martial arts question

[DrZoidberg]

Something like Jiu Jutsu is better if you don't. But Jiu Jutsu is pretty worthless if you're up against more than one or the guy has a weapon.

Mixed Martial Arts solved that particular problem in the 90's by adding kickboxing to Brazilian Jiu Jitsu.

As far as weapon defence is concerned, several martial arts, including some schools of jujutsu, train in practical counters, which are mostly based on simple principles: dodge the weapon, unbalance (or stun) the attacker, disable the attacker, then disarm them.

Lol. I've trained all those techniques. Still wouldn't use them. If the guy has a knife, doesn't take much of a fuck-up for me to lose... my life. Nah, if a guy comes at me with a knife and I don't have something I can use as a stick handy, no way am I putting up a fight. I should also add, I have been in a fight against a guy with a knife. I was unarmed and he wasn't. I didn't win. I've got four not pretty scars across my arms to prove it. It's a question of leverage. When the lever is short, you're quicker. You've got to be lighting fast to outmaneuver (with your arms and legs) a guy with a knife. You need to shift your whole body around to get in behind the knife. All he needs to do to counter any shit you try is to angle his wrist slightly. Good luck with that.

Mixed martial arts isn't a technique. Mixed martial arts just means you train more than one technique in parallel. The idea is to combat technique inbreeding. Problems that Karate, Wushu and Tae Kwondo all face. Those practitioners might be world champions and might still get their asses kicked by someone who was a little bit more versatile. Why BJJ and kickboxing are popular combos is because the UFC rules favour those techniques. In other championships, like Pride, it wasn't as obvious it was superior.

 

[bigfield]

Mixed Martial Arts solved that particular problem in the 90's by adding kickboxing to Brazilian Jiu Jitsu.

As far as weapon defence is concerned, several martial arts, including some schools of jujutsu, train in practical counters, which are mostly based on simple principles: dodge the weapon, unbalance (or stun) the attacker, disable the attacker, then disarm them.

Lol. I've trained all those techniques. Still wouldn't use them. If the guy has a knife, doesn't take much of a fuck-up for me to lose... my life. Nah, if a guy comes at me with a knife and I don't have something I can use as a stick handy, no way am I putting up a fight. I should also add, I have been in a fight against a guy with a knife. I was unarmed and he wasn't. I didn't win. I've got four not pretty scars across my arms to prove it. It's a question of leverage. When the lever is short, you're quicker. You've got to be lighting fast to outmaneuver (with your arms and legs) a guy with a knife. You need to shift your whole body around to get in behind the knife. All he needs to do to counter any shit you try is to angle his wrist slightly. Good luck with that.

This highlights a problem with anecdotes and why they are not good evidence. If someone tries to stab you then you may not have a choice but to defend yourself. You can't generalise one incident to all possible confrontations. A cut to the arm is an acceptable injury if it was necessary to stop the attacker from sticking the knife into a vital area, but since you haven't provided all of the facts I can't possibly judge things such as your skill level or the necessary course of action.

There are professions were one does not have the ability to disengage, such as police and security; their job is to protect other people, which includes subduing armed attackers. While they make this task easier by wearing armour and carrying weapons, they also need to be able to fall back on unarmed techniques, which are techniques found in various martial arts.

Mixed martial arts isn't a technique. Mixed martial arts just means you train more than one technique in parallel. The idea is to combat technique inbreeding. Problems that Karate, Wushu and Tae Kwondo all face. Those practitioners might be world champions and might still get their asses kicked by someone who was a little bit more versatile. Why BJJ and kickboxing are popular combos is because the UFC rules favour those techniques. In other championships, like Pride, it wasn't as obvious it was superior.

All that is irrelevant--the point is that MMA solved a problem in BJJ: the ability to fight without protracted grappling.

Karate, wushu and taekwondo are budo; nothing more than an athletic activity based upon unarmed combat. Karate, for instance, was developed as PE for children before it was exported to Japan, USA etc. and marketed to young adult men. The difficult and impractical stances, the cryptic kata, and the military format of classes are all evidence of that genesis.

 

[DrZoidberg]

This highlights a problem with anecdotes and why they are not good evidence. If someone tries to stab you then you may not have a choice but to defend yourself. You can't generalise that to all situations. A cut to the arm is an acceptable injury if it was necessary to stop the attacker from sticking the knife into a vital area, but since you haven't provided all of the facts I can't possibly judge things such as your skill level or the necessary course of action.

