Most Dangerous (as in Useless) Self-Defense Technique Taught?

[Gerry Seymour]

I believe the discussion was something like this:

- First someone said choke won't work. I then post a clip and said if you can use "head lock" to choke someone from behind, it will be difficult for him to get away (since his hands cannot reach you and his feet are off the ground).
- Someone then posted a clip to show a "head lock" used with both of his opponent's arms are free. He then said that you can counter a "head lock" easily.
- I then posted a clip with 3 points control to show that if you can have full control on your opponent's leading arm, he will only have 1 free arm left to counter you.
- Someone then said that a tight "head lock" control will give your opponent a chance to pull/drag you back down.
- I then said that if you can throw him forward before he can drag you down backward, you will get side mount and you can start your ground game from there.

We did start from

choke -> head lock -> throw

In the counter he showed, the other arm is only used to counter punches. Since the off-side arm of the "attacker" is being used to control an arm, there's no need to control it - it is controlling itself. I'm still not sure the control in that method prevents the counter from the video, since the arms aren't activating anything - they are simply attaching to the opponent. When we look at the throw, getting your center low enough to give you leverage is what will prevent that counter. The arm control is preventing other counters.

 

[Paul_D]

Hate to ruin your theory but that technique absolutely works as I've used it before when working in a nightclub

So after he you got the guy on the ground, you jumped in the air, landed on his kidneys, smashed his face into the floor, then broke his neck, then neck broke his nose, then finally while he his lying helpless on the ground you kicked him in the head, all of which lead to his eventual (if not immediate) death, as the title of the technique implies?

 

[drop bear]

What I meant was that choke holds and head locks are very dangerous and can often win a fight. But if not done correctly it is an advantage to the person in the choke hold. For example, side headlock gives the the person being choked the advantage of having their arms are free and close to the legs of the attacker. They can sweep them. punch them or even kick them.

Besides, It will put you in prison. Even Police are banned from doing it.

So Yes they are dangerous and not useless. But if not done right it is bad for the choker. And Therefore it is useless to the Choker when, at times, the person being choked uses their move against them.

Bulldog choke.

Its a real thing.

 

[drop bear]

There's actually a very simple takedown from that position that will land the headlockee in side control.

Edit. This is very similar to what I wad taught.

One of those weird differences between a training headlock and a proper headlock.

If you drag the person forwards they have nowhere to go but face down into the deck,

 

[Headhunter]

So after he you got the guy on the ground, you jumped in the air, landed on his kidneys, smashed his face into the floor, then broke his neck, then neck broke his nose, then finally while he his lying helpless on the ground you kicked him in the head, all of which lead to his eventual (if not immediate) death, as the title of the technique implies?

No but I used the exact same takedown pinned him with my legs and put him in the neck crank position to pin him. Those techniques are designed to give you options if you need them. It's no different to doing a jab, cross, hook, uppercut on the pads. If I knock the guy out with the cross does that mean there's no point training the combination

 

[Paul_D]

No

Hate to ruin your theory, but then you didn't do the leap of death.

 

[Headhunter]

Hate to ruin your theory, but then you didn't do the leap of death.

I used more than half of the move and used the exact principles and theories of it which I wouldn't have done if I hadnt learnt the techique so yes I did and I managed to defend myself because of that techique and if I wanted to break his neck I could've done so the techique works

 

[Paul_D]

I used more than half of the move and used the exact principles and theories of it which I wouldn't have done if I hadnt learnt the techique so yes I did and I managed to defend myself because of that techique and if I wanted to break his neck I could've done so the techique works

I never said it didn't work, I said it was useless.

It is useless as you can never use it (in full) unless of course you like long periods of incarceration. You did not do the leap, landing on the kidneys nor the did you do the neck break. Therefore you did not do the leap of death. You took the parts of the technique that wouldn't land you in jail, as any sensible person would, if the leap and the death cannot be used (unless as mentioned you like prison) then it is useless.

