Training half of martial arts bugs me.

[Gweilo]

As the saying goes, "Common sense isn't all that common.

Never a truer comment made

Imo, if people want to keep fit by boxercise, thats great, but lets be honest, these programs are predominantly American, whilst there are some epic American martial artists, past and present, Americans have an inbuilt ability to moneytise everything, as long as it looks good, sounds good, someone, somehere is going to buy it.if its sold as an exercise regime, fine, if its sold as an exercise regime that doubles as a self defense system, as used by Rambo, with a one time special offer, and a free nutri bullet, and 3 one on one video classes with 35th dan Clamydia expert, not so good. You only have your own culture to blame.

 

[Gweilo]

Yeah ok. So we are still seppartating people's motivations from the actual factual evidence of a working art.

I thought you were going for something like boxersise works because there are people who only want to boxersise.

Oh DB, you do try, the evidence you quote and seek, are facts and figures quoted by the art you train, and the people who train you, all ma are guilty of this, when are you going to understand, its not the system trained, per say, its the attitude of the student and the quality of training received, and the students understanding and application of that training. Sports related stats, do not always equate to true sd senario.

 

[dvcochran]

When you use the phrase, "better than nothing," that suggests that you think that choice is settling.
Oh, I get it now. You're not having discussions. You're serving the public good. That explains a lot.

So, for the record, then, my opinion is that you're going to be much more successful learning a combat sport or taking cardio-kickboxing classes if your goal is self defense. In fact, I think you're probably better off at a parkour school or doing crossfit than training in many styles that are 'self defense' oriented, if your goal is to be safer.

Now, if you equate fighting skill to self defense, unless you're being mugged or assaulted frequently, the best you can do is develop skill in a complimentary skill set. You can get a job as a cop, a bouncer, join the military, or become a freelance mercenary. You could, I guess, join a gang or get yourself arrested so you can do some hard time. I bet those guys have really solid self defense skills. Or, if those aren't on the table, you can get pretty close training MMA, or another combat sport, and developing skill through competition.

I use ninjutsu as an example a lot, because it's the quintessential non-combat, self defense art. But to be clear, if you think it's fun, like the costumes, or are interested in the culture and history of the art, great. Knock yourself out (no pun intended).

But if we're getting to what makes people less likely to be victimized, I believe it's more to do with building real skills and understanding the subsidiary benefits of the activity. It's useful to train in an art where you get to use what you learn. Judo, MMA, wrestling, Shuai Jiao, boxing... they all have an advantage over arts where you don't use what you learn. And that, in itself, is useful, because you will know not just that the techniques work, but that YOU can make the techniques work. So, when it comes to whether someone will be able to perform in an emergency, the school teacher who competes in Judo is much more likely to succeed in using the skills in an emergency than the school teacher who has learned several ways to kill or maim someone with their car keys. This is because the Judoka has applied the skills in a complimentary situation, in the same way that a cop will be able to rely on skills used on the job if he or she is in a self defense situation.

But that's actually not the part that I believe makes me safer. The big thing is the subsidiary benefits of training in anything that has some structural integrity, which can be achieved by doing activities that don't involve fighting or maiming or killing. Confidence, fitness, coordination, positive self image, feeling like you're a part of a group... all of these things help you lead a balanced lifestyle. Not doing drugs or hanging out in bars, starting fights at picnics or otherwise engaging in a high risk lifestyle. These also help.

Well that was a brilliant bit of common knowledge.
Try not to pat yourself on the back too hard.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

No matter how good the training is, it can only get you to the edge of proficiency, unless training is the product. You can get a degree in Jane-Cook-Do, train for 10 years and become a certified "Chef." But if you've never cooked an egg, you're likely going to suck at it for a while, no matter how long you've cooked. Think about the implications of that fundamental truth in a self defense context. The stakes are much higher than inedible food.

This is a rehash of an old debate. Fighting skills are the endpoint, not “self-defense”. Those skills can be applied in a lot of different ways. The student’s purpose (training for self-defense) doesn’t magically invalidate any and all of the other areas those skills can be applied.

