Is street fighting the missing link?
Original Poster: Elitexboxer
Forum: Hand to Hand Combat
Posted On: 02-05-2007, 19:32
Orginal Post: Elitexboxer: Ive recently learned that some of the worlds gratest martial artists have had some kind of streetfighting experience like bruce lee,mas oyama,Choku Matobu,ect. I was wondering if perhaps street fighting is the best (and most dangerous) method of preparing for real combat.
Just looking for opinions.
Post: dscott:
Just my opinion but "street fighting" will train your mind more than anything. It'll train you to be prepared for what it feels like to get hit and hit someone back. I don't think that you can excel unless you have some sort of training other than just getting into fights on the street.>
Post: WushuPadawan001:
How is a “street fight” different from “real combat?”>
Post: Elitexboxer:
[quote=WushuPadawan001 How is a “street fight” different from “real combat?”[/quote
I didn't want to say "street fighting is the only training for streetfighting" I thout it would sound wierd.
"Just my opinion but "street fighting" will train your mind more than anything. It'll train you to be prepared for what it feels like to get hit and hit someone back. I don't think that you can excel unless you have some sort of training other than just getting into fights on the street."
Then maybe that training could come from anywere. including the most riticuled dojos.as long as one could theoretically back it up with real experience on the street. Dont get me wrong,I don't intend to get my ear bitten of in a training session 8O>
Post: Tease T Tickle:
streetfighting trains you for one thing and one thing only: pain tolerance. Most street fights do not last long enough for you to "train" anything regarding your technique or strategy. Since the whole fight will be enveloped in the adrenaline dump, your "mental training" will amount to little more than conditioning certain responses, which you can do with full contact sparring in safe conditions.
The one thing that training centers typically do not provide (although I've heard of Systema gyms defying this rule) is an old fashioned ass whooping. No matter how many times you step into a ring, you will never catch a beating like you do when you get ghetto stomped by four drunk Mexicans in the parking lot of an after-hours club. So, if and when you get into a real fight, trust that the only thing you'll be accomplishing is getting used to getting hurt.>
Post: Elitexboxer:
[quote=Tease T Tickle streetfighting trains you for one thing and one thing only: pain tolerance. Most street fights do not last long enough for you to "train" anything regarding your technique or strategy. Since the whole fight will be enveloped in the adrenaline dump, your "mental training" will amount to little more than conditioning certain responses, which you can do with full contact sparring in safe conditions.
The one thing that training centers typically do not provide (although I've heard of Systema gyms defying this rule) is an old fashioned ass whooping. No matter how many times you step into a ring, you will never catch a beating like you do when you get ghetto stomped by four drunk Mexicans in the parking lot of an after-hours club. So, if and when you get into a real fight, trust that the only thing you'll be accomplishing is getting used to getting hurt.[/quote
And how do Systema gyms defy this rule?>
Post: Tease T Tickle:
I've seen video of and heard testimonies of Systema studios using a drill where one student lays on the mat and the other students stomp and kick at him. The drill is actually to develop ground movement skills and teach you to get out of that bad position, but obviously it also has the consequence of beating the hell out of you and thus works very similarly to a real street fight.>
Post: Headcrab:
OMG,! Sign me up!!>
Post: Elitexboxer:
[quote=Tease T Tickle I've seen video of and heard testimonies of Systema studios using a drill where one student lays on the mat and the other students stomp and kick at him. The drill is actually to develop ground movement skills and teach you to get out of that bad position, but obviously it also has the consequence of beating the hell out of you and thus works very similarly to a real street fight.[/quote
:P Something I'll try on training parteners :lol:
Do they allow bareknuckle fighting in Systema?>
Post: Tease T Tickle:
i don't know. I don't train Systema. By the way, you're a fucking moron.>
Post: Elitexboxer:
[quote=Tease T Tickle i don't know. I don't train Systema. By the way, you're a fucking moron.[/quote
And you're a fucking queer.>
Post: angryrocker4:
Why does homosexuality always have to be used in a derogatory manner? The best people I know are pagans, homo's, satanists, pot heads, roiders, and other "derelects". Its these law abiding, god fearin "citezens" I'm worried about.>
Post: bamboo:
We fear what we are afraid of most in ourselves.
Thats why I'm terrified of gainfully employed handsome geniuses.
-bamboo>
Post: angryrocker4:
So I'm scared I'm a circus clown? :?>
Post: Tease T Tickle:
[quote=Elitexboxer [quote=Tease T Tickle i don't know. I don't train Systema. By the way, you're a fucking moron.[/quote
And you're a fucking queer.[/quote
Let me spell this out for you, champ. Don't worry, I'll use small words and simple grammar.
Smart people avoid fights. Getting into fights out in the street, at the bar, or in any other public environment is a good way to get shot, stabbed or beaten to death by the guy you picked a fight with or his friends. If you really like to hurt people, then we won't talk to you because when you get arrested and tell the cops or the court that we gave you tips on how to bust heads out in the real world, we get sued.
On the other hand, if you like fighting and want to do so without getting yourself or anyone else in trouble, you can enter training and fight in safe, legal matches of skill. In these sorts of matches, you will never face more than one person on your own, and you will not take the kind of beating that the Latin Kings will put on you when you give their girl the wrong look. So, training for those sorts of situations is not only pointless, but a good way to get hurt when you don't know what you're doing.
So, when you make posts about how you want to train bareknuckle, a good way to break your own hand, and get all excited about training for the Harlem Hoedown, it makes you look like an idiot who wants to get hurt and then brag about how "tough" you are. We do not respect people with these attitudes, nor do we wish to have them around our forum to mislead our younger members. We host children on this site as young as ten years old. How would you feel if somebody started telling your ten year old child that to be tough they had to go out and beat the crap out of people in the street? If you have any brains at all, you'd be angry because you know that's a good way to get your kid hurt badly, maybe even killed.
So, please, straighten up or shut your mouth.>
Post: darkside05:
owned>
Post: johnny1974:
I,ve been in quite a few street fights and the only thing it proves is that both people do not have the courage to put aside their pride and either walk away or talk their way through the disagreement. When I fought they did not have many sanctioned places to fight otherwise I probably would have done that. I just had a hair trigger temper and although I almost never actually "started them" had I been a little more calm and composed I could have walked away from most of them. Their are enough training facilities that can address your need to fight so that you do not have to look for them. Keep one thing in mind. In a street fight you are responsible for injuries your opponent sustains and if your training allows you to win most street fights how does that make you a man to pick a fight with a person with no traing. That sounds like a form of bullying to me. When I fought I was not aware of the damage chokes and locks could inflict. If you are going to pick a fight do it legally in an mma event with someone who is bigger and more well trained than you so that if you lose at least you will have learned to fight bigger guys and if you win you can truly feel good about your accomplishment knowing that it was not an unsuspecting joe public you fought but a well trained athlete.>
Post: Bloodybirds:
Amen Johnny!! I have been in a few street fights when I was younger, and it was usually based upon the assumption that my size left me vulnerable to attack....then, especially under my Shaolin master, who trained us the old way and use to have circles with the student in the middle or the instructor in the middle fighting multiple opponents or, in one case, I had to fight him all padded up for almost 4 hours while he proceeded to fight me the old way. I learned quickly about pain but more importantly, learned to carry myself differently on the street. As someone about 5' 4" and 150 pounds, NB, Stas, and others will tell you I learned the kung fu and tai chi art of rooting and using mass x acceleration x rooting x foot movement to learn power. But the best thing I learned, and totally agree with Tease and Johnny, is what my Ying Jow master said to me once...."By running I preserve my opponent's like." These days, the only street fighting justification to me is if one is trying to harm my wife or children, or a member of my family. I also, at 48, avoid all places that are known to be places for drunkenness, drugs, fighting, shooting, etc.....if I want to go party, it is at someone's house or my own. I do not invite trouble....soooo, kiddos, avoid the fight at all costs....once you become proficient in the martial arts, if learned properly, one does not need to succumb to name calling or proof of manhood, one already knows how "baddd" one is without having to prove it....LOL.>
Post: Bloodybirds:
Sorry, that is life not like....fingers not working after working out and waiting for dinner to finish with wifey. Thanks for your kind understanding, young folk!!!>
Post: johnny1974:
Sorry it took so long to respond but you have some excellent points. I am the same way in that I don't go to bars or place where people who might like to be are. I grew up in a very rough neighborhood but there were kids in my neighborhood who did not get into trouble because they made freinds with people who did not encourage violence and they did not look for it. If someone wants to find trouble they can find it in any walk of life whether rich or poor.>
Post: Gazelle:
A well done to tease.
