Techniques you learn in your MA that are probably not a good idea for Self Defense

[drop bear]

Illegal? Dunno. I'm not a close follower of MMA and am not really up on the rules, but is hitting the elbow to hyper-extend it any more horrible than doing the same thing to a knee? You know, thrust-kicking the knee to hyper-extend it ...or at least hurting it, Jon Jones style, like this:

Note: As the video shows, Jones doesn't necessarily have to hyper-extend his opponent's knee, but repeated hits will bruise the heck out of his opponent's leg. Similarly a hard hit against an opponent's elbow wouldn't have to break it to hurt it enough to serious reduce their ability to use their arm against you. That's how we train it in our Escrima, anyway.

So getting back to the topic of this thread, Maybe it's risky for competition. But, I'd say it's not at all over the top for self-defense.

The elbow was done famously once. And the strong overhook elbow crank is done a bit.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Bone splinting is part of the Southern Shaolin tradition, including Jow Ga.

When you find the kung fu styles with the EMT training built in, you've found the good stuff.

I was thinking more along the lines to torn tendons and ligaments in which they wouldn't have the ability to medically heal those injuries. There different types of bone breaks and not everyone had the same access to quality medical attention.

Bone setting is one thing Bone alignment for the setting of the bone is another. This photo would be the norm expected result. Maybe not as deformed but misaligned, definitely. A limp after one has broken their leg would be normal. This would be proof of Malpractice with today's modern medicine but back then it would be accepted. I'm sure there were people who were better at it then, but we would only be talking about a handful.

Compound fractures bring a different set of risks and challenges that probably would have resulted in death from infection or amputation. In ancient Egypt a compound fracture was looked at as hopeless. Traditionally Chinese Cultures look at surgery as a last choice. Which is why much of Chinese Medicine that is championed involves non surgery medicine.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Compound fractures bring a different set of risks and challenges that probably would have resulted in death from infection or amputation. In ancient Egypt a compound fracture was looked at as hopeless. Traditionally Chinese Cultures look at surgery as a last choice. Which is why much of Chinese Medicine that is championed involves non surgery medicine.

I think you mean open fractures.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I think you mean open fractures.

While I agree, there are some poorly worded (non-professional) sources that define “compound fracture” as one that where the bone breaks the skin. Don’t know how that ever got into any text.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I've been thinking about this, and for me it's going to be the tornado kick. That's definitely not something I'll be pulling off an any kind of shape or form in a fight. There are 2 other moves but I don't know the formal names to them. One is like me holding onto your arms only by using my forearms. I can't see that working at all. Because of that I'm thinking the application that is taught isn't accurate. I'm not saying that the technique doesn't work, but I really have my doubts that it's used as it was taught to me. Maybe one day I'll understand it or get the correct application for it.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I think you mean open fractures.

Compound Fractures are the same as open fractures. It's where the bone punctures the skin.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

the tornado kick. That's definitely not something I'll be pulling off an any kind of shape or form in a fight.

I believe the tornado kick (or jump double crescent kicks) is designed to counter a floor sweep. You use the jump to escape the floor sweep. You then use the jump kick to kick your opponent's head.

If nobody uses floor sweep on you, you may never have chance to use your tornado kick.

https://i.postimg.cc/LshDsr3c/tornado-kick.gif

 

[JowGaWolf]

While I agree, there are some poorly worded (non-professional) sources that define “compound fracture” as one that where the bone breaks the skin. Don’t know how that ever got into any text.

Compound fracture is defined in the medical field as well and as been there as far back as 1971. The term is used by John Hopkins
source: Fractures

 

[JowGaWolf]

I believe the tornado kick (or jump double crescent kicks) is designed to counter a floor sweep. You use the jump to escape the floor sweep. You then use the jump kick to kick your opponent's head.

If nobody uses floor sweep on you, you may never have chance to use your tornado kick.

https://i.postimg.cc/LshDsr3c/tornado-kick.gif

Tornado kick for me is the kick at the beginning and the kick at the end of the form

I used the modified version (the kick at the end of the form.) in my form due to me being overweight and I would like my knees to last lol.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Compound Fractures are the same as open fractures. It's where the bone punctures the skin.

