Style

[Judderman]

I was wondering if anyone would like to discuss the pros and cons of each style of MA when it comes to self defence?

A lot of this is of course is dependent on how the style is taught and its effectiveness is usually down to the individual. I'm not concerned with "effectiveness", just pro's and con's.

For instance, from my experience of Shotokan Karate:
The low stances develop strong legs and quick movement rapidly, when applied to a more upright, natural stance. Typically only punching and kicking is taught, but some may show other aspects such as pressure points and locks/throws. Unfortunately I only found one or two dojos that had an aspect of "fighting" in them. This was usually because the Sensei had experience in other MA. Another downside is that without proper attention to "fighting" the attacks and defences can appear linear.


Any other thoughts??

Please discuss - don't flame

[Nrv4evr]

wado-ryu:

depending on instructor, jiu-jitsu's principles combined with karate's system is pretty effective against an average opponent. unlike shotokan, wado emphasizes more evasion, and manipulation of opponent's force, like jiu-jitsu. in one of it's katas, pinan yondan, there are a lot of grab strike combos, and this is good when fighting multiple opponents.

[Scarlet Mist]

Choy Li Fut:

A relatively new Kung fu style, almost everymove is practical. Much work on low stances and high kicks. A whole slew of hand techniques. It has many long range hand and foot strikes, it owns all at long range, plus it has powerful short range techniques. And it is theoretically great against multiple opponents.

Disadvantage, umm.. hmmm... you might get out grappled on the ground.

[xplasma]

Ninjutsu:

Pro: Emphasis placed on surviving rather then winning. Therefore, there is a better chance you will survived the encounter becuase we train to escape.

Con: Ninjutsu is Bujutsu, meaning we can get into legal problem cause we train to kill. In addition will still train with Japanese weapons that aren't used in the street. Taking time away from more street situations.

This is pro and con on street defensive not the style in general.

[oni_sensei]

Hrmm...I wouldn't class training with traditional weaponry as a con. Most of the basic weapons can easily be substituted with something that may be found in the vicinity such as a pool cue, chain or a mop etc. Even something like a jutte could be exchanged for a steering club. Replace your weaponry with a common object once in a while to get a bit more realism into your training.

Anyways, my take on TKD:

Pros: Fast and consecutive striking skills, incredibly powerful in it's own right. Footwork and balance play a major part in preventing a confrontation from going to the ground.

Cons: Lack of restraint/grappling, although some very basic techniques are included eg. sweeping, neck restraints and throws.

[Albert]

:rolleyes: You had to go and make this thread didnt you..

[Matt_Bernius]

J-man,

I'm going to take this in a different direction. I fundimentally believe that most if not all empty hand focused martial arts provide the fundimental techniques that can be used for self defense.Any martial art should provide a firm punching and kicking basis. This will be re-enforced with stance work (however, I think most martial arts overemphasize deep stances in application) and movement.

In my opinion, perhaps channeling a little SBG, the issue comes down to training methodology. Where they fall down is on two counts:

1. Psychological and awareness training.
2. Training against attacks that occur outside of the stucture of their system.

(It can be argued that an overreliance on point sparring causes problems as well.)

Correct these factors and I think one would find that most systems will cover at least 75% of all possible self defense encounters.

- Matt

[Kagebushi]

In addition will still train with Japanese weapons that aren't used in the street. Taking time away from more street situations.
well, most of them have a newer eqivalent. ninja had guns, for 1 thing, and knives. a yari can be just a pointed stick. swords translate well to a baseball bat. heavy ashtrays make good shurikens, salt or sugar packets in restaurants make good metsubushi, pool cues=hanbo, walking stick=bo. manrikikusari=wallet chain. there are a few that arent as common, but some places still use kama, i believe. a naginata would be hard to find today, but most of them are still useful.

