How Effective Is Bodybuilding For Self Defence?

[Tgace]

Apparently dictionary definitions are not so absolute.

"Weak men believe in luck. Strong men believe in cause and effect." -Ralph Waldo Emerson

All of our existence is based on decisions. If I choose to sit on the right side of my couch at 2200hrs and that's when the meteor punches through my roof and kills me, that may have been bad luck but it was also dependent on a choice I made.

Certainly one can't plan on random events like meteors, and I'm not conflating luck with blame, but by FAR most bad luck is founded in bad decisions. Training/making/preparing will certainly influence your so called "luck".

I see people having lots of what people would call "bad luck", there's a reason for it. Bad luck haunts bad decision making.

Your definition of "luck" is an attempt to use a concept, like "fate", "love" or "God" as a debate point of fact.

I think that this tangent can apply to this thread. If you are a martial artist and ignore physical conditioning, you are gonna find things happening to you that you would call bad luck

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Apparently dictionary definitions are not so absolute.

"Weak men believe in luck. Strong men believe in cause and effect." -Ralph Waldo Emerson

All of our existence is based on decisions. If I choose to sit on the right side of my couch at 2200hrs and that's when the meteor punches through my roof and kills me, that may have been bad luck but it was also dependent on a choice I made.

Certainly one can't plan on random events like meteors, and I'm not conflating luck with blame, but by FAR most bad luck is founded in bad decisions. Training/making/preparing will certainly influence your so called "luck".

I see people having lots of what people would call "bad luck", there's a reason for it. Bad luck haunts bad decision making.

Your definition of "luck" is an attempt to use a concept, like "fate", "love" or "God" as a debate point of fact.

I think that this tangent can apply to this thread. If you are a martial artist and ignore physical conditioning, you are gonna find things happening to you that you would call bad luck

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

By no stretch of logic could the meteor impact be attributable to choice. There was no means by which the individual could have made a better choice. That is what defines "chance" in the definitions. The person's choice makes no discernible difference in the odds of it happening. Getting hit by a meteor is luck (unless you know there are some coming, and had a choice of not being there). Getting hit by lightening can be luck (being struck inside your own home, in spite of good decisions) or can be causal (playing golf in a lightening storm).

 

[Xue Sheng]

Apparently dictionary definitions are not so absolute.

"Weak men believe in luck. Strong men believe in cause and effect." -Ralph Waldo Emerson

All of our existence is based on decisions. If I choose to sit on the right side of my couch at 2200hrs and that's when the meteor punches through my roof and kills me, that may have been bad luck but it was also dependent on a choice I made.

Certainly one can't plan on random events like meteors, and I'm not conflating luck with blame, but by FAR most bad luck is founded in bad decisions. Training/making/preparing will certainly influence your so called "luck".

I see people having lots of what people would call "bad luck", there's a reason for it. Bad luck haunts bad decision making.

Your definition of "luck" is an attempt to use a concept, like "fate", "love" or "God" as a debate point of fact.

I think that this tangent can apply to this thread. If you are a martial artist and ignore physical conditioning, you are gonna find things happening to you that you would call bad luck

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You are now putting words in my mouth and making rather large unsupported assumptions about what I am saying, I think in an attempt to be show that you are right and should not be questions. It is not all that hard top understand; I am simply using the dictionary definition with no associated emotion of discussion of contingency plans (planning for a meteor strike which, by the way, is not leaving anything to luck) and also with no thought at all of good luck, bad luck, fate, love, God or to debate such. Honestly I have no idea where that came from or why you threw it in, unless it was an attempt to get away from an indefensible position that was attempting to go against accepted definitions of words which is based on logic, Luck by definition cannot be planed for, trained for or controlled, it is simply luck and that is based on chance, that is all. You can plan for emergencies or meteor strikes or other problems, but that is done to avoid depending on luck.

Any further discussion on this seems pointless. I am very happy with the point I made before, we will not agree, and leave it at that.

 

[Buka]

Not always....

Just usually....

I think the whole Yin/Yang, "strength is bad" thing is used as an excuse to rationalize a lack of conditioning by many "martial artists". Not ALL. Just many.

Say what? Where did the "strength is bad" thing come from?

As for conditioning, it was something we always took to another level completely.
What's up, bro? Somebody pee in your cornflakes this morning or something?

 

[Xue Sheng]

Say what? Where did the "strength is bad" thing come from?

As for conditioning, it was something we always took to another level completely.
What's up, bro? Somebody pee in your cornflakes this morning or something?