Oh my god! 40+ years in Emergency Medicine and I didn't know that!

Your definition is incorrect. The term is frequently misused. A compound fracture is a fracture with enough deformation that you can see it through the skin.
There are lots of misused medical terms, even by people who should know better. I hear patches all the time with EMS people saying the person is coming in for "flu-like symptoms" when they mean nausea/vomiting/diarrhea. That's not flu-like. The flu is a respiratory infection. "Stomach flu" doesn't exist.
I no longer bat an eye when people ask me "is it fractured or broken?"

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Tornado kick for me is the kick at the beginning and the kick at the end of the form

We are talking about the same kick. IMO, the tornado kick and jumping crescent kick are similar. One turns 360 degree. The other only turn 90 degree.

https://i.postimg.cc/BbYSgLR7/my-crescent-kick.gif

 

[Steve]

Because a guy can still be dangerous on the ground. The question isn't that he's on the ground but what state is he in when he's on the ground. Just because a person is on the ground doesn't mean that they are of no danger to you. A person that's on the ground that is unable to continue to attack you is something different. We can look at how police officers take care when putting people on the ground. They still treat that person as a threat with guns drawn.

Not nick picking, just not willing to make it a general statement as I know you are talking about someone who can no longer attack back.

Wait a minute. Have you seen the butt scoot thread? You guys play both side of the same argument.

 

[Steve]

The goal of self defense is to end the threat. If the other person is on the ground, this may or may not mean the threat has ended. If it hasn't, curb stomping their head may well be a good choice.

Yeah, okay. I guess it’s up to the jury to decide that one.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Oh my god! 40+ years in Emergency Medicine and I didn't know that!

Your definition is incorrect. The term is frequently misused. A compound fracture is a fracture with enough deformation that you can see it through the skin.
There are lots of misused medical terms, even by people who should know better. I hear patches all the time with EMS people saying the person is coming in for "flu-like symptoms" when they mean nausea/vomiting/diarrhea. That's not flu-like. The flu is a respiratory infection. "Stomach flu" doesn't exist.
I no longer bat an eye when people ask me "is it fractured or broken?"

I'm not questioning your expertise. Although 40+ years of experience doesn't mean that "All is known." I'm just telling you what is out there and the history of the word and how it was taught to me.

According to Webster's dictionary the term Compound Fracture has been used since the 1500's and the other term, Open Fracture has been used since the 1800's. It's also used in medical articles and by medical professions.

According to your definition.
"A compound fracture is a fracture with enough deformation that you can see it through the skin."

Does a bone sticking out of your leg not satisfy "enough deformation that you can see it through the skin."?

If you want to argue the correctness of the term then you should go to the medical schools and the doctors writing medical articles and tell them that they are incorrect about what they are posting and writing online is incorrect and that they should stop associating the two. I have also found no evidence with the exception of you, GPseymour, and this guy

Everything else shows that the two terms are referring to the same thing.

As for the Flu Symptoms. This is what the CDC says about it.
Source: Flu Symptoms & Complications

Flu Symptoms​

Influenza (flu) can cause mild to severe illness, and at times can lead to death. Flu is different from a cold. Flu usually comes on suddenly. People who have flu often feel some or all of these symptoms:

• fever* or feeling feverish/chills
• cough
• sore throat
• runny or stuffy nose
• muscle or body aches
• headaches
• fatigue (tiredness)
• some people may have vomiting and diarrhea, though this is more common in children than adults.

Notice that the last one says that some people may have vomiting and diarrhea, though this is more common in children than adults.

Just saying that's what's out there.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Wait a minute. Have you seen the butt scoot thread? You guys play both side of the same argument.

I'm pretty sure this is going to be one of these: "2 things can be true" or "context is everything moment"

Which 2 sides of the argument are you referring to?

 

[JowGaWolf]

Yeah, okay. I guess it’s up to the jury to decide that one.

Just for future reference. When I hear Curb Stomping, I'm thinking of stomping on someone's head. I'm not thinking of the act of positioning someone's head on the curb to stomp them.

