That's just not how it works in real life.

[Tez3]

off course there are losers, that's this nonsense about taking part being a win. Or that getting your brains scrambled is good for experience.

Sigh. It's nothing to do with taking part being a win, the 'winning' part is that when you lose you learn so much, you analyse why you lost, what you should have done, why they were better than you, that whole thing. When people win their bout they tend to leave it at celebrating ( the very best fighters however analyse their winning fights as well as their losing ones, that's what makes them the best) and forget to look at what they could have done better/differently.

 

[jobo]

Sigh. It's nothing to do with taking part being a win, the 'winning' part is that when you lose you learn so much, you analyse why you lost, what you should have done, why they were better than you, that whole thing. When people win their bout they tend to leave it at celebrating ( the very best fighters however analyse their winning fights as well as their losing ones, that's what makes them the best) and forget to look at what they could have done better/differently.

and if the oppoinent was faster and stronger than them what do the learn, other than they are not fast enough or,strong enough. A loss at chess can be analysed for improvement. Not so much a fight. The guy hit me, I fell down , what's to learn

 

[lklawson]

You are welcome to do what you want but an arm bar is ultimately about position not submission.

There are all kinds of reasons why someone might be able to slap on a bar/choke/sub/whatever. "Position" is what you have after you get there. It's hard to make up for bad technique ("position") with superior strength, speed, or whatever. "Position" is what ensures that a smaller, weaker, person can hold the sub and make it work. However, speed, strength, deception, misdirection, partner's inattention or inexperience can all contribute to successfully getting "position."

I've seen any number of different attempts to break down application of a successful technique into "phases," but one way is to separate it into two parts. 1) Getting there 2) Got it. "Position" ensures 2. Number 1 can be influenced by any number of factors which are not necessarily "position."

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[lklawson]

The. Fight is over when one,side is incapable of carrying on.

Or when one side decides that fighting isn't worth it (or is no longer worth it) and walks away and when the other side decides to let the first walk away. That may or may not include anyone being injured.

I have a friend who got into a "Knife Fight." It started off with a dude getting pissed and he snicks out his tac-folder. My friend snaps out his tac-folder in response. The both stare at each other for a second. The first guy decides that his plan just went sideways, cautiously backs to a point where he feels safe, then turns and walks away.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[jobo]

Or when one side decides that fighting isn't worth it (or is no longer worth it) and walks away and when the other side decides to let the first walk away. That may or may not include anyone being injured.

I have a friend who got into a "Knife Fight." It started off with a dude getting pissed and he snicks out his tac-folder. My friend snaps out his tac-folder in response. The both stare at each other for a second. The first guy decides that his plan just went sideways, cautiously backs to a point where he feels safe, then turns and walks away.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

well yes it depend on context, but I've had fights where, the other has submitted and then returned with a weapon. I had fight in a pub over a game of pool, I put him in arm lock and he gave up and came back Minuets later with a claw hammer. Then o had to fight him again only this time at a huge disadvantage.
generaly, if the other guy is the attacker and it goes hands on, its wise to make sure he won't be,coming back. At least not today

 

[lklawson]

well yes it depend on context, but I've had fights where, the other has submitted and then returned with a weapon. I had fight in a pub over a game of pool, I put him in arm lock and he gave up and came back Minuets later with a claw hammer. Then o had to fight him again only this time at a huge disadvantage.
generaly, if the other guy is the attacker and it goes hands on, its wise to make sure he won't be,coming back. At least not today

Yup.

"Fight" is an ill defined and vague thing which actively defies attempts to quantify. Like Baby, nobody puts "fight" in a corner.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Tez3]

and if the oppoinent was faster and stronger than them what do the learn, other than they are not fast enough or,strong enough. A loss at chess can be analysed for improvement. Not so much a fight. The guy hit me, I fell down , what's to learn

Speak for yourself, there's always a lot to learn, to think there isn't would be a mistake. If they aren't fast enough, they learn to get faster, if they aren't strong enough they learn to get stronger. If 'a guy hit me', you learn to not get hit. If you don't see what can be learnt during a competitive bout then you don't understand the fight game at all.

