Unarmed Self Defense...
- Thread starter phoglund
- Start date
- Status
Roland of Gilead
member
Fighting on the ground is the last place you want to be, unfortunately many systems are teaching that as the primary place you take the fight. Wrestling and BJJ are generally sports, and in those sports there are only 2 people, it's on an even and flat surface, and there are rules.
I repsectfully disagree. BJJ is not "a sport". In most vale tudo matches the rules are no eye gouging, no fish hooking, no headbutting. The headbutting is disallowed because too many fights end with one guys eyeborw getting split and he's ok to fight, but too bloody to fight sanitarily. This happends accidently enough in BJJ as it is. Of course there are two people fighting, that is the only way you have a chance to fight. Stand up fighters don't beat up three assailants either, if the assailants are intent on winning and have any idea what they are doing. You face three guys and you are unarmed? You already let yourself get in an unwinnable situation. Only lots of luck or a weapon will get you out of that.
It doesn't take even a novice groundfighter long to break an attackers arm or blood choke him out once a ground fight is established. We did our belt tests in the parking lot, in street clothes. Yeah you get skinned up. I could care less, I skateboard too, I am not afraid of getting skinned up a little.
Should everyone cross train? Of course. I supplement my groundfighting with some informal kung- fu (eye gouges are permitted in a street fight) hapkido, and savate. But if you only have time to train for one kind of fighting, make it BJJ, or some form of groundfighting.
Also, you don't have to get up to shoot. I practice shooting from sitting up and lying down, propped up on one elbow, or just raised up. You don't have to practice long ranges like this, but its nice to have the memorized movements of getting your gun out and a target in your sights while you're on the ground, and be able to shoot from the ground or your bed.
I repsectfully disagree. BJJ is not "a sport". In most vale tudo matches the rules are no eye gouging, no fish hooking, no headbutting. The headbutting is disallowed because too many fights end with one guys eyeborw getting split and he's ok to fight, but too bloody to fight sanitarily. This happends accidently enough in BJJ as it is. Of course there are two people fighting, that is the only way you have a chance to fight. Stand up fighters don't beat up three assailants either, if the assailants are intent on winning and have any idea what they are doing. You face three guys and you are unarmed? You already let yourself get in an unwinnable situation. Only lots of luck or a weapon will get you out of that.
It doesn't take even a novice groundfighter long to break an attackers arm or blood choke him out once a ground fight is established. We did our belt tests in the parking lot, in street clothes. Yeah you get skinned up. I could care less, I skateboard too, I am not afraid of getting skinned up a little.
Should everyone cross train? Of course. I supplement my groundfighting with some informal kung- fu (eye gouges are permitted in a street fight) hapkido, and savate. But if you only have time to train for one kind of fighting, make it BJJ, or some form of groundfighting.
Also, you don't have to get up to shoot. I practice shooting from sitting up and lying down, propped up on one elbow, or just raised up. You don't have to practice long ranges like this, but its nice to have the memorized movements of getting your gun out and a target in your sights while you're on the ground, and be able to shoot from the ground or your bed.
Glock Glockler
Member
Roland,
Are there referees? Do they allow folding knives? In the time one takes wrestling and grappeling with an opponent can someone else enter the fight? All it takes is his buddy to come up and kick you in the back of the neck and it's lights out. BJJ has some great stuff but I think it should be viewed within the proper context of groundfighting.
Also, it is not at all unwinnable if there are multiple attackers. I personally know several people in my martial arts club that have been attacked by more than one person, others that were attacked by opponents with weapons, and some by more than one with weapons. All of them came out deceisively on top, not unscathed in all situations, but there was no question who won. The funny thing is that many "experts" out there would say that if there are more than one attacker or of the attacker has a weapon that you're goose is cooked, but when are fights one on one or completely without weapons?
If your system tells you that you cannot prevail in situation X you will not train for situation X because you already accepted defeat in your mind. Krav Maga and Systema are the only 2 systems I know of that prepare for multiple attackers and attackers with weapons.
