Counter's Don't Work

[stonewall1350]

Has anyone heard this expression when dealing with self defense tactics? I find it to be a very intriguing concept. The premise is that you will be attacked at your weakest or most vulnerable and complicated counters are going to result in you screwing up a technique and getting your tail whipped.

This is a topic I understand, but if this is the case, why do they persist in martial arts? What do you think? Complicated counters are they for really experienced fighters, and the beginners need to stick with more basic moves? Or what?


Sent from my grapefruit using smoke signals.

 

[Red Sun]

Wouldn't this be on a case-by-case basis? Can you provide an example of a complicated counter?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Has anyone heard this expression when dealing with self defense tactics? I find it to be a very intriguing concept. The premise is that you will be attacked at your weakest or most vulnerable and complicated counters are going to result in you screwing up a technique and getting your tail whipped.

This is a topic I understand, but if this is the case, why do they persist in martial arts? What do you think? Complicated counters are they for really experienced fighters, and the beginners need to stick with more basic moves? Or what?


Sent from my grapefruit using smoke signals.

Define the word "counter" as you are using it. In our world, "counter" simply means something that stops something from working. So, a counter to an arm bar is simply any change that stops the arm bar from working. Those can be simple (a weight shift in the right direction), or they can be complex (slight arm bend, some rotation, weight shifting in, a push to the knee with your knee, plus a change in hand position). Whether each will work is entirely situational.

 

[oftheherd1]

Define the word "counter" as you are using it. In our world, "counter" simply means something that stops something from working. So, a counter to an arm bar is simply any change that stops the arm bar from working. Those can be simple (a weight shift in the right direction), or they can be complex (slight arm bend, some rotation, weight shifting in, a push to the knee with your knee, plus a change in hand position). Whether each will work is entirely situational.

Yes, a definition would help. In the Hapkido I learned, everything we did was defense against a punch, kick, grap, or some weapon attack. Counters to us were techniques to counter defenses we had learned if they were used against us.

What used to be said all the time here on MT was that defenses wouldn't work against a resisting opponent. While that can be true against some individual opponents, for most people, if the technique is applied correctly, resistance is not normally possible. .

 

[Blindside]

Every counter has a counter. The trick is it has to be used at the appropriate time, if start your counter too late it won't work, the trick is to recognize the technique early enough and do the appropriate counter. If the other guy has locked your arm and taken your balance you are probably too late.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yes, a definition would help. In the Hapkido I learned, everything we did was defense against a punch, kick, grap, or some weapon attack. Counters to us were techniques to counter defenses we had learned if they were used against us.

What used to be said all the time here on MT was that defenses wouldn't work against a resisting opponent. While that can be true against some individual opponents, for most people, if the technique is applied correctly, resistance is not normally possible. .

I often tell my students that our techniques do not work against someone who resists the technique unless you are stronger than them. That's why we use a different technique - one they are not in the middle of resisting. Resistance to one technique just means they're moving toward another. I believe the principle is much the same in Hapkido.

 

[stonewall1350]

So when I'm thinking counter: I'm thinking of

you’re taught specific self defense counters. If he does this, you do that. When he grabs your wrist you do one defense, when he grabs your shoulder you do another defense. Well in sport fighting and in class, with a willing partner these appear to work. But the times you will be attacked – after a long day of work when you’re thinking about your daily grind and you find yourself faced with a threat, you will not be able to recall your complicated “self defense counters” when you move into fight or flight mode.

This is a direct quote from one of the things I have seen.

Personally? It is instinct for me to try and "control" someone who is a threat. I've got a grappling background. I also don't like being controlled. My striking is a lot of elbow and quick straights and jabs. Explosive stuff. So I don't know how y'all as primarily self defense people would see these words. I'm just curious.


Sent from my grapefruit using smoke signals.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I think many techniques only become complicated when done out of context or when the fighter tries to force the use of it. I'm still learning that many techniques are driven by: Right Time and Right Position. If anyone one of these are off or if the fighter tries to make the technique work outside of the Right Time and Right Position, then using that technique is going to be really complicated.