So, no, training with a self-defense purpose is not like cooking without food. It’s more like learning to cook, including how to rescue food from some cooking mistakes, and not being able to fully recreate all of the mistakes, so some of the learning is theoretical. The rest is just learning to cook.

Training BJJ for self-defense is largely just training BJJ.

 

[Steve]

Well that was a brilliant bit of common knowledge.
Try not to pat yourself on the back too hard.

Hey man. I really hope you get whatever you need to pull you out of this funk, because posts like this just aren’t okay.

Edit: but on the bright side, does this mean you agree with me? If so, could you explain to @gpseymour that this is common knowledge?

 

[Steve]

This is a rehash of an old debate. Fighting skills are the endpoint, not “self-defense”. Those skills can be applied in a lot of different ways. The student’s purpose (training for self-defense) doesn’t magically invalidate any and all of the other areas those skills can be applied.

So, no, training with a self-defense purpose is not like cooking without food. It’s more like learning to cook, including how to rescue food from some cooking mistakes, and not being able to fully recreate all of the mistakes, so some of the learning is theoretical. The rest is just learning to cook.

Training BJJ for self-defense is largely just training BJJ.

I would never equate training BJJ with training for self defense. That’s exactly the point.

However, I would say training and competing in BJJ promotes demonstrable skill development that could be complimentary. People who train in other “grappling” styles find out very quickly if they have been wasting their time or not. People with years, sometimes a decade or more, of experience realize that they still suck pretty bad. Consider how well an average ninja would do vs a an average wrestler on their first day at a BJJ school. One has been cooking food, and the other has been mimicking the process of cooking food.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I would never equate training BJJ with training for self defense. That’s exactly the point.

However, I would say training and competing in BJJ promotes demonstrable skill development. People who train in other “grappling” styles find out very quickly if they have been wasting their time or not. People with years, sometimes a decade or more, of experience realize that they still suck pretty bad. Consider how well an average ninja would do vs a an average wrestler on their first day at a BJJ school. One has been cooking food, and the other has been mimicking the process of cooking food.

You’ve entirely missed my point. Unfortunately, you seem to do so on purpose.

 

[Steve]

You’ve entirely missed my point. Unfortunately, you seem to do so on purpose.

Really? That implies that I secretly agree with you. Much more likely that we just disagree. I think, if the students aren’t applying skills, the best you can hope for is to get them close to application. Alternatively, you teach them your system, and hope it’s close enough to transfer the skills. If Jane-cook-do is good enough, maybe after 10 years, Old Frank will be able to catch up on the food part pretty quick. The rest is just luck and confirmation bias.

As for this being a rehash, of course it is. as @dvcochran says above, it’s common knowledge. Talking about how literally every skill is developed from birth to death in human experience... except self defense skill, if you’re to be believed,

 

[Steve]

How do chefs learn to fix their mistakes? They make mistakes and fix them, Gerry. Or they make mistakes and pitch them, and then do them until they don’t make that mistake again. Or you log enough hours developing the skill that you are expert enough to innovate.

how does a pilot learn to land a commercial plane in the Hudson?

answer, they become really, really good pilots.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

how does a pilot learn to land a commercial plane in the Hudson?

answer, they become really, really good pilots.

Agree! You can't produce any good student by using the SD teaching method.

SD teaching = train 1/2 of MA.

Does SD training include "equipment training"?

 

[dvcochran]

Hey man. I really hope you get whatever you need to pull you out of this funk, because posts like this just aren’t okay.

Edit: but on the bright side, does this mean you agree with me? If so, could you explain to @gpseymour that this is common knowledge?

Ah, one of those dish it out but cannot take it guys I see. That post was nice to many I have seen here.

 

[Steve]

Ah, one of those dish it out but cannot take it guys I see. That post was nice to many I have seen here.

Oh, I see. Somewhere along the way, I hurt your feelings and so you’re acting out. I guess that explains your saltiness. Well, if you’re going to be snarky, could you at least add some value to the discussion while you do it?

 

[dvcochran]

Oh, I see. Somewhere along the way, I hurt your feelings and so you’re acting out. I guess that explains your saltiness. Well, if you’re going to be snarky, could you at least add some value to the discussion while you do it?

You have no idea how far off base you are.