Are there referees? Do they allow folding knives? In the time one takes wrestling and grappeling with an opponent can someone else enter the fight? All it takes is his buddy to come up and kick you in the back of the neck and it's lights out. BJJ has some great stuff but I think it should be viewed within the proper context of groundfighting.
Also, it is not at all unwinnable if there are multiple attackers. I personally know several people in my martial arts club that have been attacked by more than one person, others that were attacked by opponents with weapons, and some by more than one with weapons. All of them came out deceisively on top, not unscathed in all situations, but there was no question who won. The funny thing is that many "experts" out there would say that if there are more than one attacker or of the attacker has a weapon that you're goose is cooked, but when are fights one on one or completely without weapons?
If your system tells you that you cannot prevail in situation X you will not train for situation X because you already accepted defeat in your mind. Krav Maga and Systema are the only 2 systems I know of that prepare for multiple attackers and attackers with weapons.
Roland of Gilead
member
Are there referees? Do they allow folding knives? In the time one takes wrestling and grappeling with an opponent can someone else enter the fight? In my BJJ classes there were no referees. When we rolled with other schools, there were no referees, we had pre-agreed upon rules (up to the participants), and we were honorable. They were honorable fights. I don't expect the same on the street. That is why I arm myself. Are folding knives allowed in unarmed combat? Not by definition. That is called armed combat, and no one who is unarmed has any system that gives them an advantage over someone who is armed. And if you have two opponents who are circling you, unless they are inebriated or morons, they will get you, grappler, striker, unarmed whatever. How will you punch the second one when the first one tackles you? How do you throw a knock out punch or a roundhouse kick lying on your back?
If your system tells you that you cannot prevail in situation X you will not train for situation X because you already accepted defeat in your mind. Krav Maga and Systema are the only 2 systems I know of that prepare for multiple attackers and attackers with weapons. Awesome, good for you. Learn away at them. Hope you don't get into a fair unarmed fight with someone who knows what he's doing on the ground, and also understands a striker's game.
All it takes is his buddy to come up and kick you in the back of the neck and it's lights out. What makes you think you can't get snuck up behind if you are standing up, maybe while you are dancing around with him, trying to hit him without him hitting you? I have trained unarmed combat with many strikers and grapplers of many styles, if one fighter decides such a fight will be a groundfight, it will be.
A groundfight is not what I am choosing first. I carry a pistol and a folding knife or two. Either its not a "lethal force" fight or many bad things have already happened for me to be in an unarmed street fight with lethal intent. And if by then there are still two or three guys left to fight single handedly, I guess I'll be sorry I didn't study more or differently.
If your system tells you that you cannot prevail in situation X you will not train for situation X because you already accepted defeat in your mind. Krav Maga and Systema are the only 2 systems I know of that prepare for multiple attackers and attackers with weapons. Awesome, good for you. Learn away at them. Hope you don't get into a fair unarmed fight with someone who knows what he's doing on the ground, and also understands a striker's game.
All it takes is his buddy to come up and kick you in the back of the neck and it's lights out. What makes you think you can't get snuck up behind if you are standing up, maybe while you are dancing around with him, trying to hit him without him hitting you? I have trained unarmed combat with many strikers and grapplers of many styles, if one fighter decides such a fight will be a groundfight, it will be.
A groundfight is not what I am choosing first. I carry a pistol and a folding knife or two. Either its not a "lethal force" fight or many bad things have already happened for me to be in an unarmed street fight with lethal intent. And if by then there are still two or three guys left to fight single handedly, I guess I'll be sorry I didn't study more or differently.
Glock Glockler
Member
Roland,
Might you have a weapon that gets knocked out of you hands during the fight? If so it would be a good idea to integrate your combat training into an armed/unarmed synthesis. Someone is not going to put down their knife because you defiantly say "Hey, you have a weapon and I have only trained to fight unarmed opponents, it's not fair" nor should you throw away your knife if the other guy doesnt have one.
That is called armed combat, and no one who is unarmed has any system that gives them an advantage over someone who is armed.
The why is it that my associates consistently triumped over armed attackers? Can someone who is of average strength defeat someone who is stronger? The stronger guy has an absolute advantage but that doesnt mean that the strength advantage cannot be mitigared by other advantages the other guy has. An average guy can take apart a strong guy if he knows what he's doing.