[quote=bamboo We fear what we are afraid of most in ourselves.
Thats why I'm terrified of gainfully employed handsome geniuses.
-bamboo[/quote
Very slick.>
Post: bamboo:
Hee hee, thank you gazelle. :wink:>
Post: Bloodybirds:
Great Bamboo. But what about those like me who are neither handsome nor a genius, but are gainfully employed, or handsome, stupid, and employed.....I feel like there are some slights here!!! Fine then....Bamboo...how would you categorize yourself!! I guess that makes Gazelle pretty, very smart, and a student....so gainfully unemployed but happy about it?! Jeez, I hate being stereotyped....hey, except for genetics, I could be handsome and a genius too!!! 8) 8)>
Post: Bloodybirds:
I always had dreams as a kid about being able to fly and never being able to land.....I think that is why eagle claw, white crane, nine birds, all the bird styles appealed to me.....taught me how to land!!! Just an observation based upon Bamboo's comments!!>
Post: Gazelle:
[quote=Bloodybirds Great Bamboo. But what about those like me who are neither handsome nor a genius, but are gainfully employed, or handsome, stupid, and employed.....I feel like there are some slights here!!! Fine then....Bamboo...how would you categorize yourself!! I guess that makes Gazelle pretty, very smart, and a student....so gainfully unemployed but happy about it?! Jeez, I hate being stereotyped....hey, except for genetics, I could be handsome and a genius too!!! 8) 8)[/quote
Thank you, bloodybirds, how very sweet.
See, getting better at the compliment thing now. :wink:
I have to admit, stereotyping has always been something that gets me.
What do you mean, 'taught me how to land'?>
Post: CFANico:
Howdy! I'm brand new on this forum, and this is my first post. You guys make some really great points about what street fighting teaches you. In my opinion, if you're in enough street fights you definitely learn some pain tolerance, and you also will eventually become good at doing what you're practicing, which is street fighting. But what is street fighting? Street fighting is an uncoordinated, adrenaline-fueled brawl between two thugs who aren't afraid to thrash it out and don't pull any punches. It's part slugfest and part wrestling match. When it comes to technique, street fighting is about as sophisticated as dog fighting.
But it's ruthless, and that's why a street fighter is so dangerous. His strategy is to let loose with everything he has, as that's what he's learned to do to succeed.
You can, however, train to defend yourself against a street fighter. Your technique can be built such that you can survive the onslaught and defeat the aggressor. You will have to throw away a lot of the traditional techniques that many martial arts employ that just aren't designed to handle that kind of situation, however. Say goodbye to hip-punches and high-line kicks, for example.
There's an article on the subject I read recently with a lot of awesome tips on the subject [URL="http://www.sammyfranco.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Store_Code=sammyfranco&Screen=streetfightingarticle" here.[/URL
What do you guys think about training to defeat a street thug?>
Post: zefff:
I think that to presume what a streetfight is and what a thugs capabilities are is foolish. LMFAO @ the concept of a streetfight! WTF is a streetfight? :rolleyes:
Like someone said many times on here already, "if you find yourself in a fight having to physically defend yourself, you already messed up.">
Post: nbotary:
I think if you want to advertise your webpage and peddle what your selling, it needs to be done in the appropriate forum thread...
First off, welcome to our forum. It appears that you have some credentials to back up what you say. It's always refreshing as we often get know-it-all's on here that like to talk out of their ass and don't have the sense to back up their opinions with anything intelligent.
As for the artilce, personally, I don't buy it. It amazes me how someone will write up "tips" that are generally common sense and should be taught as basic fundamentals in ANY self-defense class and claim that these are "key secrets". Please, don't insult my intelligience by trying to say you've mastered or discovered the "secret" to winning a fight.
From the looks of your webpage, you've been pretty successful with your approach. However, nothing is more insulting to me than someone saying they have "developed a system that really works" without stating where that "system" was learned or what "system" it's based off of. My favorite is the vague response of "various martial arts systems" that everyone replies with. Odds are it's an amalgamation of Karate, TKD, Aikido, Krav Maga, Muay Thai, Jiu-Jitsu, etc. What SPECIFIC art did this "new system" originate from???
Fighting is one of the most basic and primitive responses known to man as it's tied into the survival response. But, it's also a voluntary action. Either you like to fight or you don't. My guess is that the majority of the population doesn't like to fight. However, if you throw someone who doesn't like or know how to fight into a life threatening situation, the survival instinct will kick in and you will be certain to see them put up a "fight" of some sort - especially if it's for their life. Whether they win or lose will be irrelevant.
I do agree with you on some of the points you made. However, you can't "practice" street fighting. You either know how to fight, or you don't. You either know how to defend yourself or you don't. There is no in-between. Even basic knowledge of self defence - whether learned and trained or not - is still knowledge. I've probably forgotten quite a few of the techniques I've learned over the years, but I'm confident enough in what I've learned that, if put in a confrontation, I'm going to be able to take care of myself.
In any event, that's my opinion on the matter. It's not meant as a slam on you or your system, it's just an opinion on the subject. After all, this is a forum and not everyone will agree with everyone else.
Again, welcome to our forum. I look forward to reading your contributions.>
Post: Triple T:
Let me address the article you linked since your post itself was completely devoid of anything worth discussing.
Quote: 1. DON'T BLINK WHEN STREET FIGHTING...
2. BREATH WHEN STREET FIGHTING. ...
3. DON'T JUDGE HIS ABILITIES WHEN STREET FIGHTING...
4. AVOID USING FLEXIBLE WEAPONS WHEN STREET FIGHTING. ...
5. ANGLE YOUR CHIN WHEN STREET FIGHTING...
6. PROTECT YOUR CENTERLINE WHEN STREET FIGHTING...
7. KEEP BOTH OF YOUR HANDS UP WHEN STREET FIGHTING. ...
8. KNOW THE THREE TARGET ZONES TO ATTACK WHEN STREET FIGHTING...
9. KNOW THE THREE RANGES OF UNARMED STREET FIGHTING...
10. MAINTAIN PROPER WEIGHT DISTRIBUTION WHEN STREET FIGHTING...
11. KNOW WHERE TO LOOK WHEN STREET FIGHTING...
12. DON'T TELEGRAPH YOUR INTENTIONS WHEN STREET FIGHTING...
13. MASTER THE SEVEN COMPONENTS OF STREET FIGHTING DEFENSE. (1) Distance ; (2) Stance (3) Mobility (4) Blocking (5) Parrying (6) Evading (7) Attacking ...