Useless and ineffective are not the samething.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

In the counter he showed, the other arm is only used to counter punches. Since the off-side arm of the "attacker" is being used to control an arm, there's no need to control it - it is controlling itself. I'm still not sure the control in that method prevents the counter from the video, since the arms aren't activating anything - they are simply attaching to the opponent. When we look at the throw, getting your center low enough to give you leverage is what will prevent that counter. The arm control is preventing other counters.

The "3 points control" can only disable the arm. It's the spine bending that disable the counters. In order to do so, the "elbow joint" of your head lock should point straight down to the ground. In that clip, since he did not "crash his opponent's body structure", his opponent's left waist wrapping arm can still pull him back and down.

IMO, if

- your head lock cannot bend your opponent's spine side way, and
- your opponent's free arm wraps around your waist,

you have to

- change your head lock into over hook and apply pressure on his elbow joint,
- use your right leg to "spring" his left leg back into a bow-arrow stance.

If you want to use head lock,

- not only you need to develop a strong head lock,
- you also need to train many other skills such as over hook (head lock and over hook are twin brothers), elbow crack, leg spring, leg lift, leg twist, inner edge sweep, shin bite, front cut, outer twist, ...

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

If you drag the person forwards they have nowhere to go but face down into the deck,

Worst than that, it can be his chest touches the ground but his head is straight up.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

In wrestling, there is a major "contradiction".

An effective

1. throw assumes you have 100% control on your opponent's leading arm.
2. counter for throw assumes your leading arm is free.

If 1 is true then 2 is false. Also if 2 is true then 1 is false.

It's true that all technique has counters. But IMO, a 100% correct technique should not have counters. The reason is simple. If your technique can be countered, your technique may still have hole in some area.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

In wrestling, there is a major "contradiction".

An effective

1. throw assumes you have 100% control on your opponent's leading arm.
2. counter for throw assumes your leading arm is free.

If 1 is true then 2 is false. Also if 2 is true then 1 is false.

It's true that all technique has counters. But IMO, a 100% correct technique should not have counters. The reason is simple. If your technique can be countered, your technique may still have hole in some area.

I don't believe any technique is completely un-counterable. There is a point in every technique, however, where the time for counters has passed. The two situations you posit as opposites may simply be different points in the same timeline. If I go to throw you, you can counter me up until the moment where I have complete control of the necessary part of you (be it arm, leg, center, whatever). I don't think the leading arm is often a sufficient control point for preventing counters to many throws, since a shift of structure or center can be counter to many. This is in line with what you said about bending the spine (which destroys structure and prevents center shift).

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

you can counter me up until the moment where I have complete control of the necessary part of you

Agree! Sometime, it's too later to counter (such as both of your feet are off the ground).

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Getting back to the original question in this thread...

It took me a little while to track this down, but this may be the worst "technique" I have ever seen seriously presented as self-defense instruction:

 

[Paul_D]

Getting back to the original question in this thread...

It took me a little while to track this down, but this may be the worst "technique" I have ever seen seriously presented as self-defense instruction:

"Expert" yeah, of course he is

 

[senseiblackbelt]

Double post...move along...nothing to see here

Apparently IE is having a real hard time with MT today

Never knew people still used Internet Explorer. LOL.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Never knew people still used Internet Explorer. LOL.

Still big in enterprise, but Google is gaining ground

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Getting back to the original question in this thread...

It took me a little while to track this down, but this may be the worst "technique" I have ever seen seriously presented as self-defense instruction:

Wow. Yeah, that....um...

 

[drop bear]

Getting back to the original question in this thread...

It took me a little while to track this down, but this may be the worst "technique" I have ever seen seriously presented as self-defense instruction:

It is on par with almost everything anti grappling

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It is on par with almost everything anti grappling

As with most of what I've seen labeled anti-grappling, it would work against the people who watch MMA and think they are learning how to fight.