Sort of what gpseymour said

That's why we use a different technique - one they are not in the middle of resisting. Resistance to one technique just means they're moving toward another.

If the person is resisting one technique then move to one that they aren't resisting. In the most basic sense of technique, If a person is blocking (resisting) punches to the head, then kick the legs where there is no resistance.

 

[WaterGal]

you’re taught specific self defense counters. If he does this, you do that. When he grabs your wrist you do one defense, when he grabs your shoulder you do another defense. Well in sport fighting and in class, with a willing partner these appear to work. But the times you will be attacked – after a long day of work when you’re thinking about your daily grind and you find yourself faced with a threat, you will not be able to recall your complicated “self defense counters” when you move into fight or flight mode.

If you have to stop and think "at green belt, I learned to deal with this grab by doing X, then Y, then turning and doing Z", then yeah, that's not going to work. You have to practice until it's muscle memory, and understand principles so you can be prepared for the situation not being exactly like how you learned it.

But the point that you'll often be attacked at your weakest and most vulnerable moment is a good one. It makes me think of the fact that big portion of assaults are committed by a family member, intimate partner, friend, employer, teammate, etc, and in those cases, people often fail to defend themselves because they're holding back. Their emotional attachment to, or dependence on, their attacker makes them very vulnerable.

 

[drop bear]

Yeah sort of.

It seems a version of the quote "everybody has a plan untill they get punched in the face"

But it is a complicated issue.

You are are generally quite a bit slicker when the risk of loosing isn't there.

 

[Steve]

Every counter has a counter. The trick is it has to be used at the appropriate time, if start your counter too late it won't work, the trick is to recognize the technique early enough and do the appropriate counter. If the other guy has locked your arm and taken your balance you are probably too late.

In BJJ, there are also early counters (where you essentially stop an attack before it starts), and "on time" counter, and then a late counter (where you've essentially failed to recognize the technique). As you would expect, the earlier you address the attack, the more likely the counter is to succeed.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

complicated counters ...

Counter use "principle". As long as you understand which principle that you are using, there exist no complicate counters.

For example, when you opponent

- punches at your face, you can kick at his chest. Your leg is always longer than his arm.
- sweeps your leg, you can bend your leg at your knee joint and let that sweeping leg to pass under your leg. You can then sweep his leg after that and change a defense into an offense.
- grabs on your wrist, you can twist your arm against his thumb. Your opponent's 1 finger (his thumb) is always weaker than his other 4 fingers.
- gets a head lock on you, you can use your hand to push on his face backward. Your arm strength is always stronger than his neck strength.
- ...

If you always use the strong part of your body to counter the weak part of your opponent's body, you are using the right key to open the right lock. The counter is always simple and straight forward.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Yeah sort of.

It seems a version of the quote "everybody has a plan untill they get punched in the face"

But it is a complicated issue.

You are are generally quite a bit slicker when the risk of loosing isn't there.

lol.. sounds like my sparring yesterday, except I didn't have a plan and still got hit in the face. Multiple times.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

You have to make sure that your counter won't give your opponent another opportunity to counter you again. That mean you have to think many steps ahead of your opponent.

For example, when your opponent grabs on your wrist, after you can break away his grip,

- where will his hand go?
- How will you deal with his hand after that?
- ...

You just can't think about 1 step counter. Since your counter will create his counter, and his counter will force you to apply another counter, ... It's like a chess game.

 

[marques]

'Complicated' and 'useless' things may have other purposes than direct application.

Complicated arm locks teach you body mechanics (sort of). Then you can improvise - the reality is nothing like training. High kicks (if nothing else / even if you don't use in self defence) teach you balance. Weak techniques may be great feints. I understand complicated things as exercises.

In practice, I only trust on basics. And I focus in improving the basics, timing, accuracy, minimum-shortest movement. In sparring I use about 4 techniques in many ways. Enough. If it becomes boring, I can had spinning kicks and other fancy things, for fun. (That also may work, if you train them a lot, as you can find in MMA and CCTV footages).