14. KNOW THE CHARACTERISTICS OF STREET FIGHTING...
15. MASTER YOUR STREET FIGHTING BODY WEAPONS...
16. STRIKE FIRST BEFORE STREET FIGHTING...
17. THE STREET FIGHTING AFTERMATH AND THE POLICE...
18. STREET FIGHTING IS NOT THE SAME AS SUBMISSION FIGHTING...
1. yeah right. If you're busy concentrating on a one-man staring contest, you'll probably miss more than if you just let your eyes do what they want to do.
2. Proper breathing during any kind of a fight is part of just about every martial art's training.
3. While this section was phrased oddly, nobody should ever underestimate any opponent. It's just not smart.
4. flexible weapons suck period. The only place they may have is a solo demonstration in a wu shu competition.
5. tucking your chin is a basic principle of any combative art. Everyone knows to do this and the street fight is not special.
6. While not exactly universal, the centerline theory and similar ideas are pretty common. And once again, the street fight is not special.
7. If you fight with your hands down, you deserve to get hit. If you need to read an article to know to defend your head, you deserve to get hit.
8. As a concept, these target zones have nothing to do with street fights. As a concept, it's a fine enough idea. As a concept, it determines very little about execution.
9. See #8 above.
10. Weight distribution in a stance is not nearly as important as people think. First, power generation does not require any specific weight distribution. Second, if you ask any physicist about equilibrium, they'll let you know that velocity increases equilibrium - like a gyroscope. Third, you shouldn't be standing still ever.
11. Where to look? Like during a fight I'm going to be window shopping? Fuck you.
12. See #8 above.
13. See # 8 above.
14. A street fight is not special. It shares many characteristics with other types of fights, like a Vale Tudo match or a tiger taking down a wildebeast. Besides, these characteristics doesn't tell us anything about execution. Calling a fight brutal doesn't tell me that I can or cannot pull off a roundhouse to the ribs.
15. These weapons are not unique to street fights and everyone should master their natural capabilities.
16. So that when the cops do show up, you get arrested for assault and your opponent claims self-defense? You're fucking idiotic.
17. Now we're talking. If the cops get called or patrol by on your little fight, they will not hesitate to arrest all parties involved. Even if your case is legitimate self defense, there is a good chance that your assailant will claim the same and you will be charged with assault. Unless you can produce witnesses (which your opponent will be able to as well) or other evidence that you were protecting yourself, the person with the lesser injuries is generally considered the victim. If you're a good fighter, you'll probably get into legal trouble.
18. While I generally do not condone the use of groundfighting or other mobility-reducing techniques in a real fight, the idea that submission holds are worthless is quite extreme. Without consideration for a submission, the same techniques destroy your opponent's body, tearing connective tissue and muscle, dislocating or breaking bones, and then there are chokes. Imagine what those do when you don't stop for the tap out. If you're skilled at submission fighting and the situation is such that you're not put into too much danger by hitting the ground, go ahead and shred some joints.>
Post: The BadBoy:
LMAO, I wasn't gonna waste my time with this so I'll just say what he ^^ said.>
Post: bamboo:
First off- Welcome Cfanico.
"What do you guys think about training to defeat a street thug?"
I think you could be doing more positive things with your life than living a paranoid life of false confidence. You can't prepare for a nuclear attack either but then paranoia is billion dollar industry.
If you get into street fight, it happens its done. You cannot prepare for a real street fight simply because they don't happen in any uniform manner.
-bamboo>
Post: CFANico:
Hey, wow! I never thought I'd get so many responses so quickly. Whether you agree with me or not, I appreciate your responses. A couple of guys here obviously don't understand that it's possible to disagree with something without insulting the person saying it or otherwise becoming abusive, but that's cool. They really just make fools of themselves, as I'm sure the rest of you, more mature individuals would agree.
I'm going to work backwards in my responses if you don't mind
Quoting: bamboo;48684 First off- Welcome Cfanico.
"What do you guys think about training to defeat a street thug?"
I think you could be doing more positive things with your life than living a paranoid life of false confidence. You can't prepare for a nuclear attack either but then paranoia is billion dollar industry.
If you get into street fight, it happens its done. You cannot prepare for a real street fight simply because they don't happen in any uniform manner.
-bamboo
Thanks for the welcome, bamboo! But why is it after one single post you think you understand anything about how I live my life? That's kind of rude, don't you think? I do not, in fact, live a life of paranoia or of false confidence. It's sounds to me like you're generalizing and buying into the stereotype of RBSD practitioners. Do you buy into many stereotypes?
Quoting: Triple T;48677
10. Weight distribution in a stance is not nearly as important as people think. First, power generation does not require any specific weight distribution. Second, if you ask any physicist about equilibrium, they'll let you know that velocity increases equilibrium - like a gyroscope. Third, you shouldn't be standing still ever.
16. So that when the cops do show up, you get arrested for assault and your opponent claims self-defense? You're fucking idiotic.
18. While I generally do not condone the use of groundfighting or other mobility-reducing techniques in a real fight, the idea that submission holds are worthless is quite extreme. Without consideration for a submission, the same techniques destroy your opponent's body, tearing connective tissue and muscle, dislocating or breaking bones, and then there are chokes. Imagine what those do when you don't stop for the tap out. If you're skilled at submission fighting and the situation is such that you're not put into too much danger by hitting the ground, go ahead and shred some joints.
I'm not going to respond to each and every silly point you make Triple T, as you're abusive person who I shouldn't waste my time even acknowledging. There are a couple points that I will comment on, however:
10. The 50-50 weight distribution has nothing to do with power generation. It has to do with mobility. Where did you come up with power generation? Also, the article says nothing about standing still. You make lots of assumptions.
16. Would you prefer to be dead than be arrested for assault? The first strike is for when a confrontation is inevitable. You're still going to let the guy with the knife threatening your life strike first?
18. Why don't you condone the use of groundfighting? What happens when you end up on the ground? I suppose you are hoping that your assailant will take a step back and allow you to stand to face him again, perhaps even give you a hand up. You should read the Submission Fighting Article Sammy mentions. You'll see that he's not against groundfighting, he's against the misconception that submission fighting techniques are all you need in a street fight.
Moving right along, I'll now respond to an actual adult's post.
Quoting: nbotary;48674 1) I think if you want to advertise your webpage and peddle what your selling, it needs to be done in the appropriate forum thread...
2) First off, welcome to our forum. It appears that you have some credentials to back up what you say. It's always refreshing as we often get know-it-all's on here that like to talk out of their ass and don't have the sense to back up their opinions with anything intelligent.
3) As for the artilce, personally, I don't buy it. It amazes me how someone will write up "tips" that are generally common sense and should be taught as basic fundamentals in ANY self-defense class and claim that these are "key secrets". Please, don't insult my intelligience by trying to say you've mastered or discovered the "secret" to winning a fight.
