Why most martial arts don't work in self defense.

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Just like the 8 steps preying mantis master Wei Shao-Tang said, "When your friend poured you a cup of tea, he could throw the hot tea on your face, and then beat you up."

Does your training cover that?

I no longer hang out with my friends where that's a concern.

 

[dvcochran]

Sounds like a lot of rambling of a guy trying to sound smart. All martial arts have the potential to work in self defence it all depends on the practitioner and how that martial art is trained

True, but it is also true that All martial have the potential to fail as well. @Kung Fu Wang said it Very well in post #12.

 

[drop bear]

@Kung Fu Wang

What is your solution? You've presented problems both with the sport side of arts (not looking at self-defense scenarios) and of the traditional side (training methods that don't involve pressure testing). What is your method that solves all of these problems?

You sportify self defense.

So if you think say BJJ only works against one guy. You BJJ against multiple guys. And so on.

Wear a mask and roll with eye gouges. Roll with punches. Do MMA with guns.

Or create your own competitions that reflect the issues that you think occur in self defense.

The problem occurs when people have an outcome they are selling and so set up broken scenarios.

And what we find is people then approach these scenarios in the right way. So say someone is some flash TKD kicker but has entered a kickboxing comp.

Then we find these people need to find a delivery system to manage that problem.

 

[dvcochran]

Or create your own competitions that reflect the issues that you think occur in self defense.

This is not the worst idea I have ever heard. It would take tons of logistics to get it started.

The rest of the post is total wasted airspace.

 

[skribs]

Sometime we may forget that "sport" is only the path and not the goal.

When I was young, I used to train how to dodge tennis balls while standing in a small circle. IMO, the new generation may not include "how to dodge a throwing object" in their training.

For many, sport is the goal.

 

[isshinryuronin]

I believe in:

1. Entering strategy - move in safely without being kicked and punched.
2. Finish strategy - finish a fight ASAP.

Whatever the training that can achieve these 2 goals will be my training focus.

It is hard to disagree with most all of your initial OP in this forum, which I believe you were quoting. All of those points are things to be seriously considered and taken into account. They are all potential weaknesses in an actual fight.

But it's not that MA won't work for real, it just won't work if those points are not taken into account and trained for.

Re: your comment on fighting sequences not often working because the opponent will resist the initial move thus nullifying the next moves in the sequence. That all depends on the design of the sequence! "No plan survives the first contact." is a combat truism embraced thru history. You must assume resistance and that every move you make will not succeed.

If he blocks your attack and counter punches, a slight detour of your second strike into a blocking move will allow the 3rd move in a sequence to be launched. If you expect and train for the likely resisting response/counter, you have the solution. There must be flexibility in the sequence, or it truly is useless.

Using a single move to accomplish both defense and offense decreases the chance of a counter, as does employing both hands at the same time - one to defend and the other to simultaneously attack. Attacks must be direct, simple, take resistance into account and lead to a finishing move ASAP. Easy, huh?

 

[drop bear]

This is not the worst idea I have ever heard. It would take tons of logistics to get it started.

The rest of the post is total wasted airspace.

Well it wouldn't. You could start at a club or interclub level.
Or do something that exists like a dog brothers or something.

Otherwise that wasted airspace is still basically scientific method. And is really the only reliable method there is.

And with self defense it is a very simple problem.

You see some sort of attack, problem,scenario.

You research a defense.

You go fight a bunch of guys with it.

It works, doesn't work, sorta works.

 

[drop bear]

Using a single move to accomplish both defense and offense decreases the chance of a counter, as does employing both hands at the same time - one to defend and the other to simultaneously attack. Attacks must be direct, simple, take resistance into account and lead to a finishing move ASAP. Easy, huh?

The attack and counter thing has issues. So if I am blocking with one hand and striking with the other. And they are striking with both hands and blocking using footwork and timing then they have twice the opportunity to hit me.

And moving is less mental effort as it will work without having to read a strike and then react to it.

If you look at Krav maga for example one of their signature moves is blocking and striking simultaneously.

But if you ever look at Krav sparring they basically never pull that move off.

 

[dvcochran]

Well it wouldn't. You could start at a club or interclub level.
Or do something that exists like a dog brothers or something.

Otherwise that wasted airspace is still basically scientific method. And is really the only reliable method there is.

View attachment 22715

And with self defense it is a very simple problem.

You see some sort of attack, problem,scenario.

You research a defense.

You go fight a bunch of guys with it.

It works, doesn't work, sorta works.