Awesome, good for you. Learn away at them. Hope you don't get into a fair unarmed fight with someone who knows what he's doing on the ground, and also understands a striker's game.
When did I ever say that knowing groundfighting is bad? My point is that it's not the be all that many make it out to be. On the ground you loose mobility, which is critical. You might still be stabbed in the back while on your feet but your chances in your favor due to you mobility. I also don't recommend stand-up wrestling for that very reason.
Someone can only shoot in and take the fight to the ground if you're foolish enough to stay in a straight line towards them. If you step to the side the wrestler cannot tackle you when he shoots. Again, the key is mobility.
Might you have a weapon that gets knocked out of you hands during the fight? If so it would be a good idea to integrate your combat training into an armed/unarmed synthesis. Someone is not going to put down their knife because you defiantly say "Hey, you have a weapon and I have only trained to fight unarmed opponents, it's not fair" nor should you throw away your knife if the other guy doesnt have one.
That is called armed combat, and no one who is unarmed has any system that gives them an advantage over someone who is armed.
The why is it that my associates consistently triumped over armed attackers? Can someone who is of average strength defeat someone who is stronger? The stronger guy has an absolute advantage but that doesnt mean that the strength advantage cannot be mitigared by other advantages the other guy has. An average guy can take apart a strong guy if he knows what he's doing.
Awesome, good for you. Learn away at them. Hope you don't get into a fair unarmed fight with someone who knows what he's doing on the ground, and also understands a striker's game.
When did I ever say that knowing groundfighting is bad? My point is that it's not the be all that many make it out to be. On the ground you loose mobility, which is critical. You might still be stabbed in the back while on your feet but your chances in your favor due to you mobility. I also don't recommend stand-up wrestling for that very reason.
Someone can only shoot in and take the fight to the ground if you're foolish enough to stay in a straight line towards them. If you step to the side the wrestler cannot tackle you when he shoots. Again, the key is mobility.
Unarmed MA Training
phoglund wrote:
Background
* Several years of Taiho-Ryu (Taiho-Jitsu renamed so as not to scare the sporting MA types when signing up for tournaments. It is the post-WW2 Japanese military & police style and, as such, is quite eclectic. Its two bases are Japanese/Okinawan karate & Jiu-Juitsu with a lot of technique shamelessly plagiarized from Chinese & Korean MAs, as well as American boxing.)
* Irregular bits Gracie JJ (AKA, "wrestling for keeps") in the Rangers for a few years
* Enough kick-boxing to figure out that I did not want to pick up a speech impediment
Presently quite rusty WRT technique...but a lot of the most basic techniques were seared into my unconscious and muscle memory.
A blend of styles, to include at least one striking style & one ground/wrestling style, would give a grasp of the fundamentals. No one style is "best," IMO. Those who say so are selling you something or are True Believers(tm) in their style. In other words, faith-based martial artists.
T-R taught several disarmament techniques vs blades & firearms. This reflected its roots as a military/police MA, I suspect. Gracie JJ & KB did not consider the armed opponent.
psyopspec wrote:
phoglund wrote:
Background
* Several years of Taiho-Ryu (Taiho-Jitsu renamed so as not to scare the sporting MA types when signing up for tournaments. It is the post-WW2 Japanese military & police style and, as such, is quite eclectic. Its two bases are Japanese/Okinawan karate & Jiu-Juitsu with a lot of technique shamelessly plagiarized from Chinese & Korean MAs, as well as American boxing.)
* Irregular bits Gracie JJ (AKA, "wrestling for keeps") in the Rangers for a few years
* Enough kick-boxing to figure out that I did not want to pick up a speech impediment
Presently quite rusty WRT technique...but a lot of the most basic techniques were seared into my unconscious and muscle memory.
A blend of styles, to include at least one striking style & one ground/wrestling style, would give a grasp of the fundamentals. No one style is "best," IMO. Those who say so are selling you something or are True Believers(tm) in their style. In other words, faith-based martial artists.