4) From the looks of your webpage, you've been pretty successful with your approach. However, nothing is more insulting to me than someone saying they have "developed a system that really works" without stating where that "system" was learned or what "system" it's based off of. My favorite is the vague response of "various martial arts systems" that everyone replies with. Odds are it's an amalgamation of Karate, TKD, Aikido, Krav Maga, Muay Thai, Jiu-Jitsu, etc. What SPECIFIC art did this "new system" originate from???
Fighting is one of the most basic and primitive responses known to man as it's tied into the survival response. But, it's also a voluntary action. Either you like to fight or you don't. My guess is that the majority of the population doesn't like to fight. However, if you throw someone who doesn't like or know how to fight into a life threatening situation, the survival instinct will kick in and you will be certain to see them put up a "fight" of some sort - especially if it's for their life. Whether they win or lose will be irrelevant.
5) I do agree with you on some of the points you made. However, you can't "practice" street fighting. You either know how to fight, or you don't. You either know how to defend yourself or you don't. There is no in-between. Even basic knowledge of self defence - whether learned and trained or not - is still knowledge. I've probably forgotten quite a few of the techniques I've learned over the years, but I'm confident enough in what I've learned that, if put in a confrontation, I'm going to be able to take care of myself.
6) In any event, that's my opinion on the matter. It's not meant as a slam on you or your system, it's just an opinion on the subject. After all, this is a forum and not everyone will agree with everyone else.
Again, welcome to our forum. I look forward to reading your contributions.
nbotary, I added some numbers up there so you know what I'm responding to directly:
1) It's not an advertisement. I'm not selling anything. I'm a student. My name is Nico. Not Sammy Franco. Sammy Franco is my teacher.
2) Thanks for the welcome!
3) There's a lot of "common sense" out there sure. But every point in the article is something I believe is valid, and I honestly don't believe that everything the article teaches is taught in all self-defense schools. It's not all common knowledge, and it disagrees with many things that are taught in other schools. Please keep in mind that the audience isn't just martial arts practitioners, but laymen who've never studied anything before.
4) Do you have a problem with the fact that Morihei Ueshiba developed his own system? Do you question what systems he drew upon to develop it, or do you accept aikido as its own entity, and it judge it for what it is? All these systems started somewhere. In my opinion, you really shouldn't care about a system's routes. Judge the system for itself. You don't judge a child for his parents. Innovation is possible in its own right, and it doesn't have to be just an amalgamation of previous innovations.
5) You can practice street fighting, actually. Gang members do all the time. We're not gang members, though. So we train ourselves focusing on what you will encounter in a street fight.
6) Thanks very much for your maturity. I, too, only have opinions, and when I disagree with you I mean no disrespect. Hopefully others will learn from our example.
Finally, I don't even know what to say to you zefff. It is possible to define a streetfight. You can't know exactly what's going to happen, but that's part of the definition. You can also define a street thug. There are lots of them. You can't know for sure their capabilities but you can do your best to cover all the bases.>
Post: zefff:
Thanks for having the decency to read and reply to your critics. That shows a good spirit IMHO. I wont address your responses to other people, just my bit but I appreciate the effort you put into your responses.
Quoting: CFANico;48701 Finally, I don't even know what to say to you zefff. It is possible to define a streetfight. You can't know exactly what's going to happen, but that's part of the definition.
So it can be defined by its nature which is undefinable? Hmmm...???...I notice you didnt provide your definition. Could it include criteria like motivations, methods and objectives of the attacker? Does it include concise disassociation and classification of the parties involved in given situations? Etc, etc. Forgive me I didnt read the article but what Im getting at is that by strictly defining threats and situations and thus, narrowing your responses and much more importantly, your dynamic thinking, and creativity - you will find yourself at a disadvantage when you eventually place yourself in the situation you have envisaged for years prior because of obsolete, stagnant strategy. Not all thugs are stupid, not all thugs fight physically, not all thugs present a percievable target and not all thugs are actual thugs: meaning that not all enemies are unknown, foreign threats. That 'thug' could be a police officer, a crazy old bum, your brother, your co-worker etc, etc!
Im not even going to bother going on about the 'streets' scenario. How many times a week do you find yourself in that dark alley?
Quoting: CFANico;48701 You can also define a street thug. There are lots of them. You can't know for sure their capabilities but you can do your best to cover all the bases.
There are lots of stupid people, not to say that you are one of them but fear and dim thinking is contagious amoungst cattle.
So what might be the optimum defence against the definative street thug in your opinion?
I also find it interesting that street thugs rank so highly on the 'potential threats to health' list. Lets contemplate that and consider what that might say about 'our' thoughts.
peace>
Post: bamboo:
Hi CF,
I don't assume to know anything about how you live your life, I'm writing about the website your referring to.
I do believe that the vast majority of RBSD are based on paranoia and public fear of street thugs and fights. They feed into that fear and profit off of it.
This is the reason for my statement, its a general "you" and not you personal.
I don't buy into stereotypes but the webpage you presented certainly used all the grappling, "street scary" tactic stereotypes available to sell the product. I found this to be offensive to any rational thinking person.
-bamboo>
Post: nbotary:
It's about damn time we had a good 'ol fashioned knock down, drag out debate!!! LET'S GET IT ON!!! ;)
CFANico - I apologize for making the assumption that you were Sammy and not just a student a his. Your initial post wasn't clear in the determining which you were.
The following are in regards to your responses...
3. I said common sense - not common knowledge. There is a difference here. Common sense is an instinct based upon previous experiences and is not something you can teach. Common knowledge on the other hand, are lessons based upon experiences that you can teach by using examples. I see and understand the point you were trying to make, but be careful not to criss-cross or mix words when citing a quote on here. It opens you up to a whole can of worms you may regret having opened.
4. I have absolutely no problem with the fact that Morihei Ueshiba developed his own system. However, you also must recognize that he developed it based upon another system. Ueshiba learned Daitō-ryū aiki-jūjutsu and applied his philosophy and previous martial arts knowledge to develop the Aikido system we know today. The problem that I have is when somebody takes a few different martial arts classes here and there and then claims to have developed this great, grand and wonderful "new" system. Sure, he may be great with a few techniques, but put them in a situation against someone who has mastered those same techniques as well as all the other techniques in that style and see what happens. One of the instructors in my class has his black belt in Aikido and is taking Long Fist Kung Fu. He also works out with some MMA guys from time to time. He has enough knowledge and experience to truly practice the JKD philosophy. BUT, he will be the first to tell you that he's not doing anything "new" I could really care less if the kicks you're teaching me came from TKD, the grappling is from Jujitsu and hands are from Wing Chun. All I ask is that you acknowledge it so I can know where it came from. To sum this point up, I just have a real problem with someone not acknowledging their formal background/training and claiming to have "developed" something new. By definition, if it was really "new", then it never existed before.
5. Gangs and the members that form them are stupid to begin with. I find it ironic that they would actually "practice" street-fighting when all I hear on the news is how someone was shot and killed in a gang related drive-by. You'd think that with all that "practice" they could back up their punk bitch little mouths with their fists instead of a 9mm. For the record, being a parent, this is where I judge the kids by their parents. I am ultimately responsible for the actions of my children until they reach the age of 18, where in the eyes of the law, they are considered an adult. If they grow up to be little shitheads and a burden on society, then I failed in my responsibility to raise them and be productive members of the human race.