I was 16 at the time. I'd tone Thai boxing for 2 years at that time. Which really didn't help. I was drunk as fuck and it was at night. I literally walked right into it. A guy from a rival gang was picking a fight with a guy from my gang. I walked in between them to try to defuse the situation. It was the wrong judgement call and I hadn't seen that he had a knife. Back then I was good at acting like I'm the king and in control of situations when I wasn't. This was a good example of that. The guy slashed me and I protected myself and backed away as he kept cutting my arms. When I had back out of his reach I turned and run, as did everybody else in my group. I was only wearing a t-shirt at that time. I got home crashed in the living room sofa. The next morning the blood had coagulated and gotten my arms stuck in the fabric sofa. I had to be cut loose. No fun. I went to hospital and got stitched up. The following Monday we cornered the guy who did it and kicked his ass. Endless cycle of violence.

There are professions were one does not have the ability to disengage, such as police and security; their job is to protect other people, which includes subduing armed attackers. While they make this task easier by wearing armour and carrying weapons, they also need to be able to fall back on unarmed techniques, which are techniques found in various martial arts.

But that hardly applies here. Also cops always have a baton to fall back on.

 

[KeepTalking]

Hello,

I do not know any martial arts but was wondering about something about it.

If you do not know martial arts and am confronted by someone who does is there any way you might could beat them in a fight, or at least get them down long enough you can run off.

If the ultimate objective is to get away, then run away first, only fight if you have no choice.

About twenty years ago I was mugged in Dallas. The guy hit me a couple of times and took my wallet. When the cops came and I described the guys two hits he said it sounded like my attacker used some sort of karate.

I read your further description. It sounds like the guy at least had some knowledge of pain points, and how to apply them, at least in this kind of situation. It could have been as simple as someone else spending five minutes to show it to him.

I have always wondered, if that was the case, if there was any way I would have had a chance?

Of course you would have had a chance if you had been aware and fully fit. But why risk it? The guy probably had a weapon, or backup. Once you were in the situation, the best thing to do would have been to hand over your wallet, or at least your cash. Nothing in that wallet was worth your life, was it?

I have training in several forms of martial arts, they all have one thing in common, in certain controlled situations, operating within the rules of sport, they can be very effective at neutralizing an opponent who has no training. A mugging is not a controlled situation, is not a sport, and has no rules. The only thing you can do is to learn how to avoid finding yourself in that situation. Be aware, don't look like a target, don't go places alone. Once you are being actively mugged, your only objective should be to end the encounter quickly and without getting hurt. The best way to assure that happens is to hand over your wallet.

 

[Rhea]

I agree with KeepTalking's points. The main thing I learn in my martial art training that could be intended for every day events is defensive tactics; to block, disentangle and run. We do, however learn some things that are intended for offensive street combat and intended never to be used if possible. But if, for example, I were with my child and I wanted _them_ to get away, I'd use it.

For the record, the reason I train in martial arts is to acquire and maintain flexibility, range of motion and fitness. The fact that I get to do it by kicking and hitting just makes it less tedious and more fun. And telling people I stay fit by kicking my children twice a week amuses me. I agree that willingness to injure becomes an equalizer even against a trained person.

I would echo the street smarts as the answer to your question, though. What could you have done differently? Learning signs to begin the get-away sooner in the encounter. Probably some blocking technique to minimize injury and enhance get-away. And in the end, relinquish anything that will end the encounter with you safe.

 

[Lion IRC]

...This incident has bothered this poster for quite some time. I know other people who have been mugged that seem to carry the negative effects of it for a while. But rather than help make sense of the situation, you seem to be trying to change the subject into some kind of nonsense semantic game, which seems to be the only thing you know how to do.

It's not a semantic game to point out that we aren't talking about martial 'art' here. We're talking about the exchange of violence.

By all means, talk to the Op about the nuances of different styles and the basics of keeping a safe distance between yourself and your opponent and situational awareness blah, blah, blah. But that's rather like telling your child to avoid the bullies at school.

...You aren't helping this person. You are just taking yet another opportunity to show off your stale ideas.

My advice to the Op would be the same as yours - step back and maintain a safe distance and remember it's all about footwork. Then when they attack, step back and maintain a safe distance. And when they swing a punch be sure to duck.