T-R taught several disarmament techniques vs blades & firearms. This reflected its roots as a military/police MA, I suspect. Gracie JJ & KB did not consider the armed opponent.
psyopspec wrote:
No doubt, mindset trumps most other coinsiderations.
Roland of Gilead
member
Someone can only shoot in and take the fight to the ground if you're foolish enough to stay in a straight line towards them. If you step to the side the wrestler cannot tackle you when he shoots.
This is like saying "Someone can only strike you are foolish enough to stand there and let them strike you." Both are kinda oversimplification. I did not mean to come across as a proponent of BJJ and nothing else. I do think that BJJ is more useful in a real fight than tae kwon do, but I agree that both leave you open to a lot in a no rules, true "anything goes",fight where you don't even really know if your opponent is armed or not. I also agree that mindset is the most important single factor. Getting caught flat footed will monkey wrench any fighting regiment that you have.
When did I ever say that knowing groundfighting is bad?
Never. Point taken. I never said knowing stand up is bad. I did say:
Should everyone cross train? Of course
Then why is it that my associates consistently triumped over armed attackers?I did not say it was impossible, I said "no one who is unarmed has any system that gives them an advantage over someone who is armed", and I stick to that. Whoever has the knife has an advantage over whoever doesn't. Mr. Empty hands might be better trained, but he is gonna get hurt worse, with less effort than the dude holding the knife.
I think we agree about this more than you think.
This is like saying "Someone can only strike you are foolish enough to stand there and let them strike you." Both are kinda oversimplification. I did not mean to come across as a proponent of BJJ and nothing else. I do think that BJJ is more useful in a real fight than tae kwon do, but I agree that both leave you open to a lot in a no rules, true "anything goes",fight where you don't even really know if your opponent is armed or not. I also agree that mindset is the most important single factor. Getting caught flat footed will monkey wrench any fighting regiment that you have.
When did I ever say that knowing groundfighting is bad?
Never. Point taken. I never said knowing stand up is bad. I did say:
Should everyone cross train? Of course
Then why is it that my associates consistently triumped over armed attackers?I did not say it was impossible, I said "no one who is unarmed has any system that gives them an advantage over someone who is armed", and I stick to that. Whoever has the knife has an advantage over whoever doesn't. Mr. Empty hands might be better trained, but he is gonna get hurt worse, with less effort than the dude holding the knife.
I think we agree about this more than you think.
Glock Glockler
Member
Roland,
This is like saying "Someone can only strike you are foolish enough to stand there and let them strike you."
Heh, this is also true. I see many people train to block strikes, and while there is some value to that I dont see nearly as much emphasis on evasion. Think of it this way, if someone were trying to run over you with their car would you try to block it or would you get out of the way? What if they tried to shoot you, would you block the bullet or get out of the way? A strike, if you view it as a threat to you, would be something to get out of the way of, if you don't think of it as a threat then why are you even reacting to it? That seems very simple and obvious but unfortunately many dont seem to get it.
As far as the knives go I look at it this way: many components to into the level of threat that someone represents, things like attitude, awareness, focused relaxation, skill level, training, improvisation ability, etc. Having a knife is only one of those factors, and sometimes it can actually a hinderance to the person carrying it because they focus just on that and forget about all the other weapons available to them (limbs, head, floor, walls, etc). Actually, a belt can be a far more lethal weapon than a knife of one knows how to use it properly because it allows the user the advantage of distance. If one were to hit the attacker in the face or eyes, especially with the metal end, it will take the fight out of him real quick.
Keep in mind though that I would never opt to face and armed opponent if I could help it but many could fare far better against knife weilding opponents if they recognized to themselves that they actuallu had a chance against them. And, yes, I do think we agree more than disagree, just a matter of details.
This is like saying "Someone can only strike you are foolish enough to stand there and let them strike you."
Heh, this is also true. I see many people train to block strikes, and while there is some value to that I dont see nearly as much emphasis on evasion. Think of it this way, if someone were trying to run over you with their car would you try to block it or would you get out of the way? What if they tried to shoot you, would you block the bullet or get out of the way? A strike, if you view it as a threat to you, would be something to get out of the way of, if you don't think of it as a threat then why are you even reacting to it? That seems very simple and obvious but unfortunately many dont seem to get it.