Finally, I'm glad to see that you've come on here with the understanding that not everyone is going to agree and that you can back up your posts with an intellectual response. Too many times, I and other members of this forum, have come down or slammed someone for posting something that comes across us utter bullshit and the response we get is one that you would expect from some punk ass, know-it-all who has the I.Q. of a 4 yr. old.>
Post: Triple T:
Quoting: CFANico;48701 A couple of guys here obviously don't understand that it's possible to disagree with something without insulting the person saying it or otherwise becoming abusive, but that's cool. They really just make fools of themselves, as I'm sure the rest of you, more mature individuals would agree.[/quote
They actually generally appreciate my abusiveness towards morons like you because it saves them the time of having to teach your properly and it allows us to discuss more pertinent matters in that mature fashion we enjoy. By more pertinent matters, I mean just about anything.
Quote: I'm not going to respond to each and every silly point you make Triple T,
Of course not. Because if you read carefully and actually understand the martial arts, you'd know most of my "silly" points are correct.
Quote: as you're abusive person who I shouldn't waste my time even acknowledging.
Odd, then, that you do acknowledge. Save the hyperbole and try pointing out fallacies.
Quote: 10. The 50-50 weight distribution has nothing to do with power generation. It has to do with mobility. Where did you come up with power generation? Also, the article says nothing about standing still. You make lots of assumptions.
1) What is the purpose of a stance? To provide a base for techniques and to root your body so that when receiving your opponent's techniques you don't fall over. Obviously, power generation is important to your offensive techniques. If your stance is improper, you cannot generate power effectively. Talk to any kung fu guy. 2) When do you use a stance? Obviously not when you're moving. So, to discuss a stance is to discuss your body's positioning when not executing a technique or utilizing proper footwork. You should always be moving, so your stance - at best - should be constantly changing, if it exists at all. Assumptions my ass, this is sound principle based out of a multi-millennia tradition of Chinese fighting arts. But I bet that Sammy Franco taught you better. :roll:
Quote: 16. Would you prefer to be dead than be arrested for assault? The first strike is for when a confrontation is inevitable. You're still going to let the guy with the knife threatening your life strike first?
I would rather not be put into this situation at all. Don't believe the hype, you can avoid real fights a lot more easily than people like Franco want you to think. That's why, if you bothered to read any part of this thread, I say things like, "If you're in a street fight, you already messed up." If you're genuinely concerned for your well-being as it relates to street thugs, drunk guys at the bar or even schoolyard bullies, you ought to consider methods of conflict PREVENTION rather than conflict resolution. But then, if people actually thought this way, guys like Franco couldn't make money off selling training that would be sub-par in most McDojos.
Quote: 18. Why don't you condone the use of groundfighting? What happens when you end up on the ground? I suppose you are hoping that your assailant will take a step back and allow you to stand to face him again, perhaps even give you a hand up. You should read the Submission Fighting Article Sammy mentions. You'll see that he's not against groundfighting, he's against the misconception that submission fighting techniques are all you need in a street fight.
1) When you're on the ground, you're getting stomped. Never assume your opponent is alone. 2) When you're on the ground, it is much more difficult to escape the scene. Never assume that your opponent must be "defeated" for you to end the fight. 3) When you're on the ground, the risk of injury increases. Missing a strike means hitting concrete, the proximity makes it harder to be aware of your opponent pulling a concealed weapon, etc. Unless there's a ref, stay on your feet. You're mother will thank me for imparting that advice.
Quote: Moving right along
Good, get the fuck off the forums before some kid who doesn't know what from which reads your regurgitated Sammy Franco bullshit and winds up getting capped because he thought he knew how to handle a real fight. Information, whether right or wrong, is power. With power comes responsibility. Try to remember that.>
Post: CFANico:
Hello again, Gentlemen... and Triple T. Sorry for taking so long to respond to you. Thanks for your responses are very much appreciated. I'll respond in the order that you guys did.
Quoting: zefff;48703 Thanks for having the decency to read and reply to your critics. That shows a good spirit IMHO. I wont address your responses to other people, just my bit but I appreciate the effort you put into your responses.
Likewise, zefff. I welcome the critiques. Had I thought everyone would have agreed with me on this forum I wouldn't have posted here, but instead stuck to my CFA forum, where pretty much everybody does! :-)
Quote: So it can be defined by its nature which is undefinable? Hmmm...???...I notice you didnt provide your definition. Could it include criteria like motivations, methods and objectives of the attacker? Does it include concise disassociation and classification of the parties involved in given situations? Etc, etc. Forgive me I didnt read the article but what Im getting at is that by strictly defining threats and situations and thus, narrowing your responses and much more importantly, your dynamic thinking, and creativity - you will find yourself at a disadvantage when you eventually place yourself in the situation you have envisaged for years prior because of obsolete, stagnant strategy. Not all thugs are stupid, not all thugs fight physically, not all thugs present a percievable target and not all thugs are actual thugs: meaning that not all enemies are unknown, foreign threats. That 'thug' could be a police officer, a crazy old bum, your brother, your co-worker etc, etc!
Thanks for tying me down on that definition. I should have included it in my previous response. Here it is.
Street Fight: a spontaneous and violent confrontation between two or more individuals wherein no rules apply.
That's it. It doesn't include motivations or objectives of the attacker. You can't always know what his motivations are. Maybe he wants to rob you. Maybe he wants to kill you. Maybe he doesn't actually want to fight but you bruised his ego somehow and the altercation can be de-escalated. You say that I'm strictly defining threats and situations. I disagree. I think I'm leaving things wide open. So ultimately, I think we're exactly on the same page.
You're absolutely right about the fact that your assailant could be just about anybody, not necessarily a "thug". I think, however, that among the examples you give of possible assailants, the street thug is the greatest threat. If you can defend yourself against him, then you can defend yourself against the others.
Quote: Im not even going to bother going on about the 'streets' scenario. How many times a week do you find yourself in that dark alley?
Very infrequently do I find myself in a dark alley. I don't usually go down dark alleys unless absolutely necessary. But dark alleys aren't the only places where violent crimes occur. They're not the only place you can be mugged or attacked by someone.
Quote: There are lots of stupid people, not to say that you are one of them but fear and dim thinking is contagious amoungst cattle.
Fear? I'm not afraid. I'm certainly not paranoid. I'm just prepared. I'm not afraid of getting into an accident when I drive to work. I still wear my seatbelt though. There are lots of people out there like that, though, you're right. None of them are in Contemporary Fighting Arts, though.
Quote: So what might be the optimum defence against the definative street thug in your opinion?
Well I can't really answer that here, zefff. My friend and teacher Sammy Franco has published 13 books on the subject. So I think that's kind of outside the scope of this little debate of ours.
I think to sum it up though, you need to be prepared as possible for anything. Any situation, any attack, any number of attackers, any weapons, etc. You obviously can't prepare for each individual possibility specifically, as they're infinite. You can address generalized situations, where the real thing will end up just being a variation on a theme. But one thing I'm sure about, if you want to learn to defend yourself from a real threat and not just from a fellow Traditional Martial Artist, who generally don't mug people anyway, then studying a TMA isn't the answer.
Quote: I also find it interesting that street thugs rank so highly on the 'potential threats to health' list. Lets contemplate that and consider what that might say about 'our' thoughts.