 

[JbrmWC]

Speak for yourself, there's always a lot to learn, to think there isn't would be a mistake. If they aren't fast enough, they learn to get faster, if they aren't strong enough they learn to get stronger. If 'a guy hit me', you learn to not get hit. If you don't see what can be learnt during a competitive bout then you don't understand the fight game at all.

Agreed

 

[pgsmith]

well yes it depend on context, but I've had fights where, the other has submitted and then returned with a weapon. I had fight in a pub over a game of pool, I put him in arm lock and he gave up and came back Minuets later with a claw hammer. Then o had to fight him again only this time at a huge disadvantage.
generaly, if the other guy is the attacker and it goes hands on, its wise to make sure he won't be,coming back. At least not today

I agree, as this is one of my philosophies on life. I never engage in fights unless I am absolutely forced to, as I was involved in some pretty horrific ones in my youth. However, if I am forced to fight, I assume the other fellow is trying to kill me and I'll do my best to make absolutely certain that he can't. Just explaining this has gotten me out of several potential fights as many testosterone laden fools are unwilling to actually risk dying rather than bruises to prove their point.

 

[Touch Of Death]

and if the oppoinent was faster and stronger than them what do the learn, other than they are not fast enough or,strong enough. A loss at chess can be analysed for improvement. Not so much a fight. The guy hit me, I fell down , what's to learn

Distance is your best friend.

 

[Martial D]

Distance is your best friend.

Indeed. Preferably a kilometre or more

 

[Steve]

Or when one side decides that fighting isn't worth it (or is no longer worth it) and walks away and when the other side decides to let the first walk away. That may or may not include anyone being injured.

I have a friend who got into a "Knife Fight." It started off with a dude getting pissed and he snicks out his tac-folder. My friend snaps out his tac-folder in response. The both stare at each other for a second. The first guy decides that his plan just went sideways, cautiously backs to a point where he feels safe, then turns and walks away.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

I got into a knife fight 30 years ago in high school. I was punching a guy. He pulled out a knife, and I immediately turned around and ran into traffic. Maybe not the smartest move on my part, but I figured keeping a metro bus between us was a good idea.

 

[Paul_D]

The guy hit me, I fell down , what's to learn

Don't get hit.

 

[jobo]

Don't get hit.

I suspect that if your going down with a single punch, don't get in fights would be the best lesson

 

[drop bear]

I suspect that if your going down with a single punch, don't get in fights would be the best lesson

Can happen to anyone.

 

[Juany118]

It isn't me that has misunderstood anything, but many many people seem to misunderstand the nature of actual combat.

You, in a way, just did the very thing I was referring to. You just assume your body will respond in the 'right way'. Have you tested that?

I have a pretty good experience with combat. I also know that I am not taught individual techniques, I am taught a skill. I know that my body will react in accordance to how I have studied and there is even dash cam and cell block video to show it. I may not know which art I used, in the moment, (I am familiar enough with 3 to just "do it") but in looking back, or the video I can say "yep that was what I have trained to do."

Now, does this require pressure testing while you train? Imo yes, just learning the skills the skills doesn't work, you have to use them under pressure so you learn to cope with the adrenaline rush that can make fine motor skills out the window (again just my opinion). The problem is this people don't do this. To many MA schools, again just my opinion/experience, don't do real pressure testing because that can lead to bumps and bruises, even the (very) occasional ER trip and that is bad for business. This is why it too me over a year to find my current teacher. Finding one with the appreciation for the "art" side of TMA, and who also teaches what they now call "combatives." I kept finding one or the other in my area, glad I finally found both.

Short form, if in a real fight or competition, the problem is usually not the method, often not even the practitioner, rather how the practitioner was trained.

 

[Juany118]

Can happen to anyone.

This. No one is perfect and the right shot in the right place at the right time will drop anyone.