As far as the knives go I look at it this way: many components to into the level of threat that someone represents, things like attitude, awareness, focused relaxation, skill level, training, improvisation ability, etc. Having a knife is only one of those factors, and sometimes it can actually a hinderance to the person carrying it because they focus just on that and forget about all the other weapons available to them (limbs, head, floor, walls, etc). Actually, a belt can be a far more lethal weapon than a knife of one knows how to use it properly because it allows the user the advantage of distance. If one were to hit the attacker in the face or eyes, especially with the metal end, it will take the fight out of him real quick.
Keep in mind though that I would never opt to face and armed opponent if I could help it but many could fare far better against knife weilding opponents if they recognized to themselves that they actuallu had a chance against them. And, yes, I do think we agree more than disagree, just a matter of details.
Roland of Gilead
member
The devil is always in the details, they say. 
I agree bout the belt vs. knife scenario, give me a broom handle over a folding knife anyday. Knives being flashed are prolly more intimidating, more likely to make everyone decide its not worth a fight after all, but once the fighting started, I'd rather have a broomstick.
Heh, this is also true. I see many people train to block strikes, and while there is some value to that I dont see nearly as much emphasis on evasion. Think of it this way, if someone were trying to run over you with their car would you try to block it or would you get out of the way? What if they tried to shoot you, would you block the bullet or get out of the way? A strike, if you view it as a threat to you, would be something to get out of the way of, if you don't think of it as a threat then why are you even reacting to it? That seems very simple and obvious but unfortunately many dont seem to get it.
Great point. That is kinda a hard style vs. soft style argument, and old as the arts themselves. I think like you though, if at all possible, move, not only do you not get hit, but you aren't a stationary target, the next one won't be as likely to get you.
I agree bout the belt vs. knife scenario, give me a broom handle over a folding knife anyday. Knives being flashed are prolly more intimidating, more likely to make everyone decide its not worth a fight after all, but once the fighting started, I'd rather have a broomstick. Heh, this is also true. I see many people train to block strikes, and while there is some value to that I dont see nearly as much emphasis on evasion. Think of it this way, if someone were trying to run over you with their car would you try to block it or would you get out of the way? What if they tried to shoot you, would you block the bullet or get out of the way? A strike, if you view it as a threat to you, would be something to get out of the way of, if you don't think of it as a threat then why are you even reacting to it? That seems very simple and obvious but unfortunately many dont seem to get it.
Great point. That is kinda a hard style vs. soft style argument, and old as the arts themselves. I think like you though, if at all possible, move, not only do you not get hit, but you aren't a stationary target, the next one won't be as likely to get you.
HI express
Member
Oldie?
Been in the M.A. for almost 47 years now. Learning quick and to the point techniques are important, but remember...you should not be playing fair in a real self-defense situation. You are not only defending your life, but there might be an S.O. as well as kids. You want the most efficient tool for the job...at various ranges. Unarmed self-defense limits you to what you can reach. Think armed multiple attackers at various ranges.
I don't want to play with the fate of my S.O and daughter by not being prepared with the best tools at my disposal. I suggest that you don't either.
Several years back I was faced with three armed attackers at various distances. I was able to get away while disarming and hurting one. One of the other two guys pointed his guns at my wife and mother-in-law, but that is a story for another time, right?
All I can say is that the B.G.'s will never fight fair if they're coming at you. So if you practice M.A., keep that in mind.
Been in the M.A. for almost 47 years now. Learning quick and to the point techniques are important, but remember...you should not be playing fair in a real self-defense situation. You are not only defending your life, but there might be an S.O. as well as kids. You want the most efficient tool for the job...at various ranges. Unarmed self-defense limits you to what you can reach. Think armed multiple attackers at various ranges.
I don't want to play with the fate of my S.O and daughter by not being prepared with the best tools at my disposal. I suggest that you don't either.
Several years back I was faced with three armed attackers at various distances. I was able to get away while disarming and hurting one. One of the other two guys pointed his guns at my wife and mother-in-law, but that is a story for another time, right?