That is a great poster. 100% SM accurate. However, nearly All of your post are so laced with confirmation bias that they mean dick.
I have no doubt that you roll hard and have some real slobber knocker matches. In regards to the poster, that would be in the hypothesize/experiment areas. Until you have been able to fully experience (test hypothesis) a significant portion of all MA's (not just one school from each style) you have not effectively put SM to use. As an example, I am certain there are some BJJ schools that go at it much harder than others.
In other words, your martial arts or fighting system (whatever You call what you do) works in your world. Summarily saying it works 100% of the time, all the time is BS. Period.
I enjoy conversing with you when you bring your knowledge to the table. When you quickly jump to your usual narrative, it gets really old.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Find this discussion in another forum. IMO, some valid points are made here. What are the proper solutions? Your thought?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's a detailed explanation why most martial arts don't work in self defense.

1. Wrong assumptions - Martial artists make many wrong assumptions about the streets. They assume it's going to be a fair fight. They assume they're going to face one untrained opponent. I could go on and on. When you're on the streets, you're not in your turf. You're in the criminal's territory. Street attackers don't follow your dojo or MMA gym's rules. They go by street rules which often has no rules.

2. Trying to control too many variables - The second biggest problem with most martial arts is they try to control too many variables. They often do demos. with compliant partners and spar with people of the same style. They add rules of what is and is not allowed in sparring. Truthfully, you can't control everything that happens in the streets. There's going to be things outside of your control. You can't really predict how your attacker will attack. All you can do is make educated guesses.

3. Unrealistic scenarios - Most martial artists engage in very unrealistic scenarios. They assume a street attacker will attack the way in a controlled manner usually in the defender's own art. That's far from reality. Most attackers attack chaotically with wild punches, kicks, bearhugs, bodyslams, headbutts, tackles, sucker punches, etc. It's going to be too fast and chaotic for your techniques to work.

4. Unrealistic techniques - Most martial artists have unrealistic techniques. They're too flashy to work in combat. They usually think in sequences. The problem with sequences is you're assuming your attacker won't react or resist. They usually resist the moment you try to do your first technique which makes it harder for you to execute your second one.

5. Unrealistic mindset - Most martial artists train with a sports mindset. They don't know the difference between an attack and a fight. An attack is a violent act meant to hurt you without your consent whereas a fight is agreed on. In a fight, there's some degree of respect and protection via. referees, mats, gloves, etc. That doesn't exist in a real attack. Street attackers have no problem bashing your skull in with a pipe. There's more blood and guts in street attacks than there is in fighting.

6. Impractical exercises - Martial artists often engage in pointless work outs like flow drills and forms. Flow drills don't translate well to real combat for several reasons. 1) Your attacker won't stay in one range. Your attacker will start in one distance then move to another. 2) There's no intent to attack. People who do flow drills often attack with the intent for their partners to defend and counter then repeat. Martial artists say "well the point of flow drills is to practice your reflexes, speed, coordination, etc." Well, getting those benefits practicing flow drills is the equivalent of playing patty-cakes with your hands. Forms are also useless. You can practice your techniques on an imaginary opponent all day, but things completely change when you're dealing with a real attacker. Martial artists think they're improving their stance, structure, techniques, etc. by doing forms. They're in for a rude awakening when they get attacked and can't maintain their forms under pressure via. getting rammed against, getting punched wildly, etc.

7. Ignorance of weapons and multiple attackers - Most martial artists neglect training against multiple attackers and armed attackers. They'll say "no art can deal with such situations" or "run" to justify bad training. If they do train against them, it's usually scripted and too flashy to be realistic. In fact, most martial artists who get attacked on the streets end up hurt or killed by weapons and/or multiple attackers.

8. Ignorance of stress - Most martial artists don't realize stress can greatly decrease your performance. It's not enough to simply spar full contact. When you reached a certain level of stress, your brain forgets complex motor skills because it's not necessary for survival. That means all your flashy techniques become useless. You'll get tunnel vision, stiff muscles, difficulty concentrating, difficulty breathing, etc. If you don't know how to manage stress, your techniques will suffer and might find yourself getting beaten up regardless if you had the right training or not.

9. Wrong techniques - Martial artists often train with the wrong techniques. They think if a punch or kick lands, it works. Nothing could be further from the truth. If it doesn't end the threat fast be it by breaking your attacker's limbs or knocking him/her out, it's not helping you defend yourself. Like the case with Meredith Kercher. She was a Karateka who got jumped by two people who plotted to kill her with knives. She fought for her life using Karate. She still got stabbed multiple times with knives, raped, and died with a sit throat. People can take Karate punches because they don't pack as much as power as other arts like boxing.