[Judderman]

A very good point Matt. As I said earlier this thread is more concerned with the pro's and con's of a style. Even if you took the "alive" principle and applied it to say wrestling (an "alive" trained style), you could say that the grappling techniques were very good, both standing and ground, however its striking ability is non existent. I'd be interested in your thoughts on the "Balance" thread.

Nrv4evr and Scarlet, are there any other con's to those particular styles?

An interesting take on Ninjutsu, are you saying its vary adaptable, but limited to the use of weaponry?

[xplasma]

Good point ShadowWarrior (Kagebushi), I would agree with everything you said. However, my original point stands. When we train weaponery, we train to kill, Blinding Powder and Shuriken would be ok, but if most places assault with a baseball bat is assault with a deadly weapon and I believe that carries jail time. IMO if you end up being sued or in jail it just as good as losing the fight.

just a point, a wallet chain would be a terrible kasari-fundo, the aren't strong engouh or heavy enough. Also I would want ot use my wallet as a weapon, what if they just grab it and run?

Judderman, Ninjtusu train Taijutsu equally with weapons, I was just comparing the time we spend on taijutsu vs. an empty handed style.

[Matt_Bernius]

A very good point Matt. As I said earlier this thread is more concerned with the pro's and con's of a style. Even if you took the "alive" principle and applied it to say wrestling (an "alive" trained style), you could say that the grappling techniques were very good, both standing and ground, however its striking ability is non existent.
Ahh, but here's the question: what consitutes a style? Is "wrestling" a style. I would suggest that collegate/greco roman wrestling may not fall into the category of a complete style. In a pure form it only addresses, at best, two of the four ranges of combat (trapping and grappling).

However, is there ever such a thing as a pure art. Take judo. Tgere are no "strikes" in judo. However, after reading a number of accounts of judo matches, it's clear that stiking does enter into competition (often masked in grabbing techniques). So are those stikes a part of Judo or not?

So onto Kung Fu and it's weaknesses. For the most part systems have strong striking and trapping aspects. They opperate well in those areas. There is some emphasis on locking as well (though I tend to think most schools practice this far less than striking). KF's most glaring gap is when you get to full on grappling. Chinese systems have grappling components, but (at the risk of getting flamed) they typically are not as developed as those of Japanese systems (I should note that I'm not the only one who shares this view).

- Matt

[cybermonk]

So onto Kung Fu and it's weaknesses. For the most part systems have strong striking and trapping aspects. They opperate well in those areas. There is some emphasis on locking as well (though I tend to think most schools practice this far less than striking). KF's most glaring gap is when you get to full on grappling. Chinese systems have grappling components, but (at the risk of getting flamed) they typically are not as developed as those of Japanese systems (I should note that I'm not the only one who shares this view).

I agree with that, if I wanted outstanding grappling skills I would go for a japanese grapling art.

[Nrv4evr]

ah yes...the cons. hoped i'd get away with that.

cons: no knuckle strengthening exercise, at least not in the curriculum.

speed is good, but not everything, you need to teach force.

not enough focus on locks for a jiu-jitsu based art...

no real emphasis on knees, again with the jj absence :confused:

not enough full contact tournaments, most students also take muay thai or bjj for the full contact practice

[Nrv4evr]

I agree with that, if I wanted outstanding grappling skills I would go for a japanese grapling art.

as well, brazilian jiu-jitsu and san shou have excellent grappling and throwing systems. the proof's in the UFC.

[Matt_Bernius]

as well, brazilian jiu-jitsu and san shou have excellent grappling and throwing systems. the proof's in the UFC.

BJJ is an outgrowth of Japanese Ju Jitsu and Judo. And frankly it isn't that far removed from those arts. The Chinese grappling arts have far more differences when compaired to the Japanese arts.

As for San Shou, I consider it a relatively modern art and a direct outgrowth of Judo and Brazilian Ju Jitsu. Bringing back to China of Japanese techniques.

- Matt

[Nrv4evr]

but you must give them credit for the realization of ground fighting's importance, as plagiaristic as it may have been.

