training, it was about boastful people who say you have to be macho to survive.

I did not take it as being macho. I just took it as a person willing to put the work in to do 10,000 drills vs. the person who has not. The first person is going to be the more learned person, (assuming they did the drills correctly!).

 

[dvcochran]

Yeah because you can see MMA working. You can collect real data and even test it. You can't see for example standing arm bars working as well. I know i asked and nobody could provide it.

I mean what would you prefer. Something that actually works or some tale about ancient battle fields.

I mean check this out. Please show me your proven on the battlefield martial art. So like this.

Great videos and impressive "OORAH". It really took me back to my LEO days and some of the scenario training we would do. To be fair, the section of the video of the guys rolling (looked like both military and non-military) are at the peak of fitness and age. So they are definitely at the higher end of the curve in terms of ability. In this context it all works and those guys can keep going until they figure out something that works.
In the idea of the 'typical' self defense scenario that is not the norm. One side is going to be at a disadvantage (usually the victim). The goal is Avoid first, Get Away second, and Get in and Get out third. Not hang around and fight or roll with the assailant.
How this fits into the MMA/TMA argument I am not sure. I do know most folks can continue doing TMA into their later years in a more 'rounded' way. That is not to say there are not outliers who can roll into an old age.
I do have to say some of this is internalized. If I was on the ground and someone started cranking on my legs it would be over. My legs are Way too broken up to be cranked on very hard. Kind of odd because I can still do standing drills/attacks decently well.

Corporately, we mildly practice falls but really only a rolling fall in the event of loosing balance, not as a takedown. There are step drills for the higher belts that have follow through techniques (takedown/finish).

At the end of the day, they are just two different martial art styles who both have a lot of merit.

 

[Tez3]

I did not take it as being macho. I just took it as a person willing to put the work in to do 10,000 drills vs. the person who has not. The first person is going to be the more learned person, (assuming they did the drills correctly!).

I think you are looking at a different post from me. Nothing to do with training, doing drills and all to do with this......

If you cant slaughter a animal without serious mental repercussions you should rethink plunging a knife into somone as a self defence option etc etc. Its a sound point though. Some people just cannot kill or go to the same brutality others can and with that as effectively as others can.

 

[Cynik75]

Because most TMA has been proven for centuries on battlefeilds (which is what they are designed for), some military styles are still being proved in modern day, to claim these arts have no evidence is proof of 2 things, your misunderstanding, and arrogance...

1. In battle much important than individual skills are: weapon, tactic, cooperation with other combatants. Please show me single TMA school which learns people how to behave in combat bigger than 1:1 or how to repeal cavalry charge. All today learned traditional martial arts are designed for single person not for group/unit melee
2. There is no martial art with proven lineage longer than about 150 years. 150 or even 200 years ago guns have won battles not fists, swords or knives

 

[skribs]

2. There is no martial art with proven lineage longer than about 150 years. 150 or even 200 years ago guns have won battles not fists, swords or knives

This is absolutely false. Boxing started in 1681. The origins of wrestling go back 15,000 years. HEMA is from the time period of 1300-1800 AD. Fencing is from the 1600s. Karate can be traced back to the 1300s, when it was introduced to the Japanese from Chinese Kung Fu masters (which the art existed long before that).

 

[dvcochran]

I read it to say within the last 150 years, although not perfectly worded that way. In this context I have to agree with the statement.

EDIT: That is not said to diminish the value of knowing a hand-to-hand combat. There is still the very real possibility to things ending up there in battle.

 

[Gweilo]

1. In battle much important than individual skills are: weapon, tactic, cooperation with other combatants. Please show me single TMA school which learns people how to behave in combat bigger than 1:1 or how to repeal cavalry charge. All today learned traditional martial arts are designed for single person not for group/unit melee
2. There is no martial art with proven lineage longer than about 150 years. 150 or even 200 years ago guns have won battles not fists, swords or knives

Ok modern day warfare, is weapons based, so unarmed combat for the every day soldier is an add on, as the regiments become moee elite the unarmed combat training becomes more intense.
Many TMA were taught with the unarmed techniques to fall back on if they lost their weapon, the samurai for example would have learnt a form like Daito ryu aki jutsu for this purpose, which dates back the 9th century, daito ryu is still taught today, and the history has evolved to include Aikido and Hapkido that are founded from Daito ryu.
Modern day military styles include Krav maga and systema, which are still taught to military units today, A different form of Krav maga to most you see in the gyms today is used by the Isreali military, which has also been adapted by north and south Korean military.
System has a couple of linages, that again date back from the 10th century, although modernised in the 20th century for Russian military, its heritage can be found in Kossack/Slavic traditions, so there is a couple of arts beleived to be modern that have linage way over 200 years of age.

 

[drop bear]

Great videos and impressive "OORAH". It really took me back to my LEO days and some of the scenario training we would do. To be fair, the section of the video of the guys rolling (looked like both military and non-military) are at the peak of fitness and age. So they are definitely at the higher end of the curve in terms of ability. In this context it all works and those guys can keep going until they figure out something that works.
In the idea of the 'typical' self defense scenario that is not the norm. One side is going to be at a disadvantage (usually the victim). The goal is Avoid first, Get Away second, and Get in and Get out third. Not hang around and fight or roll with the assailant.
How this fits into the MMA/TMA argument I am not sure. I do know most folks can continue doing TMA into their later years in a more 'rounded' way. That is not to say there are not outliers who can roll into an old age.
I do have to say some of this is internalized. If I was on the ground and someone started cranking on my legs it would be over. My legs are Way too broken up to be cranked on very hard. Kind of odd because I can still do standing drills/attacks decently well.

Corporately, we mildly practice falls but really only a rolling fall in the event of loosing balance, not as a takedown. There are step drills for the higher belts that have follow through techniques (takedown/finish).

At the end of the day, they are just two different martial art styles who both have a lot of merit.

There is a misconception that certain arts have a monopoly on either street experience or military use. Therefore giving that martial arts an extra depth that a sport doesn't have. The video shows that it is not really true.


As far as weighing the merits of an art equally I don't think we can based solely on evidence. On one side we can see a martial art working and on the other we only have assurances that it works.

I mean that can't be close to even when comparing anything.

And there are plenty of TMA,s that compete in MMA. So it is not like a good TMA can't do it.

 

[drop bear]

1. In battle much important than individual skills are: weapon, tactic, cooperation with other combatants. Please show me single TMA school which learns people how to behave in combat bigger than 1:1 or how to repeal cavalry charge. All today learned traditional martial arts are designed for single person not for group/unit melee
2. There is no martial art with proven lineage longer than about 150 years. 150 or even 200 years ago guns have won battles not fists, swords or knives

And this is not a guns thing.

And even back in the day wars were won with tactics and numbers. Not martial arts.

Look for example at the phalanx (I think there is a more accurate term) Which was a Roman superweapon.