That's why most martial arts are impractical for self defense.

I think most of those are marketing language. There are some good points in there, but several of them contradict each other. If you put them all together, there seem to be only two options: nothing, or all-out attacks on each other with no rules.

I'll address the more reasonable points, in the interest of time:

1. Yes, but not necessarily the wrong assumptions stated here. Reviewing videos that are available and talking with folks who deal with attacks is probably the best we can do to adjust our assumptions.

2. I'm not sure what his actual point is here. He seems to mix a couple of other points together. Going from his initial phrase, I agree. There's a tendency to start from the assumption that you get to work at one given distance (some arts close, some farther, etc.), which is a mistake. Good fight training/SD training should cover controlling/working at various distances.

3. Again, he seems to mix points here. SD-oriented schools tend to make this mistake, but not in the way outlined. I think this is mostly a repeat of #1.

5. This is something said often by SD schools. I'm not sure there's a lot of validity in the "sport mindset is bad" claim. @drop bear can do a better job than me of expounding on that.

6. This seems to be mostly a misunderstanding of the purpose of drills.

7. Not really true of SD-oriented training. Whether they do well at this or not is an entirely different question.

8. I can't think of an instructor I've trained with for more than a couple of hours who hasn't actually made this point, so not sure where they're getting it.

9. While some folks do seem to train as if a single technique will end the attack/fight, most don't seem to train with that mindset. It's certainly not universal, as the quote implies. The extreme example provided is a ridiculous jump.

 

[RTKDCMB]

It doesn't look like the person who wrote that has had much experience in the martial arts.

 

[dvcochran]

For many, sport is the goal.

This is a good point to further divide the purpose of MA's practice for some people.
TMA with hard contact and emphasis
Sport MA
MA done more as healthful exercise only. No desire or intent for hard contact or competition.

The last one gets tough to translate sometimes. I suppose it is in the same category as kid students keeping the doors open. Don't misunderstand the message. Every practitioner should get the same training and exposure. It is just a fact of life that some people can/will be able to go harder than others. Where/when/how you decide each person has satisfied the curriculum requirements is subjective. The 35 year old engineer with 4 kids and a wife, mortgage and other debt will look at things differently from the 24 year old unmarried engineer. Always. @drop bear , this has to be factored into the SM.

Everybody spars in our classes. Hard rule. We have some adults that will never be competitive. They go light in sparring and that is understood. I take the time to have clear concise conversations about the effects. I always try to offset the loss of sparring effects with hard contact drills.
Somehow, somewhere every person learning a martial art must experience the sensation of being rocked and how to not freeze up and overcome it. I know of no other way to experience this than to have it repeatedly happen. If anyone else has found ways to minimize the risk I would love to hear them.

There has been some very good references about the effects of stress. Stress comes in two primary forms; mental stress and physical stress. Interestingly, each can affect the other and the variables are almost endless.
A mildly fit, sedentary worker with a laser focus and strong mental acuity can overcome more physical exertion than a body builder or defensive lineman in some situations. Naturally, the inverse can also be true.
Interestingly, there is quite a lot of recorded evidence of people of apparently average strength doing super human feats for extended periods. It is thought to be a Placebo effect whereas since the body has never felt stress at such a level it does not register it as a negative thus the mind does not tell the body to shut down. Pretty cool stuff to me and exactly the 'indominable spirit' that many martial arts talk about.

I think the greatest variable in this discussion is at what point does the stress of a situation start to adversely affect the person?

Some people come in our classes and are effectively stressed before they ever walk in the door. Others come in with quite a lot of capacity. I have seen a similar occurrence in siblings of close age a number of times. Regardless of where the stress trigger starts for a given person the goal is to move the trigger farther out as they continue to practice. Learning how to move the scale for each individual is a challenge the instructor/teacher has to figure out.

All this said, I feel some people will always have a greater capacity for stress than others.

 

[dvcochran]

I think most of those are marketing language. There are some good points in there, but several of them contradict each other. If you put them all together, there seem to be only two options: nothing, or all-out attacks on each other with no rules.

I'll address the more reasonable points, in the interest of time:

1. Yes, but not necessarily the wrong assumptions stated here. Reviewing videos that are available and talking with folks who deal with attacks is probably the best we can do to adjust our assumptions.

2. I'm not sure what his actual point is here. He seems to mix a couple of other points together. Going from his initial phrase, I agree. There's a tendency to start from the assumption that you get to work at one given distance (some arts close, some farther, etc.), which is a mistake. Good fight training/SD training should cover controlling/working at various distances.