 

[drop bear]

Basically in a fight for sheep stations you will be more of a gumby than you think you should be.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

So when I'm thinking counter: I'm thinking of



This is a direct quote from one of the things I have seen.

Personally? It is instinct for me to try and "control" someone who is a threat. I've got a grappling background. I also don't like being controlled. My striking is a lot of elbow and quick straights and jabs. Explosive stuff. So I don't know how y'all as primarily self defense people would see these words. I'm just curious.


Sent from my grapefruit using smoke signals.

This is bollux. You do what you've learned well. That whole "muscle memory" thing is not a myth. If it were, soccer (football) players wouldn't be able to dribble under pressure.

Yes, "complicated" doesn't work. But "complicated" is only complicated when it doesn't fit the flow that's happening in the moment. And, no, you don't learn just ONE thing to do if he grabs your shoulder/wrist, etc. In fact, you learn one technique, then how to recognize its applications if he grabs your shoulder/wrist, etc. Then you learn another.

 

[Koshiki]

My impression of the "counters don't work" idea, is that the thought is not that you cannot defend yourself against a given attack, but that the methodology taught many places of, "when attack x occurs, do defense y" is a faulty concept.

In a grappling situation, attacks take much longer and are more tactile, so the idea of perscribed counters may hold a bit more merit. However, we've all seen the idea that, when attacked by the oh-so-prevalent high inverted round kick, you should every time expect to sidestep, scoop the kick, chop to the neck, and then sweep the foot.

Like almost every "X never/always" statement, it's a reasonable principle that you shouldn't expect pre-determined defenses agains specific attacks to work as expected, and that it's better to train your own attacks and general live responsiveness, but then again, if you also have to somehow learn what to do when you're NOT attacking.

I'd call the idea a good general principle, but definitely far short of an omnipresent law.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

All counters can be handled as:

1. before it happen,
2. when it happen.

For example, to counter an "under hook",

1. before it happen - when your opponent tries to "under hook" your arm, if you raise your arm straight up, there is no way that your opponent's "under hook" can work on you.
2. when it happen - you should try to take advantage on it (aggressive approach) instead of just trying to get away (conservative approach). If your opponent already has "under hook" on you, you can counter him with an "over hook" and apply pressure on his elbow joint.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

My impression of the "counters don't work" idea, is that the thought is not that you cannot defend yourself against a given attack, but that the methodology taught many places of, "when attack x occurs, do defense y" is a faulty concept.

In a grappling situation, attacks take much longer and are more tactile, so the idea of perscribed counters may hold a bit more merit. However, we've all seen the idea that, when attacked by the oh-so-prevalent high inverted round kick, you should every time expect to sidestep, scoop the kick, chop to the neck, and then sweep the foot.

Like almost every "X never/always" statement, it's a reasonable principle that you shouldn't expect pre-determined defenses agains specific attacks to work as expected, and that it's better to train your own attacks and general live responsiveness, but then again, if you also have to somehow learn what to do when you're NOT attacking.

I'd call the idea a good general principle, but definitely far short of an omnipresent law.

Yes. I think much of this argument actually comes from the way instructors speak about the techniques and applications they are teaching. When an instructor, for instance, is teaching a student how to do a wrist throw (like kote gaeshi/front wrist throw) as a response to a 2-handed shove, she might say, "When uke shoves, you block both hands to one side with a knife-edge block, then you...." This gives the observer the impression that the student is being taught a complex response to that single attack, which starts by having to use a specific block. In fact, what the instructor is teaching is what to do if that attack is given and you block that way - what technique will be waiting there for you. I've recently started shifting this type of explanation to clear it up for the students. I'll say something like, "When uke shoves, if you block both his hands to one side with an outer block, then you'll be in position to..."

It's semantics, but I think semantics are a large part of the argument between TMA (where this is more likely to occur) and modern MA.