All I can say is that the B.G.'s will never fight fair if they're coming at you. So if you practice M.A., keep that in mind.
thorn726
Member
the thing i have enountered once or twice is the idiot with heavy object.
most recently the biggest padlock i have ever seen.
the guy was yelling , threatening. there is little to do in this sit. , to make things worse, i am not tiny, but he was LarGE. (why such a large guy needs a padlock as well?)
anyway= things i did to keep myself safe=
as soon as i saw it, kept my eye on it, and his other hand.
-get ready to duck.
-realize running gives him the chance to throw it at my head,
so try and clam guy down, keep him extra close, too close to get a good swing, grab his hand and shake it while trying to talk him out of beating me to death (geez)
eventually he freaks out at my behavior and runs away.
he thought i had taken his picture, i had not.
(ps even if i did, he had no legal right to harass me)
a CCW and a big gun would have been nicer, but really this is the kind of idiot i would have had to kill had i pulled a gun, instead, no harm done besides a hassle. not that ridding the world of this kind of person would be a bad thing, but my consceince tells me its better not to.
this experience has however convinced me a good stun gun might be useful,
and that i need to remeber these street idiots do carry weapons sometimes, and it's beter to start the exodus as soon as trouble arises. run if you have to
(guns and the street= of course , there are muggers that use guns, but i am a very unlikely target for that type of crime. what i hav eto be careful of is drug dealers who might just up and shoot me for crossing their turf or some other nonsense. crackhead losers already traded their gun for crack, they have to use blunt/ sharp obj).
i would like to learn better defense techs, i pretty much go for the
let them strike first, GRab rather than block, control the wrist, choke the heck out of em with other hand. otherwise, im going for the headlock and squeezing till you cry for mercy.
a very large man this evening attacked me becuase he was jealous over some nonsense with my ex. (more reason i cant lug a gun around, people like this)
guy went for my throat, i caught his hand, went for the headlock, he took us both down, but my grip was solid.
finally i agree to let go, had to listen to him yell from other room for a few minutes. (and guy is like over 40. geez. like i need to be getting attacked over a girl at 31, and he is 40+!)
i was appalled.
but the thing is , if you got no real skills, you get control of that neck, whether by throat, headlock, or my personal favorite grab their hair at the front and pull down, the neck is weak, the body must follow it and struggle to protect it first.
this guy was WAAAAY ove my size, ex athlete. i am in good shape, not big.
once i had his head , he was done.
but also, on the street or something, you neve know when someone will have a sharp. i try not to engage at all costs, but you also cnat turn your back on the aggressor.
as far as regular fighting, it just shouldnt happen. i am disgusted by what happened to me this evening., especially since this guy claims to be such a mature man.
yet seeing a lady go out of the room to talk privately with me for 5 secs, i should be beaten ?
Fighting on that level is a cop out. you have been beaten with words, so you have to try and win with your hands.
most recently the biggest padlock i have ever seen.
the guy was yelling , threatening. there is little to do in this sit. , to make things worse, i am not tiny, but he was LarGE. (why such a large guy needs a padlock as well?)
anyway= things i did to keep myself safe=
as soon as i saw it, kept my eye on it, and his other hand.
-get ready to duck.
-realize running gives him the chance to throw it at my head,
so try and clam guy down, keep him extra close, too close to get a good swing, grab his hand and shake it while trying to talk him out of beating me to death (geez)
eventually he freaks out at my behavior and runs away.
he thought i had taken his picture, i had not.