Yin and Yang never states strength is bad, if that is what is being said it is a gross misunderstanding of Yin and Yang

 

[Tgace]

By no stretch of logic could the meteor impact be attributable to choice. There was no means by which the individual could have made a better choice. That is what defines "chance" in the definitions. The person's choice makes no discernible difference in the odds of it happening. Getting hit by a meteor is luck (unless you know there are some coming, and had a choice of not being there). Getting hit by lightening can be luck (being struck inside your own home, in spite of good decisions) or can be causal (playing golf in a lightening storm).

I think people sometimes link decisions automatically with "responsibility" and I don't think that's necessarily always the case. We make all sorts of choices...like what breakfast cereal to buy and we make decisions (de-cide like homi-cide where we kill all other choices but one). Like yin/yang they are all intertwined in our fate. You nudge the meteor that is your life in one direction or the other with every one of them.

If I decide to drive drunk and get in an accident or if I decide to take a different route home today and a truck runs a red light and hits me, I get in an accident either way and each decision was associated with the outcome. One was a good/bad decision while the other was simply a selection between choices....one that had the truck in the same time/space as me vs all the others. I believe that our human life is a dynamic system, much like the weather. To understand the weather, science has had to apply its own system of cause and effect in order to make forecasts as to what the future might be.

Our choices and decisions are what create the "weather systems" of our lives. In that system are the things we cant control and the things we can. I think it's possible that sometimes those things can be intertwined..we call that luck, fate.

There's been several studies on Luck. Psychologists have one take on it:

The Science Of Luck

So while these chance encounters can’t be controlled, people can do a lot to put themselves in a particular place and time and hope that it’s the right one. An open, positive, go-getter attitude also makes people more likely to appreciate an opportunity and to take advantage of it.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I think people sometimes link decisions automatically with "responsibility" and I don't think that's necessarily always the case. We make all sorts of choices...like what breakfast cereal to buy and we make decisions (de-cide like homi-cide where we kill all other choices but one). Like yin/yang they are all intertwined in our fate. You nudge the meteor that is your life in one direction or the other with every one of them.

If I decide to drive drunk and get in an accident or if I decide to take a different route home today and a truck runs a red light and hits me, I get in an accident either way and each decision was associated with the outcome. One was a good/bad decision while the other was simply a selection between choices....one that had the truck in the same time/space as me vs all the others. I believe that our human life is a dynamic system, much like the weather. To understand the weather, science has had to apply its own system of cause and effect in order to make forecasts as to what the future might be.

Our choices and decisions are what create the "weather systems" of our lives. In that system are the things we cant control and the things we can. I think it's possible that sometimes those things can be intertwined..we call that luck, fate.

There's been several studies on Luck. Psychologists have one take on it:

The Science Of Luck

You are confusing outcome with probability. Remember the definitions center around "chance" (probability, usually random in that usage). If I choose a different path and get in an accident, my decision doesn't change the probability of being in an accident until you know where the accident will be, unless I choose a path that has a higher overall probability of accidents.

There are two ways to look at luck: by the definition (essentially, outcomes whose probability is not altered by decisions based on known information), or by perception (what some perceive as luck is actually the result of not considering the outcomes, so they make bad choices).

The psych article you referenced actually deals with the latter, and claims to refer to the former. It says you cannot put yourself in the right place (random chance), but then turns around and points out how decisions can make "the right place" more likely (perception of chance, but actually changing the odds).

 

[Steve]

Yin and Yang never states strength is bad, if that is what is being said it is a gross misunderstanding of Yin and Yang

Yin and Yang are two guys who work out at the 24 Hour Fitness down the street.

 

[Paul_D]

Walking away when someone is trying to attack you is neither easy nor simple.

Of course is it.

They can chose to follow you of course, in which case you deal with it in the required way. But the required way isn't to invite them to fight you (fisticuffs), (unless of course the only skills you have come from consensual sparring, in which case you have no choice).

The general point though is that contrary to what certain martial artists would have us believe, Violence isn't the only possible outcome to a self defence situation.

 

[Steve]

Of course is it.

They can chose to follow you of course, in which case you deal with it in the required way. But the required way isn't to invite them to fight you (fisticuffs), (unless of course the only skills you have come from consensual sparring, in which case you have no choice).

The general point though is that contrary to what certain martial artists would have us believe, Violence isn't the only possible outcome to a self defence situation.

By "certain martial artists" you surely mean the self defense guys. Right?