[Matt_Bernius]

There's nothing plagiaristic about it. No one can "own" technqiues. Ideas, perhaps (perhaps not).

Evolve or die. I was just noting that the Japanese went further with grappling and ground work than the Chinese did. And just like in the arms race, one the technology get out there a lot of people play catch up.

- Matt

[KUNG FU FIGHTER]

PPS is direct, effective and drills its students using scientific and progressive methods

[Furikuchan]

Judo:
Pros: Slamming a guy on the sidewalk is usually a pretty effective way to stop the fight.
It works for people who don't have a lot of body strength and can't put much power into punches.
Time-tested. I haven't heard of it failing yet. (Saved the life of one of our boys over in Iraq that ended up in hand-to-hand combat range.)

Cons: In dojos, it is looked at too much as a sport, and the self-defense aspect is sometimes lost. (This is why I want my black belt...)
Judo's hold-downs are not as effective in all situations.

[Judderman]

PPS is direct, effective and drills its students using scientific and progressive methods

...and its cons??

[SoKKlab]

I was wondering if anyone would like to discuss the pros and cons of each style of MA when it comes to self defence?

A lot of this is of course is dependent on how the style is taught and its effectiveness is usually down to the individual. I'm not concerned with "effectiveness", just pro's and con's.
Any other thoughts??


Actually, the main 'Cons' to ALL of these systems listed herein, is that they, as arts contain so much information, techniques and stylisations, that they overcomplicate 'Self-Defence' to the point of being an 'Art'.

There is a fundamental difference between 'Martial Arts' and 'Self-Defence'. Whilst the practice of Martial Arts can and often does equip its practitioners to become better at protecting themself, often they merely assist the practitioner in becoming better at 'Martial Arts', but not necessarily better at 'Self-Defence'.

Taking a guesstimate, I'd say that probably 10 percent of what most Martial Art Systems contain, is immediately relevant to 'Self-Defence' and the other 90 percent consists of techniques that are either for usage against practitioners of the same art and/ or techniques to counter other Martial Arts (example Hapkido Counters to Judo throws).

For immediate usage from a Self-Defence POV, any 'system' worth it's salt, must contain realistic answers to Habitual Acts of Violence (HAOV).

As an example, (becoming a bit of a cliched question now), but,

'If you knew that you were going to Prison (let's hope not) in thirty days, what would you train in? Kata, stance work and etiquette or learning to smash things with hard parts of your body, emergency tactics etc etc?'

Those thirty days would be immediately relevant to 'Self-Defence', everything after would be veering towards 'Art'.

[KUNG FU FIGHTER]

...and its cons??

You have to try to understand it....it takes a little bit of thought to get around normal martial arts paradigms

[Kagebushi]

Good point ShadowWarrior (Kagebushi), I would agree with everything you said. However, my original point stands. When we train weaponery, we train to kill, Blinding Powder and Shuriken would be ok, but if most places assault with a baseball bat is assault with a deadly weapon and I believe that carries jail time. IMO if you end up being sued or in jail it just as good as losing the fight. yeah, i agree, but my point was that the training could save your life just as easily. you just have to be able to judge what you need to do to survive.

just a point, a wallet chain would be a terrible kasari-fundo, the aren't strong engouh or heavy enough. Also I would want ot use my wallet as a weapon, what if they just grab it and run? if they do, youre safe. i usually dont wear it on my wallet anyway. i wear it on my wrist or hip. anyway, mine is plenty strong enough for the grappling stuff, and it is heavy enough to cause serious pain, but not to do the damage that a kusarifundo would. also, you can put a carabiner (mountain climbing clip thingie) on each end to attach it to the belt or beltloop. THEN it is heavy enough, not to mention the fact that you can quickly clip it to something heavier, if you see someone coming(and you are willing to do that much damage)

[cqc156]

If you want to survive a street attack you have to have the right mind set and not freak out.Also you have to have the heart and willingness to use what you have learned. I know a lot of martial artist that are skilled but would freak out if they where attacked.Train your mind as well as your body

[Sandy]

BJJ is an outgrowth of Japanese Ju Jitsu and Judo. And frankly it isn't that far removed from those arts. The Chinese grappling arts have far more differences when compaired to the Japanese arts.