(ps even if i did, he had no legal right to harass me)
a CCW and a big gun would have been nicer, but really this is the kind of idiot i would have had to kill had i pulled a gun, instead, no harm done besides a hassle. not that ridding the world of this kind of person would be a bad thing, but my consceince tells me its better not to.
this experience has however convinced me a good stun gun might be useful,
and that i need to remeber these street idiots do carry weapons sometimes, and it's beter to start the exodus as soon as trouble arises. run if you have to
(guns and the street= of course , there are muggers that use guns, but i am a very unlikely target for that type of crime. what i hav eto be careful of is drug dealers who might just up and shoot me for crossing their turf or some other nonsense. crackhead losers already traded their gun for crack, they have to use blunt/ sharp obj).
i would like to learn better defense techs, i pretty much go for the
let them strike first, GRab rather than block, control the wrist, choke the heck out of em with other hand. otherwise, im going for the headlock and squeezing till you cry for mercy.
a very large man this evening attacked me becuase he was jealous over some nonsense with my ex. (more reason i cant lug a gun around, people like this)
guy went for my throat, i caught his hand, went for the headlock, he took us both down, but my grip was solid.
finally i agree to let go, had to listen to him yell from other room for a few minutes. (and guy is like over 40. geez. like i need to be getting attacked over a girl at 31, and he is 40+!)
i was appalled.
but the thing is , if you got no real skills, you get control of that neck, whether by throat, headlock, or my personal favorite grab their hair at the front and pull down, the neck is weak, the body must follow it and struggle to protect it first.
this guy was WAAAAY ove my size, ex athlete. i am in good shape, not big.
once i had his head , he was done.
but also, on the street or something, you neve know when someone will have a sharp. i try not to engage at all costs, but you also cnat turn your back on the aggressor.
as far as regular fighting, it just shouldnt happen. i am disgusted by what happened to me this evening., especially since this guy claims to be such a mature man.
yet seeing a lady go out of the room to talk privately with me for 5 secs, i should be beaten ?
Fighting on that level is a cop out. you have been beaten with words, so you have to try and win with your hands.
Nope..
58 years old, fractured spine two years ago. Unarmed is not part of the plan. Anyone who attempts to assault me will get MACED first, stabbed if necessary, and then shot as a last resort. I then plan to unass the area before the popo arrive if possible.
58 years old, fractured spine two years ago. Unarmed is not part of the plan. Anyone who attempts to assault me will get MACED first, stabbed if necessary, and then shot as a last resort. I then plan to unass the area before the popo arrive if possible.
Roland of Gilead
member
I then plan to unass the area before the popo arrive if possible.
A wise policy, sir. Explaining anything to the police is like :banghead: .
A wise policy, sir. Explaining anything to the police is like :banghead: .
Unfortunately, I don't think there's much you can do to prepare yourself via dry work at home. Probably the best use of 2 days would be some type of high-intensity experience designed to demonstrate the kind of dynamic situation self defense can be. Perhaps fully geared up in pads you could have someone attack you at 100% just to get an appreciation for what it is like. Or vice versa.
Although there are basic/generic techniques that could perhaps be introduced in 2 days, it would be rough to get any practical, long-term retention from it. In my opinion the 2 days would be better spent with mental and physical interactions designed to push your experiences, rather than just instruction.
To the contrary, even when on the ground your general goals don't change. If you can end the threat effectively without getting to your feet, then there is no need to do so.
thorn726
Member
if you got a headlock tight on the ground, you dont need to get up till dude is unconcious!
Ground fighting: I'll fight you on rusty nails and broken glass!!
Pfft, yeah right.
I second all the "don't go down" nods. As has already been pointed out Royce Gracie types do just fine in the ring. But out on the street they don't fair so well. Once you get into a grappling match on concrete you'll understand.
With that said, you are NEVER, I mean NEVER unarmed. There is ALWAYS something laying around. Dirt, a rock, a ladder leaning up against a building. Your clothing. Stuff in your pockets. Even "society" is littered with "weapons". Hell, I've even carried a roll of pennies before. They work great, and they don't arouse suspicion.
As for grappling the best moves you can know are take downs. And keeping the other guy down then. And in a self defense street fight you should not be looking at staying offense if you get a guy down and you're unarmed. You put him down so you can get a hand weapon, or handgun. And those are DEFENSIVE weapons, you should get to those so you can get away or get to an OFFENSIVE weapon, like a rifle or missle launcher.
Anyway next time you go into your office, the mall, the supermarket, church. Whatever. Look around start to become aware of your surroundings number one. And who is around you. This saves you 9 out 10 the ten times you might enter a threatening scenario. That's rule number one. Watch your six, know who's there, identify threats.