 

[Paul_D]

By "certain martial artists" you surely mean the self defense guys. Right?

I was thinking more certain poster(s) in this thread who keep referring to fighting and self defence as if they were synonymous.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Of course is it.

They can chose to follow you of course, in which case you deal with it in the required way. But the required way isn't to invite them to fight you (fisticuffs), (unless of course the only skills you have come from consensual sparring, in which case you have no choice).

The general point though is that contrary to what certain martial artists would have us believe, Violence isn't the only possible outcome to a self defence situation.

The post in question didn't imply it was. It showed the "attacker" not allowing the "defender" to decline. In that case, walking away wasn't an option, and there are many cases where that is true.

 

[Steve]

I was thinking more certain poster(s) in this thread who keep referring to fighting and self defence as if they were synonymous.

I hear what you're saying. When you said that, my mind jumped to the RBSD, eye gouge, curb stomp crowd.

For what it's worth, I do think self defense and fighting are synonymous to some people. Not to others.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I hear what you're saying. When you said that, my mind jumped to the RBSD, eye gouge, curb stomp crowd.

For what it's worth, I do think self defense and fighting are synonymous to some people. Not to others.

To me, it mostly depends how you define "self-defense". It's a rather fluid term, as you've commented before. I (usually) define self-defense as the physical defense one puts up when attacked. For me, the things we can do to avoid that attack fall under the umbrella term of "self-protection" (which includes self-defense). That's my usage, and others define them differently. Thus, for me, self-defense does mostly equal fighting (as I define the term "fighting", which is not necessarily a mutually agreed bout).

But that only holds true within my definitions. Others use both "self-defense" and "fighting" differently, so they will have a different view.

 

[Sami Ibrahim]

In this corner we have fighting and in that corner we have self-defense and in this other corner introducing an additional monkey wrench: Killing.
Now, when some people think about fighting, they are not thinking about fighting to the death or to the kill and when they think about self-defense they think about using only the necessary amount of force required to survive and when people think about killing and murder their minds conjure images that are rather interesting. Getting "shanked" repeatedly in the back while peeing in a latrine, getting shot in the base of the skull while kneeling to change a tire. Getting a bag thrown over your head and thrown into a van and driven into a secondary crime scene where you're raped, tortured and set on fire. Anyway, what all three have in common is violence...defined as behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something. So if you just train to be exceptionally well versed in the language of violence, you will cover all three. (just my two cents and I don't know what I am talking about)

 

[Paul_D]

In this corner we have fighting and in that corner we have self-defense and in this other corner introducing an additional monkey wrench: Killing.
Now, when some people think about fighting, they are not thinking about fighting to the death or to the kill and when they think about self-defense they think about using only the necessary amount of force required to survive and when people think about killing and murder their minds conjure images that are rather interesting. Getting "shanked" repeatedly in the back while peeing in a latrine, getting shot in the base of the skull while kneeling to change a tire. Getting a bag thrown over your head and thrown into a van and driven into a secondary crime scene where you're raped, tortured and set on fire. Anyway, what all three have in common is violence...defined as behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something. So if you just train to be exceptionally well versed in the language of violence, you will cover all three. (just my two cents and I don't know what I am talking about)

By that logic I could take table tennis lessons in my bid to win Wimbledon, after all they're both just about hitting a ball over a net with a bat.

A mugger will not invite you to fight with the winner going home with your wallet. A rapists will not stand six feet away in a fighting stance bobbing and weaving out of range. Criminals operate using the four D's, Deception, dialogue, distraction and destruction. Your knowledge of the rituals of violence, which you allows you to spot what is going on, brain engagement, pre-emptive striking, ve bal de-escalation, target hardening, threat and awareness evaluation, are far more important in self defence than your ability to throw exploratory jabs to test your opponents reaction and spot potential weaknesses in his ring craft which you could then exploit.

Otherwise people with no fighting skill would never be able to defend themselves, which they have, and skilled fighters/martial artists would never be the victims of crime, which they have.

Fighting and self defence from non consensual criminal violence are two very different things and it is a very costly mistake to think that your success at one will translate into a competent level of ability in the other.