When I'm thinking someone as being dangerous on the ground, I'm not thinking of butt scoot. I'm thinking of someone who has a good chance of physically hurting me getting back up and beating the crap out of me, be it with a concealed weapon or not. If I feel the need to stomp someone's head in order to protect myself, then I will. In terms of self-defense, I'm always surprised that many people will take the option to shoot someone multiple times but not stomp on their head?

I think the ease and impersonal act of shooting someone gives the impression that it's less violent or less brutal than "stepping on someone's head." There's sort of a disconnect of what violence is and that disconnect tends to create messed up ideas of what is "Acceptable Violence" and what isn't. Shoot a home intruder 5 times you are hero. Stomp on an home intruder's head after tripping him, you are a villain.

Maybe Hollywood is to blame. How many movies do we see where the Hero shoots ups all of the bad guys and we think that's awesome. How many times do we see heroes stomping on someone's head?

 

[drop bear]

Just for future reference. When I hear Curb Stomping, I'm thinking of stomping on someone's head. I'm not thinking of the act of positioning someone's head on the curb to stomp them.

When I'm thinking someone as being dangerous on the ground, I'm not thinking of butt scoot. I'm thinking of someone who has a good chance of physically hurting me getting back up and beating the crap out of me, be it with a concealed weapon or not. If I feel the need to stomp someone's head in order to protect myself, then I will. In terms of self-defense, I'm always surprised that many people will take the option to shoot someone multiple times but not stomp on their head?

I think the ease and impersonal act of shooting someone gives the impression that it's less violent or less brutal than "stepping on someone's head." There's sort of a disconnect of what violence is and that disconnect tends to create messed up ideas of what is "Acceptable Violence" and what isn't. Shoot a home intruder 5 times you are hero. Stomp on an home intruder's head after tripping him, you are a villain.

Maybe Hollywood is to blame. How many movies do we see where the Hero shoots ups all of the bad guys and we think that's awesome. How many times do we see heroes stomping on someone's head?

Intent.
Ability.
And delivery system.
(I think it has been a while)

So they intend to kill you.

They are actually physically able to carry out that task.

And they can get to you to perform the job.

 

[punisher73]

It's a 6-12 elbow. No strike is allowed with it rising or falling.

It's not difficult at all to pull off against a resisting opponent, because it's basically an armbar that uses gravity rather than pressure. It can be done standing or on the ground, too.

You'd quickly get DQ'd in BJJ competition if you even tried it.

Unified Rules of Mixed Martial Arts | UFC

www.ufc.com

According to the unified rules, it would not be illegal to perform. The elbow "banned" is the descending elbow strike (12 to 6). It was allowed in earlier competitions and then a politician saw a demonstration of an ice break with the descending elbow and thought it was way to dangerous to allow, so it was banned back in the day to get MMA passed as legal (paraphrase).

 

[punisher73]

Just for future reference. When I hear Curb Stomping, I'm thinking of stomping on someone's head. I'm not thinking of the act of positioning someone's head on the curb to stomp them.

When I'm thinking someone as being dangerous on the ground, I'm not thinking of butt scoot. I'm thinking of someone who has a good chance of physically hurting me getting back up and beating the crap out of me, be it with a concealed weapon or not. If I feel the need to stomp someone's head in order to protect myself, then I will. In terms of self-defense, I'm always surprised that many people will take the option to shoot someone multiple times but not stomp on their head?

I think the ease and impersonal act of shooting someone gives the impression that it's less violent or less brutal than "stepping on someone's head." There's sort of a disconnect of what violence is and that disconnect tends to create messed up ideas of what is "Acceptable Violence" and what isn't. Shoot a home intruder 5 times you are hero. Stomp on an home intruder's head after tripping him, you are a villain.

Maybe Hollywood is to blame. How many movies do we see where the Hero shoots ups all of the bad guys and we think that's awesome. How many times do we see heroes stomping on someone's head?

Back when I started, "curb stomping" had a very specific meaning and that was putting someone's head on a "curb like" surface and busting out their teeth with a stomp. I say "curb like" because, back in the day the foot rails on bars were also used.

 

[Steve]

I'm pretty sure this is going to be one of these: "2 things can be true" or "context is everything moment"

Which 2 sides of the argument are you referring to?

Go read the thread and pay attention to the "in a real fight" comments.