Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Bad Dog Cafe' started by verb boten, Jul 6, 2019.
Next thing you know, you'll be telling people that Steven Seagal can't whip the entire Oakland Raiders organization all at once.
this is the secret.
I think any fighting training is better than none. MMA has revealed that the full package of striking and grappling skills is what is most effective in the real world. But if someone has even just a .22 pistol and keeps their distance then it’s game over for the wonderfully trained fighter. Drives me crazy in movies when the person holding the gun moves within striking distance, eliminating their weapon’s primary advantage: the ability to strike from out of range.
What we're gonna do right here is go back, way back, back into time.
When the only people that existed were troglodytes...
Cave men, cave women, Neanderthal, troglodytes.
Let's take the average cave man at home, listening to his stereo...
how is that soliciting?
OK, no problem, one thing at a time. No Asian Martial ART is intended for self defense, regardless of what the sensei advertises to get students. This is all stylized. Kata are ritual exercises, not sparring. If a sensei adds full contact sparring to his/her dojo, that isn't a formal part of the Art. Yes, senseis do add sparring, good for them. If an Aikido master teaches formal Aikido, there will be no true sparring, just interactive training. Geiko is not kumite. Karate is the same way. Referirng to ****o Ryu, the style I'm most familiar with, "sparring" is not true sparring, it's "One Point Sparring, Two Point Sparring, etc", just a set of training exercises. If the dojo allows semi-contact or full contact sparring, that's not really technically part of the Art, that's additional skills that fall outside of the true style.
A very wise fella, Fumio Demura, once told me, "If you want to learn to fight, you must get into lots of fights. If you want to learn Karate, that's a whole different thing." His buddy, Dan Ivan, was a friend. He had been, I believe, a cop in Hawaii. He told me, "Here is a Karate stance, use this to practice Karate. Here is a fighting stance, use this to whip somebody's butt." I think their point was, Karate is a formal Art, practiced to develop yourself as an individual, to achieve physical and mental harmony. Some of the techniques can translate to real fighting ... leg sweeps, side kicks, throws. Using these techniques in a fight requires additional training. Same thing with Aikido, you practice that Art to achieve harmony of body and mind. Some of the techniques can be used in a real fight ... joint locks, throws, etc. To successfully do that, it requires additional training. Formal Aikido training is not sufficient to learn to fight. Some Aikido techniques are very useful in a fight.
How to gouge an eye ... from the front (if you are right handed, present your left flank, grab opponent around neck with left arm in an upright headlock, force opponent head toward you and gouge with right thumb. I won't admit to ever harming anyone, that's never smart. You can take my word for this technique working or not, but I won't publicly admit to ever hurting someone.
Break knee: grab opponent's striking hand, perform downward wrist lock while stepping back, then rotate opponent arm toward center of body and rest dominant foot on opponent extended knee, step down on knee while leaning forward releasing some tension on opponent arm. Hard to describe, easy to learn. Knee may break, may separate, may just sprain. Break is common ... ouch, it hurts.
Bend finger ... that's an Aikido specialty. When you trap the hand, you want to trap a gripping hand, not a punching hand. Force opponent forearm upward, with opponent palm facing up, grab extended fingers and pull down with dominant hand while pushing up on opponent wrist. At this time, if you don't want to guide opponent in a throw or submission, pick a finger and hyper-extend it down.
Head butt? Wow, that's the one everybody had experienced from one side or another. Grab lapels, shirt, shoulders, aim hairline for nose, smash.
You're making it sound like there are fighting techniques that always work in real life, but Aikido techniques never will. That's wrong wrong. Fights are mayhem, nothing ever always works, that's why fighters dance around looking for an opening and end up rolling on the ground. Some things work better than others, and obviously, a fighter needs to match the technique with their own strengths and with their opponent's perceived weaknesses.