Why learn to defend one's self at all then? You're right again, a lot more people die from heart disease and car accidents than are murdered in the street. Again, I'm not paranoid. I understand that the likelihood I'll be attacked in the street is very low. But I'm still going to be prepared for it, as unlikely as it is. I understand that MAs are about respect and discipline and many other things that I'm sure you'd do a much better job listing off than I. But aren't they also supposed to be about self-defense? Real self-defense, not just tournaments, but self-defense against somebody who actually attacks you in attempt to harm you?
What I've noticed is that a lot of people fall into one of two camps. They're either paranoid, or they're naive. I'm not saying you are naive, but I think where some people overestimate the likelihood of violent crime occurring, other underestimate it. I don't know how you estimate the probabilities, but I strive for the middle road.
Quoting: bamboo;48705 Hi CF,
I don't assume to know anything about how you live your life, I'm writing about the website your referring to.
I do believe that the vast majority of RBSD are based on paranoia and public fear of street thugs and fights. They feed into that fear and profit off of it.
This is the reason for my statement, its a general "you" and not you personal.
I don't buy into stereotypes but the webpage you presented certainly used all the grappling, "street scary" tactic stereotypes available to sell the product. I found this to be offensive to any rational thinking person.
-bamboo
Thank you for qualifying that you weren't referring specifically to me. I agree, there are a lot of RBSD systems out there that are exactly as you say. I do not believe that my system is one of them however. It's also my opinion that the Contemporary Fighting Arts website does not use any such alarmist methods. The information it provides is very serious. But I don't get the impression that it uses any "scare tactics" whatsoever. Take a look at the "CFA Defined" page. http://www.sammyfranco.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=defined
What elements of that page do you find to be alarmist and make use of "scare tactics"?
Now on to nbotary's response in my next post....>
Post: CFANico:
Quoting: nbotary;48719 It's about damn time we had a good 'ol fashioned knock down, drag out debate!!! LET'S GET IT ON!!! ;)
Hell yeah! That's what I'm talking about!
Quote: CFANico - I apologize for making the assumption that you were Sammy and not just a student a his. Your initial post wasn't clear in the determining which you were.
No problem, man. I didn't make that I clear so anybody could have thought the same. There are worse people you could mistake me for.
Quote: 3. I said common sense - not common knowledge. There is a difference here. Common sense is an instinct based upon previous experiences and is not something you can teach. Common knowledge on the other hand, are lessons based upon experiences that you can teach by using examples. I see and understand the point you were trying to make, but be careful not to criss-cross or mix words when citing a quote on here. It opens you up to a whole can of worms you may regret having opened.
Agreed. Though I'm not intimidated by that can of worms you mentioned, I recognize that I misunderstood what you were attempting to say. I still think there's a lot of information in that article that may be common sense to some, but won't be to others. I also think there's information that isn't even common sense, like Sammy's recommendation that you strike first, for example.
Quote: 4. I have absolutely no problem with the fact that Morihei Ueshiba developed his own system. However, you also must recognize that he developed it based upon another system. Ueshiba learned Daitō-ryū aiki-jūjutsu and applied his philosophy and previous martial arts knowledge to develop the Aikido system we know today. The problem that I have is when somebody takes a few different martial arts classes here and there and then claims to have developed this great, grand and wonderful "new" system. Sure, he may be great with a few techniques, but put them in a situation against someone who has mastered those same techniques as well as all the other techniques in that style and see what happens. One of the instructors in my class has his black belt in Aikido and is taking Long Fist Kung Fu. He also works out with some MMA guys from time to time. He has enough knowledge and experience to truly practice the JKD philosophy. BUT, he will be the first to tell you that he's not doing anything "new" I could really care less if the kicks you're teaching me came from TKD, the grappling is from Jujitsu and hands are from Wing Chun. All I ask is that you acknowledge it so I can know where it came from. To sum this point up, I just have a real problem with someone not acknowledging their formal background/training and claiming to have "developed" something new. By definition, if it was really "new", then it never existed before.
But Aikido was something "new" was it not, even it was in to some degree based on another system or systems? And Ueshiba did in fact "develop" and "innovate" something, did he not? I'm glad you don't care about where a system find its roots. Neither do I. But I think the point you're making is this, and correct me if I'm wrong, (though I know you would anyway): Give honor unto your teachers. Is that correct? I completely agree. Sammy has spoken to us many times of the classes he took in JKD from someone who learned directly from Bruce Lee. If you were to look for one art from which CFA was developed, that would be it. But I maintain that CFA, as it's own entity, is innovative and is "new". The same way Aikido was new, the same way JKD was new and VERY innovative as I'm sure you'd agree.
Quote: 5. Gangs and the members that form them are stupid to begin with. I find it ironic that they would actually "practice" street-fighting when all I hear on the news is how someone was shot and killed in a gang related drive-by. You'd think that with all that "practice" they could back up their punk bitch little mouths with their fists instead of a 9mm. For the record, being a parent, this is where I judge the kids by their parents. I am ultimately responsible for the actions of my children until they reach the age of 18, where in the eyes of the law, they are considered an adult. If they grow up to be little shitheads and a burden on society, then I failed in my responsibility to raise them and be productive members of the human race.
Agreed. Gangs and their members are stupid, but they're very real. You hear about the drive-bys and the shootings but for every one of those you hear about there are ten old-school style beat downs that you didn't hear about. More than that I'm sure. They don't consider it "practice". They just do a lot of it because it's part of the ethos and the archetype.
I'm not a parent so I can't really address your point with any experience to back it up, but I do agree with you. I, too, would consider myself a failure if my child grew up to be "a little shithead". But I'd also blame them, as everyone makes their own choices in life.
Quote: Finally, I'm glad to see that you've come on here with the understanding that not everyone is going to agree and that you can back up your posts with an intellectual response. Too many times, I and other members of this forum, have come down or slammed someone for posting something that comes across us utter bullshit and the response we get is one that you would expect from some punk ass, know-it-all who has the I.Q. of a 4 yr. old.
I'm very happy as well to see that the majority of you are open-minded and mature enough to participate in an intellectual debate.
But speaking of 4 yr. olds.... I'll now respond to Triple T.>
Post: CFANico:
Quoting: Triple T;48726 They actually generally appreciate my abusiveness towards morons like you because it saves them the time of having to teach your properly and it allows us to discuss more pertinent matters in that mature fashion we enjoy. By more pertinent matters, I mean just about anything.
If that's the case, then why am I getting intelligent and productive responses from three other forum members, namely nbotary, zefff, and bamboo? Why are you the only one throwing insults? Why do your fellow forum members tell me that they're happy to participate in a mature debate? Are you sure your abusiveness is so appreciated? It doesn't seem that way.
Quote: 1) What is the purpose of a stance? To provide a base for techniques and to root your body so that when receiving your opponent's techniques you don't fall over. Obviously, power generation is important to your offensive techniques. If your stance is improper, you cannot generate power effectively. Talk to any kung fu guy. 2) When do you use a stance? Obviously not when you're moving. So, to discuss a stance is to discuss your body's positioning when not executing a technique or utilizing proper footwork. You should always be moving, so your stance - at best - should be constantly changing, if it exists at all. Assumptions my ass, this is sound principle based out of a multi-millennia tradition of Chinese fighting arts. But I bet that Sammy Franco taught you better. :roll:
Having a 50-50 weight distribution allows for you to perform any attack and move in any direction rapidly and fluidly in any direction. If, for example, you place more that 50% of your weight on your left foot, it becomes more difficult to move to the left. You need to have a good stance for proper power-generation, absolutely. But the point is MOBILITY. You're not addressing the point. You should be moving at all times, just like you said. That's why you want to be able to move fluidly in any direction at any time. Hence, a 50-50 weight distribution.