3. Again, he seems to mix points here. SD-oriented schools tend to make this mistake, but not in the way outlined. I think this is mostly a repeat of #1.

5. This is something said often by SD schools. I'm not sure there's a lot of validity in the "sport mindset is bad" claim. @drop bear can do a better job than me of expounding on that.

6. This seems to be mostly a misunderstanding of the purpose of drills.

7. Not really true of SD-oriented training. Whether they do well at this or not is an entirely different question.

8. I can't think of an instructor I've trained with for more than a couple of hours who hasn't actually made this point, so not sure where they're getting it.

9. While some folks do seem to train as if a single technique will end the attack/fight, most don't seem to train with that mindset. It's certainly not universal, as the quote implies. The extreme example provided is a ridiculous jump.

Very well said.

 

[skribs]

It is hard to disagree with most all of your initial OP in this forum, which I believe you were quoting. All of those points are things to be seriously considered and taken into account. They are all potential weaknesses in an actual fight.

But it's not that MA won't work for real, it just won't work if those points are not taken into account and trained for.

Re: your comment on fighting sequences not often working because the opponent will resist the initial move thus nullifying the next moves in the sequence. That all depends on the design of the sequence! "No plan survives the first contact." is a combat truism embraced thru history. You must assume resistance and that every move you make will not succeed.

If he blocks your attack and counter punches, a slight detour of your second strike into a blocking move will allow the 3rd move in a sequence to be launched. If you expect and train for the likely resisting response/counter, you have the solution. There must be flexibility in the sequence, or it truly is useless.

Using a single move to accomplish both defense and offense decreases the chance of a counter, as does employing both hands at the same time - one to defend and the other to simultaneously attack. Attacks must be direct, simple, take resistance into account and lead to a finishing move ASAP. Easy, huh?

I think part of it depends on how they're trained. Virtually every grappling art will teach you individual techniques or drill you on progressions from take-down to control to submission or pin. If these drills are always practiced the same way, and you never drill for other techniques or how to deal with your plan going awry, then you're going to be really easily beaten when your initial technique fails.

However, I think that just as often, people see a video saying "Hapkido throw" and assume that because it's not Judo or Wrestling, that we don't drill for resistance or to modify our plans should our opponent react in different ways.

In fact, I'm kind of curious to go onto reddit (where the martial arts community is very much of the attitude that "it's MMA or it's bullshido") and post 2 videos. They would be the exact same, except in one video I would call it "Hapkido throw" and in the other I would call it "MMA throw" and see if I get different comments on both videos.

 

[isshinryuronin]

The attack and counter thing has issues. So if I am blocking with one hand and striking with the other. And they are striking with both hands and blocking using footwork and timing then they have twice the opportunity to hit me.

This does not make sense to me. Perhaps you missed the word "simultaneously." Usually, attacks come in two counts: jab, then cross, for example. If I block the jab and counter on the same beat, the counter will land before the cross is launched and will be nullified. Rarely does an attacker strike with both hands at the same time. Even if he does, the worst case scenario is that one of his attacks will be blocked, and the other one will land the same time as mine. I don't get how he has twice the chance to hit me.

 

[dvcochran]

I think part of it depends on how they're trained. Virtually every grappling art will teach you individual techniques or drill you on progressions from take-down to control to submission or pin. If these drills are always practiced the same way, and you never drill for other techniques or how to deal with your plan going awry, then you're going to be really easily beaten when your initial technique fails.

However, I think that just as often, people see a video saying "Hapkido throw" and assume that because it's not Judo or Wrestling, that we don't drill for resistance or to modify our plans should our opponent react in different ways.

In fact, I'm kind of curious to go onto reddit (where the martial arts community is very much of the attitude that "it's MMA or it's bullshido") and post 2 videos. They would be the exact same, except in one video I would call it "Hapkido throw" and in the other I would call it "MMA throw" and see if I get different comments on both videos.

That would be an excellent experiment in confirmation bias. It would be very interesting to hear the results.

 

[drop bear]

That is a great poster. 100% SM accurate. However, nearly All of your post are so laced with confirmation bias that they mean dick.
I have no doubt that you roll hard and have some real slobber knocker matches. In regards to the poster, that would be in the hypothesize/experiment areas. Until you have been able to fully experience (test hypothesis) a significant portion of all MA's (not just one school from each style) you have not effectively put SM to use. As an example, I am certain there are some BJJ schools that go at it much harder than others.
In other words, your martial arts or fighting system (whatever You call what you do) works in your world. Summarily saying it works 100% of the time, all the time is BS. Period.
I enjoy conversing with you when you bring your knowledge to the table. When you quickly jump to your usual narrative, it gets really old.