 

[Sarpedon]

Yes, a marital art isn't an art. And a ladybird isn't a bird. A silverfish is not a fish. The Temple Mount is not a Mountain. The Pope isn't anyone's father. The Kingdom of Hungary from 1920-1944 didn't have a king, but was ruled by an admiral, despite being landlocked. The world is full of things that are not actually what they are called. What the hell is your point?

The fact that so many things are not what they are called is one of the many reasons I detest semantic arguments.

And as unhelpful as my postings on this subject may be, they have the virtue of having actually answered the questions, unlike whatever it is you are doing.

 

[fast]

You're always better off handing over the wallet. You've got insurance, and if they're desperate enough to mug you then they'd be desperate enough to hurt you. No wallet is worth dying for.

I'm better off when the street is flowing crimson red. Statistically, you might stand a better chance of a safer outcome by giving in to the demands of a mugger, but your chances will be greater if he comes across my path first. I will not judge you as a scared little school girl when you acquiesce to the threats of a mugger, but I will defend my right to live when confronted with threat of life. I ought never be chastised for my choice because of statistical chance.

If you and your daughter are mugged, and if you make the statistically superior decision (merely for statistics sake) and your daughter dies, then I will not be inviting you over for a BBQ cook out. If you genuinely feel you made the right choice at the time, that's one thing (you did what you thought was best at the time), but if your choice is already made despite whatever situation might so happen to arise, then put me in the camp of those that blame the victim. I can live with a wallet taken, but if my choice must already exclude a willingness to fight (be it for a loved one or an ability to live with myself), then we can't eat at the same table.

 

[bigfield]

I was 16 at the time. I'd tone Thai boxing for 2 years at that time. Which really didn't help. I was drunk as fuck and it was at night. I literally walked right into it. A guy from a rival gang was picking a fight with a guy from my gang. I walked in between them to try to defuse the situation. It was the wrong judgement call and I hadn't seen that he had a knife. Back then I was good at acting like I'm the king and in control of situations when I wasn't. This was a good example of that. The guy slashed me and I protected myself and backed away as he kept cutting my arms. When I had back out of his reach I turned and run, as did everybody else in my group. I was only wearing a t-shirt at that time. I got home crashed in the living room sofa. The next morning the blood had coagulated and gotten my arms stuck in the fabric sofa. I had to be cut loose. No fun. I went to hospital and got stitched up. The following Monday we cornered the guy who did it and kicked his ass. Endless cycle of violence.

Well, apart from the fact that Thai boxing doesn't prepare one for that kind of situation, the fact that you were drunk probably made it irrelevant anyway. A friend of mine once tried to teep me when a party got a little too drunk and disorderly; he caught me right in the bladder but he fell on his ass and gave himself a concussion.

There are professions were one does not have the ability to disengage, such as police and security; their job is to protect other people, which includes subduing armed attackers. While they make this task easier by wearing armour and carrying weapons, they also need to be able to fall back on unarmed techniques, which are techniques found in various martial arts.

But that hardly applies here. Also cops always have a baton to fall back on.

Assuming that they belong to a police force that carries batons.

 

[Lion IRC]

Yes, a marital art isn't an art....

That's all you had to say.

That's the point I was making when you rudely went out of your way and tried to smack down my post as "unhelpful".

Why not let the Op decide what's helpful^TM or not and let the Op decide if they want to make the effort (as you have) to go around telling posters who is and isn't helpful.

IOW - step off and check your anti-theist aggro bags at the door.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Assuming that they belong to a police force that carries batons.

I think they've all got one or another. The Swedish police all have telescopic batons. Even plain clothes police have them. When folded they're tiny, but pack a hell of a punch.

 

[DrZoidberg]

You're always better off handing over the wallet. You've got insurance, and if they're desperate enough to mug you then they'd be desperate enough to hurt you. No wallet is worth dying for.

I'm better off when the street is flowing crimson red. Statistically, you might stand a better chance of a safer outcome by giving in to the demands of a mugger, but your chances will be greater if he comes across my path first. I will not judge you as a scared little school girl when you acquiesce to the threats of a mugger, but I will defend my right to live when confronted with threat of life. I ought never be chastised for my choice because of statistical chance.