Quote: I would rather not be put into this situation at all. Don't believe the hype, you can avoid real fights a lot more easily than people like Franco want you to think. That's why, if you bothered to read any part of this thread, I say things like, "If you're in a street fight, you already messed up." If you're genuinely concerned for your well-being as it relates to street thugs, drunk guys at the bar or even schoolyard bullies, you ought to consider methods of conflict PREVENTION rather than conflict resolution. But then, if people actually thought this way, guys like Franco couldn't make money off selling training that would be sub-par in most McDojos.
Wow. It's amazing you should say so. The first thing you learn in Contemporary Fighting Arts is "de-escalation", where you attempt to avoid a violent altercation. But then again, since you don't know anything about CFA, but continue to make all kinds of assumptions as is usual for you, you didn't realize that we actually agree on this point. Where you're wrong is to say "you ought to consider methods of conflict PREVENTION rather than conflict resolution". You shouldn't "rather" do one or the other. You should do both. Sometimes violent altercations are unavoidable, and if you don't think that's the case, then you live in a fairy-tale fantasy world. How are the pretty unicorns doing on your side of town?
Quote: 1) When you're on the ground, you're getting stomped. Never assume your opponent is alone. 2) When you're on the ground, it is much more difficult to escape the scene. Never assume that your opponent must be "defeated" for you to end the fight. 3) When you're on the ground, the risk of injury increases. Missing a strike means hitting concrete, the proximity makes it harder to be aware of your opponent pulling a concealed weapon, etc. Unless there's a ref, stay on your feet. You're mother will thank me for imparting that advice.
WOW! Yet again, we completely agree with one another. Just because going to the ground is something that you definitely don't want to do, doesn't mean that it won't happen, even if there isn't a referee around. You should know how to handle yourself in a ground-fight if it unfortunately comes to that, and there is a high likelihood of that occurring in any street fight, whether you like the idea or not. But oops, I forgot! In your world, people don't fall to the ground, they just kind of... float. Not that you'd ever be attacked anyway. So there's no need for you to worry about learning how to groundfight. Don't waste your time. You, Triple T, will never, ever get taken down to the ground. Ever. Unless there's a ref, right? Right.
Quote: Good, get the fuck off the forums before some kid who doesn't know what from which reads your regurgitated Sammy Franco bullshit and winds up getting capped because he thought he knew how to handle a real fight. Information, whether right or wrong, is power. With power comes responsibility. Try to remember that.
Actually, no, I think I'll stick around, thanks. I like it here. And you can't do anything about that. Oh, and if any kid comes on here thinking he's going to learn how to handle himself in a real fight, then you know what? He deserves to be capped. It's called natural selection. You don't learn self-defense on the internet. You learn it from a qualified instructor. You really think kids are that stupid?
Anyway, say hi to the Care Bears for me!>
Post: Triple T:
Quoting: CFANico;48892 If that's the case, then why am I getting intelligent and productive responses from three other forum members, namely nbotary, zefff, and bamboo? Why are you the only one throwing insults? Why do your fellow forum members tell me that they're happy to participate in a mature debate? Are you sure your abusiveness is so appreciated? It doesn't seem that way.[/quote
Actually, you're not reading this situation correctly at all. For instance, once you get past my rhetoric and actually read my message - a feat you seem unqualified to do - you will realize I'm talking about the things you do. Zefff, Bamboo and Botary - for better or for worse - seem to be addressing your reasons for doing it, conceptualizations of it, etc. We can talk back and forth all you like about gang members, the usefulness of realistic self defense training etc. I'm not talking about that because I haven't found a need to do so. Instead, I'm addressing how you defend yourself - hence talking about stances and mobility - which you seem to see as an insult. If you actually want to think about martial arts in terms of mechanics, please continue reading. If you want to act holier than thou because I'm not kissing your ass to make a "debate" where I wholely disagree with you seem friendly, then go to some other forum. Oh, and if you doubt that anyone here appreciates my methods, feel free to ask them why they haven't banned me after six years of this sort of behavior.
Quote: Having a 50-50 weight distribution allows for you to perform any attack and move in any direction rapidly and fluidly in any direction. If, for example, you place more that 50% of your weight on your left foot, it becomes more difficult to move to the left. You need to have a good stance for proper power-generation, absolutely. But the point is MOBILITY. You're not addressing the point. You should be moving at all times, just like you said. That's why you want to be able to move fluidly in any direction at any time. Hence, a 50-50 weight distribution.
Wait. Did I not address mobility or did I say you should be moving at all times? It doesn't seem I can do both at the same time. This is precisely my point, you can't do two mutually exclusive things at once. Every time you take a step with footwork or execute a technique, your weight distribution must change. If you aren't moving or using a technique, maybe your weight should be 50-50, but then the question is: why are you standing still?
Quote: Wow. It's amazing you should say so. The first thing you learn in Contemporary Fighting Arts is "de-escalation", where you attempt to avoid a violent altercation. But then again, since you don't know anything about CFA, but continue to make all kinds of assumptions as is usual for you, you didn't realize that we actually agree on this point. Where you're wrong is to say "you ought to consider methods of conflict PREVENTION rather than conflict resolution". You shouldn't "rather" do one or the other. You should do both. Sometimes violent altercations are unavoidable, and if you don't think that's the case, then you live in a fairy-tale fantasy world. How are the pretty unicorns doing on your side of town?
if you have to "de-escalate" you've already messed up. Avoiding a violent altercation doesn't mean talking a guy down, it means not being physically present. I don't have to assume anything about Franco and the CFA because part of my "job" for this site was to research guys like Franco so we could provide this site's patrons with accurate information. Every single "self-defense" expert I've come across in the past five years has always operated from the starting point that at some time or another, you can be attacked. This is not only false - given contemporary crime statistics - it's a fundamental error in the general drive to self-preservation. You say that sometimes violent altercations are unavoidable. I'd like to know when that's true. Plenty of people go through their entire life span without a single violent altercation. Maybe they know something that Franco can't teach you. Maybe I learned it and have been trying to get you - and others - to see it.
Quote: WOW! Yet again, we completely agree with one another. Just because going to the ground is something that you definitely don't want to do, doesn't mean that it won't happen, even if there isn't a referee around. You should know how to handle yourself in a ground-fight if it unfortunately comes to that, and there is a high likelihood of that occurring in any street fight, whether you like the idea or not. But oops, I forgot! In your world, people don't fall to the ground, they just kind of... float. Not that you'd ever be attacked anyway. So there's no need for you to worry about learning how to groundfight. Don't waste your time. You, Triple T, will never, ever get taken down to the ground. Ever. Unless there's a ref, right? Right.