 

[isshinryuronin]

Let's spend more time on addressing the subject and less on each other's subjectively assumed interpretations and feelings.

Like Buka, I LOVE to eat, but all the food analogies in this thread have ruined my appetite.

 

[drop bear]

Oh DB, you do try, the evidence you quote and seek, are facts and figures quoted by the art you train, and the people who train you, all ma are guilty of this, when are you going to understand, its not the system trained, per say, its the attitude of the student and the quality of training received, and the students understanding and application of that training. Sports related stats, do not always equate to true sd senario.

Yeah. Yeah. This old chestnut.


The only people who are stopping anybody quoting some self defense facts and figures are the people who are trying to hide the fact there isn't any.

You can't find a genre of martial arts more addicted to anecdotes, hypotheticals, and experts with no practical experience.

I could find 20 MMA fighters that would eat alive the top self defense instructors in the world. And who would teach you for the cost of a carton of beer.

I could find 20 MMA fighters with more self defense experience than most of your top self defense guys.

Otherwise if it is not the system.

Why do similar systems produce similar results?

Are you suggesting that krav guys and aikido guys don't win BJJ competitions because they just all happen to be consistently lazy?

Or does their system not have the tools to equip them to engage in a specifactivity.


The difference is that self defense isn't actually performed by anybody and sport is. Which means you can train in self defense and be terrible at it and it quite likely won't matter. Because you may never use it. You can be a top self defense expert and not have a clue about self defense.

If you are a sportsperson you are guaranteed to have to use it. And you have to be good at that sports to be a top sports person.

Which is the very simple premise that has been explained for the last to pages.

 

[Steve]

Let's spend more time on addressing the subject and less on each other's subjectively assumed interpretations and feelings.

Like Buka, I LOVE to eat, but all the food analogies in this thread have ruined my appetite.

my analogies are amazing!

 

[isshinryuronin]

I could find 20 MMA fighters that would eat alive the top self defense instructors in the world.

Most self defense is taught to nonprofessionals to fight against other nonprofessionals. This will work most of the time. Most scuffles one gets into do not involve MMA fighters. You are comparing apples and oranges.

Are you suggesting that krav guys and aikido guys don't win BJJ competitions because they just all happen to be consistently lazy

If a BJJ guy fought a Krav Maga guy using Krav Maga rules, the BJJ guy will be at a disadvantage. McGregor did extremely well against Mayweather using boxing rules. If they fought using MMA rules, McGregor would have wiped the floor with him.

If one is objectively honest, it can be seen that different arts have different purposes and it is biased to judge them head to head on a single purpose. Each offers certain advantages and benefits (sometimes not directly related to fighting) that appeals to different people.

If an MMA/BJJ guy got me on the ground, I could not out-grapple them. But (if he didn't immediately get my back) I could gouge the eyes or sink my teeth into something soft, or even give his balls a good squeeze. He probably does not train much to defend these attacks and I may gain the advantage. Does that mean that my (fictional) art based on these techniques is superior? Such comparisons and debates are ridiculous.

You need not work so hard to defend your position. Let everyone practice their art for their own purposes and benefits from a qualified teacher who doesn't oversell his art's capabilities. That way, we can all be happy.

 

[drop bear]

Most self defense is taught to nonprofessionals to fight against other nonprofessionals. This will work most of the time. Most scuffles one gets into do not involve MMA fighters. You are comparing apples and oranges.

That is kind of my point.

 

[drop bear]

If an MMA/BJJ guy got me on the ground, I could not out-grapple them. But (if he didn't immediately get my back) I could gouge the eyes or sink my teeth into something soft, or even give his balls a good squeeze. He probably does not train much to defend these attacks and I may gain the advantage. Does that mean that my (fictional) art based on these techniques is superior? Such comparisons and debates are ridiculous.

We can see MMA and BJJ working in street environments though where eye gouges and groin grabs are used though.

 

[drop bear]

You need not work so hard to defend your position. Let everyone practice their art for their own purposes and benefits from a qualified teacher who doesn't oversell his art's capabilities. That way, we can all be happy.

It is almost impossible to have a reasonable discussion with someone who does not have tools to separate fact from fiction though.