If you and your daughter are mugged, and if you make the statistically superior decision (merely for statistics sake) and your daughter dies, then I will not be inviting you over for a BBQ cook out. If you genuinely feel you made the right choice at the time, that's one thing (you did what you thought was best at the time), but if your choice is already made despite whatever situation might so happen to arise, then put me in the camp of those that blame the victim. I can live with a wallet taken, but if my choice must already exclude a willingness to fight (be it for a loved one or an ability to live with myself), then we can't eat at the same table.

Why would they kill my (hypothetical daughter)? Why would a mugger hurt me if he's got what he wants?

 

[bigfield]

Assuming that they belong to a police force that carries batons.

I think they've all got one or another. The Swedish police all have telescopic batons. Even plain clothes police have them. When folded they're tiny, but pack a hell of a punch.

I can't say I've ever seen a police officer draw their baton, but I have seen several officers grappling with belligerent drunk young men in the nightclub district. That's evident they have a need to be able to subdue people without using weapons. I also suspect that they would consider a baton to be excessive use of force in many cases.

One can learn a lot simply by watching the police:

Police are trained in shoulder and wrist manipulations, the most common ones I've seen being the hammerlock and the reverse arm entanglement; these techniques are useful for anyone dealing with a belligerent drunk or a threatening and aggressive person.

The police also demonstrate situational awareness; they pay attention to their surroundings, identify threatening behaviour and control the distance between themselves and the possible threats; that is how one avoids (as best as it is possible) a king hit. Such tactics are more important than having good technique. Budo schools and boxing gyms are unlikely to teach such tactics.

Police also avoid the posturing behaviour that is part of the pre-fight posturing ritual that men engage in. They aren't there to look intimidating or to gain status; they are there to diffuse a violent situation. Many men could avoid fights simply by having some presence of mind.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I think they've all got one or another. The Swedish police all have telescopic batons. Even plain clothes police have them. When folded they're tiny, but pack a hell of a punch.

I can't say I've ever seen a police officer draw their baton, but I have seen several officers grappling with belligerent drunk young men in the nightclub district. That's evident they have a need to be able to subdue people without using weapons. I also suspect that they would consider a baton to be excessive use of force in many cases.

One can learn a lot simply by watching the police:

Police are trained in shoulder and wrist manipulations, the most common ones I've seen being the hammerlock and the reverse arm entanglement; these techniques are useful for anyone dealing with a belligerent drunk or a threatening and aggressive person.

The police also demonstrate situational awareness; they pay attention to their surroundings, identify threatening behaviour and control the distance between themselves and the possible threats; that is how one avoids (as best as it is possible) a king hit. Such tactics are more important than having good technique. Budo schools and boxing gyms are unlikely to teach such tactics.

Police also avoid the posturing behaviour that is part of the pre-fight posturing ritual that men engage in. They aren't there to look intimidating or to gain status; they are there to diffuse a violent situation. Many men could avoid fights simply by having some presence of mind.

Or do it like the Norwegian cops do. Just talk to them

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byE5HAdWAuE

 

[Sarpedon]

a baton can also be used as a lever to move people around, or as a shield, or a distancing device. You don't need to strike people with it to use it effectively.

 

[Rhea]

Why would they kill my (hypothetical daughter)? Why would a mugger hurt me if he's got what he wants?

Because mugging is not the only crime you will encounter. There was a case of a mother and a 10yo daughter dragged into a van in a mall parking lot (not clickbait, actual case). The man wanted to rape the daughter. Well, he planned to rape both, and he did. The mother fought him until she died, but it allowed the daughter escape the van. Like that.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Why would they kill my (hypothetical daughter)? Why would a mugger hurt me if he's got what he wants?

Because mugging is not the only crime you will encounter. There was a case of a mother and a 10yo daughter dragged into a van in a mall parking lot (not clickbait, actual case). The man wanted to rape the daughter. Well, he planned to rape both, and he did. The mother fought him until she died, but it allowed the daughter escape the van. Like that.

I would explore my options given any situation. If I wouldn't be able to see a viable option then I wouldn't even try. That's martial arts. It's like chess. Nobody just makes a move. Everybody always has a well rehearsed plan for every move. As soon as you make a move you inform your opponent of your weaknesses. Hide them as long as possible. Best way to hide them is to keep cool until the moment when you spring your trap. But the best option is nearly always not to put up a fight.