Or, maybe your training should revolve around staying on your feet rather than continuing a fight in the event of it "going down." You see there are really simple methods of accomplishing this goal: 1) Be aware of your surroundings and utilize effective spatial control so that you never trip over something, 2) develop skills in breakfalls and rolls so that in the event you are pushed or knocked off your feet you can efficiently return to them, 3) develop take-down defense skills so that you can't be wrestled to the ground, you get the idea. Studying the groundgame is best left to guys like the Gracies. Studying the sprawl and brawl game is exactly what you want to do. But then, I'm apparantly prone to fantasis about floating people and unicorns, so maybe training takedown defense is pointless.
Quote: Actually, no, I think I'll stick around, thanks. I like it here. And you can't do anything about that. Oh, and if any kid comes on here thinking he's going to learn how to handle himself in a real fight, then you know what? He deserves to be capped. It's called natural selection. You don't learn self-defense on the internet. You learn it from a qualified instructor. You really think kids are that stupid?
Kids prove themselves that stupid when they try to copy the guys from the movie The Program and get run over by traffic. Or when they try to emulate the Jackass guys and stick bottle rockets in their buttholes. Yes, kids really are that stupid. Lastly, if you don't think you can learn anything from the internet, why are you here? The Care Bears said hello and were wondering if you could explain why you think anyone at any point in time deserves to be murdered. Even Macho Bear thinks your tough guy act is lame and Sociopath Bear wants you to stop stealing his act.
By the way, I see real maturity in your posts, hypocrite. But it's nice to see that with a little push you're more than willing to meet somebody on their level. It saves me the time of ever having to read your high horse bullshit ever again. Welcome to the forums, kid. Have a nice fucking day.>
Post: bamboo:
My head hurts. Did we really need this ad for franco?
Honestly, the subject died and is really not worth rehashing.>
Post: nbotary:
DAMN!!! Where the hell have I been?!?!?!
This is the last post I'm gonna make on this thread...
CFANico - Glad to see you're able to see different sides of this debate. Yes, I was trying to make the point to honor your teachers. I have a problem with someone saying they created a system of their own when all they've really done is take techniques from other systems, used a JKD philosophy, and put a new name on it. Morihei Ueshiba may have "developed" or "created" Aikido, but he still acknowledged his teachers so you knew he wasn't full of shit. I'm sure Sammy would like to know his students refer back to him and show him honor. I just hope he's doing the same. I guess I'm just a traditionalist in that regard.
Please don't pull me into your disagreement with other forum members. I like Triple T. I respect him and he respects me. In fact, I would also consider him to be a friend as I have personally spoken with him. While I do enjoy his posts - and I too have taken part in flaming diatribe - I'm trying not to get in the middle of this disagreement. The fact that he's still here is proof of why I too haven't been banned for some of my responses. As a general rule, the mood I'm in will determine how I respond to a post. Sometimes I'm an asshole, sometimes I'm not, but I earned the right to be one.
Like I said earlier, you posted comments and backed it up with credentials that show and prove you're not talking out of your ass like some of the wannabe's and know it all trolls that show up on here from time to time. I will always respect that and engage in an intelligent debate with anyone until they prove to me that they're not as smart as they thought they were or they start being an asshole without having earned the right. Then it's on.
T - I'll always be your porn-lovin', Sith Lord sidekick!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:>
Post: Triple T:
Nick - while you may be my only Sith sidekick, let's be realistic here...who doesn't love porn? :lol:>
Post: SAINT:
[quote=Tease T Tickle;42612 I've seen video of and heard testimonies of Systema studios using a drill where one student lays on the mat and the other students stomp and kick at him. The drill is actually to develop ground movement skills and teach you to get out of that bad position, but obviously it also has the consequence of beating the hell out of you and thus works very similarly to a real street fight.[/quote In CQB they call it the "Boot Party".>
Post: NeverMan:
[quote=Tease T Tickle;42729 Let me spell this out for you, champ. Don't worry, I'll use small words and simple grammar.
Smart people avoid fights. Getting into fights out in the street, at the bar, or in any other public environment is a good way to get shot, stabbed or beaten to death by the guy you picked a fight with or his friends. If you really like to hurt people, then we won't talk to you because when you get arrested and tell the cops or the court that we gave you tips on how to bust heads out in the real world, we get sued.
On the other hand, if you like fighting and want to do so without getting yourself or anyone else in trouble, you can enter training and fight in safe, legal matches of skill. In these sorts of matches, you will never face more than one person on your own, and you will not take the kind of beating that the Latin Kings will put on you when you give their girl the wrong look. So, training for those sorts of situations is not only pointless, but a good way to get hurt when you don't know what you're doing.
So, when you make posts about how you want to train bareknuckle, a good way to break your own hand, and get all excited about training for the Harlem Hoedown, it makes you look like an idiot who wants to get hurt and then brag about how "tough" you are. We do not respect people with these attitudes, nor do we wish to have them around our forum to mislead our younger members. We host children on this site as young as ten years old. How would you feel if somebody started telling your ten year old child that to be tough they had to go out and beat the crap out of people in the street? If you have any brains at all, you'd be angry because you know that's a good way to get your kid hurt badly, maybe even killed.
So, please, straighten up or shut your mouth.[/quote
Can we nominate this for like best post of the year or what?
Street Fights involve/start with Drunk People, Angry Parents who are just Angry People with Kids, Bored Sociopaths, etc, etc.
Street Fights are NOT a good way to learn how to fight. 3T hit it right on. You learn how to fight in a controlled environment with proper instruction. You learn how to fight so you can avoid serious injury to both yourself and, hopefully, to whomever is trying to kick your ass, IMO. If you feel the need to unload on a guy then so be it, at least you can try and minimize your own injury.
Like 3T said, street fights are a good way to get serious hurt or killed. Try avoiding them. That's the best thing you can learn on the street: when to feel a situation is going sour and avoid it.>
Post: nbotary:
Best way to avoid a fight - be a hermit, stay home, watch some porn, play some video games, eat some pizza... :lol: :lol: :lol:>
Post: Triple T:
being a stoner helps, too. I have seen a lot of pissed off people start a fight while somebody is talking, dancing, walking, drinking, even taking a piss. I have NEVER seen anyone start a fight with somebody when they're toking up.
Maybe this helps, maybe it doesn't. It's just an observationn.>
Post: Hengest:
Don't know why I didn't bother with this thread before, cos it seems right up my alley, if you'll pardon the expression.
I'm betting that the Franco nuthugger has buggered off, but I thought that this quote from the website pretty much summed up how "new" this CFA crap really is.
Quote:
Unlike most self-defense systems, Contemporary Fighting Arts teaches the art and science of the preemptive attack called "First Strike."
Gasp! Please, do go on!
Franco, Geoff Thompson called. He'd like to know why you're ripping off stuff he wrote twenty years ago and calling it your own.>
Post: Triple T:
The First Strike philosophy also seems like it'd get in the way of "de-escalation" efforts which everyone gives lip service to. Unless they're me, that is.>
Post: nbotary:
[quote=Triple T;49198 being a stoner helps, too. I have seen a lot of pissed off people start a fight while somebody is talking, dancing, walking, drinking, even taking a piss. I have NEVER seen anyone start a fight with somebody when they're toking up.[/quote
True, so true... I never knew a stoner that wanted to scrap whilst he had been baking. :lol: Back in the day when I used to burn 'em up, my buddies and I were more concerned with staying away from public places full of non-bakers (especially ones full of cops) and trying to score with some chick than we were with proving who the biggest idiot was.>
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|