 

[Headhunter]

In this corner we have fighting and in that corner we have self-defense and in this other corner introducing an additional monkey wrench: Killing.
Now, when some people think about fighting, they are not thinking about fighting to the death or to the kill and when they think about self-defense they think about using only the necessary amount of force required to survive and when people think about killing and murder their minds conjure images that are rather interesting. Getting "shanked" repeatedly in the back while peeing in a latrine, getting shot in the base of the skull while kneeling to change a tire. Getting a bag thrown over your head and thrown into a van and driven into a secondary crime scene where you're raped, tortured and set on fire. Anyway, what all three have in common is violence...defined as behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something. So if you just train to be exceptionally well versed in the language of violence, you will cover all three. (just my two cents and I don't know what I am talking about)

Disagree so if you spar all the time that means your ready to deal with a group of armed drugged up street thugs or ready to deal with a guy coming at you from behind while your talking on the phone. Martial arts training is good but it doesn't make you unbeatable. Every single person on this board myself included could easily get knocked out, stabbed, shot, glassed or punched or kicked by any single person. We could get in a fight and be knocked out straight away. Doesn't mean anything about your skills it just means the other person hit you hard. Anyone who thinks they can block every single punch or kick or whatever that's thrown at them is deluded.

 

[Headhunter]

By that logic I could take table tennis lessons in my bid to win Wimbledon, after all they're both just about hitting a ball over a net with a bat.

A mugger will not invite you to fight with the winner going home with your wallet. A rapists will not stand six feet away in a fighting stance bobbing and weaving out of range. Criminals operate using the four D's, Deception, dialogue, distraction and destruction. Your knowledge of the rituals of violence, which you allows you to spot what is going on, brain engagement, pre-emptive striking, ve bal de-escalation, target hardening, threat and awareness evaluation, are far more important in self defence than your ability to throw exploratory jabs to test your opponents reaction and spot potential weaknesses in his ring craft which you could then exploit.

Otherwise people with no fighting skill would never be able to defend themselves, which they have, and skilled fighters/martial artists would never be the victims of crime, which they have.

Fighting and self defence from non consensual criminal violence are two very different things and it is a very costly mistake to think that your success at one will translate into a competent level of ability in the other.

Absolutely like I just commented. Everyone says sparring is so important but is sparring going to help you against guys pinning you against a wall or a gang trying to beat you to a pulp or to stab you or is it going to help when some guys to smash you over the head while you on your phone. Being good at sparing doesn't mean your good at self defence. Sparring has rules and you know who you're fighting and how many people your fighting and how long you'll be fighting for and can move as much as you like. You don't get those luxuries in the street

 

[jobo]

Really. Huge muscles are not a obvious indicater of strength accross the board as it were. Raw grunt maybe, but raw grunt is easily countered with applied skill

I think you need to be careful of that as an assumption. Bodybuilder are by any normal comparison strong, they are lifting quite heavy weight a lot of times and the body Adapts by a) increasing the size of the muscle and b ) by in creasing its efficiency ie they get stronger. They are possibly not as strong in raw grunt as someone who trains exclusively for strength , but has smaller mucles. but that is only any use to you if you train raw strength. Its quite true that some folk just have big mucles and are not particularly strong, but then some are . Just as some folk with hardly any muscle size are unfeasable strong. Strength has more to do with the devepment of the nervous system than the actual size of the muscle in question. The mucle size just helps it along somewhat

 

[Buka]

Training differs in schools, as does terminology, belt gradings, sparring (or not) and on and on. Probably a good thing otherwise everything would be the same. Damn, what would we all carry on about if that were the case? If everything were the same, each day we logged onto the forum it would be like this....

For me, I lump everything together under the word "fighting". That's self defense, sparring, competing, rolling, etc. Yes, I know they are not the same thing. Just as a side kick, a front kick, a foot sweep and a jump 360 spinning, hook kick are not the same, but I lump them together as well, under the word "kicking".

I do so because of the way I teach. It's a mind set term used to wade through countless years of resistance training. With the people I've taught, when they hear the word fighting, they think about fighting, they don't care what kind it is, it's one person against another, or one person against more than one person, or a whole group of people brawling, or fighting for your life. But it's just fighting. (principles remain the same) Doesn't matter if you get suckered from behind and get a cord wrapped around your neck, or are rolling with your friend after class, or are competing in a boxing match. It's fighting. At least to us.

I'm not suggesting anyone else think this way, not everyone's cup of tea, but always made things simpler for us. It's worked so far, going on fifty years now.

As for body builders - never had much of a problem playing with them. Sure, they're strong, but if you make them wear a baggy, long sleeved shirt, you take away a lot of their super powers.

Now, power lifters, that's another story. Not only are they incredibly strong, they're really fast, really explosive in movement. I hate playing with power lifters. It's like fighting a boulder coming down hill.