If your arguing that Aikido is a poor method of fighting, well, yeah, it's an Art. If you are arguing that a trained fighter can't use Aikido techniques in a fight, well, no. I disagree, some Aikido techniques work well in a fight when they are applied with fighting as a training goal.
The better trained your opponent, the less likely they will present easy targets, so a guy who has learned wrestling or Judo will be hard to grapple, and a boxer won't willingly close with you so you can grab and throw him. You have to feint and use distractions, if you can, that doesn't always work. Nothing always works.
I'm willing to chat about full contact sparring, or about hypothetical fights I'll never admit to actually engaging in, but I'm gonna excuse myself when the conversation gets to implications that there are technique from established Asian Martial Arts, from Gung Fu to Aikido, that can't be used in a real fight because MMA. Any style can adapted to combat, if the sensei has the knowledge and ability.
Glad you enjoy talking Martial Arts.
This thread is hilarious.
Ok I see from your first paragraph where our differences lay.
I see you on the philosophical side, I’m more on the practical.
Because both are on TV or in a movie. Which is different than real life.
Ding ding ding? What do I win?
There's an interesting video on youtube w Mariusz Pudzianowski fighting a Gracie Brazil-Jitsu blackbelt. Maiusz wipes the floor with him. The strongman is not a very graceful fighter, but he's strong as a horse. I don't get from that video that Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu is useless. It just happened to not work in this bout. So, it wasn't about the style, it was about the fighters. A baseball bat would have been useful.
Also, the techniques barred from MMA aren't barred because they are ineffective, they are barred because they are destructive and damaging.
I have to disagree about grappling in the real world. On the street you go the ground your not getting up 9 out of 10 times. One on one is rare in real world. Stay on your feet.
It has happened once or twice here in Austin in the past several years. Lots of rowdy drunks out on 6th street. I remember one incident where a man died, and quite a few serious injuries from the resulting fall and eventual head hitting the pavement. Head injuries are serious business.
I recently read Bruce Lee's bio-- it was interesting. He was very much interested in street fighting-- ran around Hong Kong getting into fights all the time.
He developed his version of Kung Fu in order for it to be more effective in actual fighting vs. the ritualized artistic stuff they were teaching in schools.
Same with Gracie family and Jiu Jitsu. Jiu Jitsu was being taught in a very stylized manner. The Japanese way is to honor the masters by doing it exactly
as handed down. But the Gracies were informal, casual Brazilians. They would see what actually worked and didn't work and thereby dramatically changed
Jiu Jitsu for the better when it comes to real fighting. But MMA has taught us that a pure grappler will often lose to a striker because he will get knocked out
before he's ever able to get the striker in a hold. So you need to know how to use both and defend against both.
There's a reason cops carry weapons. If you are trained on how to use a weapon and you use it correctly that goes a very long way to evening up the odds.
Hence the baseball bat reference above. But cops also call for back up for good reason, too. They size up their opponent and if they're smart they realize
they better get some help when dealing with a dangerous person.
I would argue that ALL Martial arts are designed for self defense.
True, Kata are ritual exercises (just like practicing scales and chords is a ritual exercise).
BUT, break down the individual movements within a Kata, and you will find every action within the Kata is either offensive or defensive. The same even applies to Tai Chi: it's all specific attack or defense actions.
You can appreciate the grace, training and effort put into a Kata: this is looking.
You can also break it into its component parts: this is seeing.
That is so true and don't rely on size to make that decision either. I am a pretty big guy (6'4" and 225 lbs), boxed until I was 13 and went on to serve in the Marines. I have always been able to handle myself but the worst beating I ever took was by a guy who was about 5'3" and maybe weighed 130 bls soaking wet over in Korea. Never saw anybody like that, just so damn fast with his hands, I never landed a single blow.
The trouble with martial arts is that it expects the opponent to fight fair.
The economy of motion and the speed of what I saw I've never seen again. They were as if a hammer had landed with each blow. Another guy who used to make smart cracks to the old boxer never did again and called him Mr. Joe after that day.