Rule number two, especially if unarmed, start looking for hand and throwing weapons immediately. They are everywhere. Heh, try the airport. See how many you can identify when you are there.
Rule three never go somewhere you don't have an out. I think rule number three takes care of the 10th out of 10 times you might walk into a threatening situation. Rule number two is really just to keep you from getting bored, and those times you let down your guard or missed something.
Anyway most of hand to hand is practice, but foremost state of mind.
Pfft, yeah right.
I second all the "don't go down" nods. As has already been pointed out Royce Gracie types do just fine in the ring. But out on the street they don't fair so well. Once you get into a grappling match on concrete you'll understand.
With that said, you are NEVER, I mean NEVER unarmed. There is ALWAYS something laying around. Dirt, a rock, a ladder leaning up against a building. Your clothing. Stuff in your pockets. Even "society" is littered with "weapons". Hell, I've even carried a roll of pennies before. They work great, and they don't arouse suspicion.
As for grappling the best moves you can know are take downs. And keeping the other guy down then. And in a self defense street fight you should not be looking at staying offense if you get a guy down and you're unarmed. You put him down so you can get a hand weapon, or handgun. And those are DEFENSIVE weapons, you should get to those so you can get away or get to an OFFENSIVE weapon, like a rifle or missle launcher.
Anyway next time you go into your office, the mall, the supermarket, church. Whatever. Look around start to become aware of your surroundings number one. And who is around you. This saves you 9 out 10 the ten times you might enter a threatening scenario. That's rule number one. Watch your six, know who's there, identify threats.
Rule number two, especially if unarmed, start looking for hand and throwing weapons immediately. They are everywhere. Heh, try the airport. See how many you can identify when you are there.
Rule three never go somewhere you don't have an out. I think rule number three takes care of the 10th out of 10 times you might walk into a threatening situation. Rule number two is really just to keep you from getting bored, and those times you let down your guard or missed something.
Anyway most of hand to hand is practice, but foremost state of mind.
Ivy Mike
Member
Things I have picked up from my training as well as actual fighting expierience have been that if you can get away without fightig, you should. If you must fight, fight to win.
I would try to avoid ground fighting in real life, simply because being tied up with an opponent isn't the best way to gain the upper hand. If you go to the ground and break his arm on the way down, you are in a much better position to dictate terms, get up and run, continue injuring opponent.
The biggest asset in a fight is being fighting fit. If you don't have to stamina, then no type of ancient, super secret, kawng-foo death touch will do you much good. You must be able to last. You must also be able to think.
Muscle memory is nice, but what do you do after you have thrown the BG down? What about his buddies or what about your surroundings. There is a lot to think about even if it doesn't occur to you right away.
I'd start with a proven art and cross train from there. I liked the realism and brutality that I get from KM. Maybe later, I'll take boxing or wrestling.
One of the best hits I ever saw happened at a place called the Combat Club here in LV. A BJJ practitioner tried to shoot on a boxer. The boxer shifted his weight and landed one heckuva punch to the nose of BJJ-guy. Dropped him right to the mat. Kinda hart to fight with blood in your sinuses and tears in your eyes.
I would try to avoid ground fighting in real life, simply because being tied up with an opponent isn't the best way to gain the upper hand. If you go to the ground and break his arm on the way down, you are in a much better position to dictate terms, get up and run, continue injuring opponent.
The biggest asset in a fight is being fighting fit. If you don't have to stamina, then no type of ancient, super secret, kawng-foo death touch will do you much good. You must be able to last. You must also be able to think.
Muscle memory is nice, but what do you do after you have thrown the BG down? What about his buddies or what about your surroundings. There is a lot to think about even if it doesn't occur to you right away.
I'd start with a proven art and cross train from there. I liked the realism and brutality that I get from KM. Maybe later, I'll take boxing or wrestling.
One of the best hits I ever saw happened at a place called the Combat Club here in LV. A BJJ practitioner tried to shoot on a boxer. The boxer shifted his weight and landed one heckuva punch to the nose of BJJ-guy. Dropped him right to the mat. Kinda hart to fight with blood in your sinuses and tears in your eyes.
- Status