As for San Shou, I consider it a relatively modern art and a direct outgrowth of Judo and Brazilian Ju Jitsu. Bringing back to China of Japanese techniques.

- Matt

If you were going to supplement your striking art with one other, which one would people choose? Ju jitsu, judo, BJJ, san shou, aikido or something else?

[SoKKlab]

If you were going to supplement your striking art with one other, which one would people choose? Ju jitsu, judo, BJJ, san shou, aikido or something else?
Judo or Wrestling would be a good supplement as they cover stand-up Grappling and Groundwork, albeit in Stricter forms, dependent upon the Rules of the Sport.

Most BJJ you find is almost totally Groundwork Orientated. Apparently Alot of Gracie Schools are more Self-defence Orientated whilst maintaining the same Training Methodology. I've only ever trained at Schools that were Points/ Sport-orientated, but would love to train at either a Machado or Gracie School, cash-willing.

JJJ is a great Art, but often the training methodology is lacking in a certain amount of realism, this is in part to the fact that if you could apply some of the techniques against an attacker, then they would indeed be Very Nasty.

Problem you face with mixing JJJ with a Striking Art, is that because Japanese Ju Jitsu is a somewhat 'Complete' Art, alot of the striking methods can detract from the striking art that you are already practising, depending upon what it is, also the Principles of the two may well inferefer.

San Shou would be a decent option also.

So alot of it depends upon the Striking Art that you are doing, as to what add to it. Don't neglect Sombo as an Option, also..

Thread Returns to Original Form...

[Sandy]

Many thanks for such a comprehensive reply, SoKKlab.

I primarily have a Thai/kick boxing background, but have recently branched out into jun fan/JKD. I had been weighing up whether or not to take instruction in a seizing, locking and throwing art for a period, so that I at least know something about it for self-defence.

Options locally are BJJ with a black belt from Brazil, very traditional Japanese ju jitsu, and a Shaolin school that includes chin na as part of its curriculum. From a self-defence point of view, I would be interested in which would fill the gap. (Although my JKD class includes some locking, etc, and I tried judo as a kid and didn't overly enjoy it, even though it's certainly effective.)

[jjk]

I'll post my thoughts on Kuk Sool Won:

Pros: Very effective at trapping (standing grappling) range, with joint locks, joint lock throws and joint breaks. Very active "self-defense" mindset. KSW System is "open" in that you can find an instructor who will focus on grappling or boxing within the Kuk Sool Won system.

Cons: Many schools do not focus on grappling. Emphasis on variety of traditional weapons at higher levels, few of which can be employed in a street fight.

[SteelyPhil]

I know this is a bit of thread necromancy but it's an interesting thread (and doesn't have all the styles on it really)
My thoughts on Wing Chun (at least my teacher, who does Judo and JKD as well)
Pros: Focus on defense turning to swift attacks and simple methods of trapping as well as knocking the other person over
Cons: Lack of locks and grappling techniques, leave you a bit unawares against the more aggressive attackers

[Johnno]

I'm still a complete noobie at Judo, but I'll answer anyway. If more experienced Judoka want to shoot me down in flames, them at least I'll have learnt something! ;)

Pros: strong on stand-up grappling, throwing/take-downs and ground work. Techniques can be tested against a fully-resisting opponent and can be tested in a competitive environment.

Cons: the absense of striking means that in terms of self-defence, it is focussed on a very limited part of the bigger picture.