The self defense I have engaged in have have been slobber knocker matches. And so some training that vaguely reflects that gives me the best chance of being successful.

So the usual narrative is essentially inescapable.

Now people can sell self defense however they want but without the essential elements of training with real resistance. Your slobber knocker training, It just isn't going to be a very good product.

That is why when I ask for a video of whatever people's crazy idea they think will work. I get some kind of excuse. Because they haven't tested it. And are trying to hide that fact.

And that is why I am useful in a technical discussion. Because instead of talking about techniques and methods I haven't used and don't understand. Or about self defense situations that I have read or heard about.

I have real practical experience and am not trying to scam anyone or promote some system I am selling.

I can wrestle on standing arm bars against duds without breaking people's arms by the way. There is a trick to it.

 

[drop bear]

This does not make sense to me. Perhaps you missed the word "simultaneously." Usually, attacks come in two counts: jab, then cross, for example. If I block the jab and counter on the same beat, the counter will land before the cross is launched and will be nullified. Rarely does an attacker strike with both hands at the same time. Even if he does, the worst case scenario is that one of his attacks will be blocked, and the other one will land the same time as mine. I don't get how he has twice the chance to hit me.

Not if the jab is thrown with your head off line.

Then you block the jab counter at air and are basically start doing that tennis thing where they are running from one side of the court to the other trying to catch up with the other person's shots.

And I spar guys where i can't see their punches coming at speed.

Footwork, head movement does not have to react to a punch to be effective. You can move away from where they will probably punch.

So automatically footwork takes care of some of their attacks.

My guard automatically takes care of some of their attacks.

And then I only have to address consiously the rest. That is where I can block and strike simultaneously. Or whatever.

The block and strike is kind of the last thing on this order of priorities for effective defense.

I mean think of it this way. If I am in the streets and someone wants to punch me. Am I more likely to stop whatever random technique they throw if I block?

Or am I more likely to stop that shot if they can't reach me?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

The attack and counter thing has issues. So if I am blocking with one hand and striking with the other. And they are striking with both hands and blocking using footwork and timing then they have twice the opportunity to hit me.

I have difficulty to understand your logic here. Your blocking can interrupt your opponent's 2nd punch (cross).

For example,

- A throws a right jab.
- B blocks on A's right elbow joint and cause A's right arm to rotate to A's left.
- A's "body rotate to the left" can interrupt A's left cross (body rotate to the right).

IMO, an effective blocking can cause your opponent's leading arm to jam his own back arm. If you use your other free hand to punch him at the same time, since his arms are jammed, your one free hand will have the advantage.

In the following picture, the person on the right, his left punch can't punch out.

Same strategy (leading arm jam back arm) apply here.

 

[dvcochran]

The self defense I have engaged in have have been slobber knocker matches. And so some training that vaguely reflects that gives me the best chance of being successful.

So the usual narrative is essentially inescapable.

Now people can sell self defense however they want but without the essential elements of training with real resistance. Your slobber knocker training, It just isn't going to be a very good product.

That is why when I ask for a video of whatever people's crazy idea they think will work. I get some kind of excuse. Because they haven't tested it. And are trying to hide that fact.

And that is why I am useful in a technical discussion. Because instead of talking about techniques and methods I haven't used and don't understand. Or about self defense situations that I have read or heard about.

I have real practical experience and am not trying to scam anyone or promote some system I am selling.

I can wrestle on standing arm bars against duds without breaking people's arms by the way. There is a trick to it.

I truly appreciate your perspective and I can fully relate. I got pretty far in the circuit in my day. I get that there is a carnal nature to blood and guts training and that it has a value. To think that this kind of training can be sustained and is the only way is not only unwise, it is downright foolish.
It is your summary conclusion that every other kind of training is crap that rubs the wrong way. People like me who have 'been though the mill' cannot get in the ring any more. A lot of us cannot go nearly as hard in class as we once did. But that does not preclude us from training and learning quality technique that Is effective in a SD scenario. Yes, it has to be tested. I get it. But the greater value is in committing methods to memory so that our muscle memory will kick in when needed. I feel like you think this statement is crap but it is not.
We have a phrase in the south that really applies here: "want to". When a person loses their 'want to' , no matter what the situation/scenario is they are in trouble. Don't want to work? That is a problem. Don't want to increase your knowledge and skills to get ahead? That is a problem. Don't want to work your training to saturation? That is a problem.

There is no 'one size fits all' style of training. For the majority of people, what you describe as training is temporal. A young mans game. What will you do when you either get broken up or aged?