[Tiger_ARVN]

Wing Chun for me (based on my personal observation and experience)

1) Pro's=

The WC that I am learning has opened my mind set to more than just the
"fighting" aspect of the martial arts. I have now come to the realization that on the streets ANYTHING goes. Often your attackers will not want to "fight" you per se but OVERWHELM you.
I.e dirty tactics/unconventional methods. Multiple attackers, weapons, ambushes, etc. So in training I often stress the fact (to myself) that I am not training to be a "Champion" or to be a guy with ego/over confidence to win fights and such but, to be a smart guy who
avoids isolated areas especially at night, be aware of my surroundings, and to do my best to not escalate things with people.
HOWEVER, if the sh1t DOES hit the fan, I will do EVERYTHING and almost ANYTHING to survive the encounter, evade and escape with my life and ensure my loved ones survive and are also safe if they are with me during the incident. And/or if that involves fighting so be it, but if I fight I will fight dirty and not care about rules of engagement. Since its my life or theirs, cuz on the streets the aggressors are not going to feel sorry for you as you lie there on the ground dying, in fact they may feel obligated to continue the attack by stomping you in your head as you lie there semi conscious or unconscious. You do no want to be on that ground like that...


Cons=

Wing Chun to me is a martial art yes BUT, it is also a life style. I had to learn the hard way and now realize that you cannot
just practice the principles of Wing Chun in the class BUT, also everyday and everywhere in your life.
And I don't mean technique only. But also the way you address people, the way you present yourself, the way you observe your surroundings/environment everywhere you go, and of course the way you train at home outside of class...

Unfortunately many students of various W.C systems do not realize this so they are trapped in a mind set of "who's better at fighting, who's better at Chi Sau, who's art is better, who's the toughest, etc etc".

It has taken me many years to slowly get away from this thinking, and I am still learning it even now.

Basically the art of fighting without fighting ehehe.
I.e "fighting is a last resort, but when you need to, do it with all your heart/mind to survive"

[JTMS]

Actually, the main 'Cons' to ALL of these systems listed herein, is that they, as arts contain so much information, techniques and stylisations, that they overcomplicate 'Self-Defence' to the point of being an 'Art'.

There is a fundamental difference between 'Martial Arts' and 'Self-Defence'. Whilst the practice of Martial Arts can and often does equip its practitioners to become better at protecting themself, often they merely assist the practitioner in becoming better at 'Martial Arts', but not necessarily better at 'Self-Defence'.

Taking a guesstimate, I'd say that probably 10 percent of what most Martial Art Systems contain, is immediately relevant to 'Self-Defence' and the other 90 percent consists of techniques that are either for usage against practitioners of the same art and/ or techniques to counter other Martial Arts (example Hapkido Counters to Judo throws).

For immediate usage from a Self-Defence POV, any 'system' worth it's salt, must contain realistic answers to Habitual Acts of Violence (HAOV).

.

Hello SoKKlab,

I have read your post here and have found your views very interesting. I will say that I agree with many of your point but only on a “short term basis”.

If someone only has 30 days or even a few months to train I agree that a large part of traditional – classical training should be modified in order to face a potential foe.

However, I have been training in the aspects of classical martial arts that you seem to discount here as having nothing or little to do with self defense have proven to be very useful to myself and others. I believe that there is a point that a martial art becomes a science of self defense (if practiced correctly).

Pure self defense, what is this? If it is a QUICK solution it is buying a big dog and an alarm system for your home. It is using good common sense, avoiding bad situations etc.

Let’s face it there are no short cuts. If one only has 30 days to prepare for a horrible situation (and it is a rare thing to get such a notice) time and money would be better spent on pepper spray or a hand gun.

I train because I love it not because I am looking to get into a fight. I am able to defend myself however because I train in a classical martial ART. I do not feel that I have wasted ANY of my time doing so.

[SteelyPhil]

^^^^
Literally commenting on a 3 year old post.




Though i do agree with you Moosul

[JTMS]

^^^^
Literally commenting on a 3 year old post.




Though i do agree with you Moosul

lol! oh well.....