Dojo Storming [Archive] - Martial Arts Planet

Agutrot-

15-Apr-2007, 02:16 PM

I don't see the point in dojo storming. Its not as if everyone in the world is going to take up BJJ as it stands at the moment. Lets face it, even people who love training find it hard going most of the time. We need to try and make BJJ classes more stuctured and open first.

Better to spread the word through seminars tailored towards clubs new to BJJ, then roll at the end so that people start to see what really works. There are plenty of non-BJJ clubs out there who are interested enough to learn a few basics, and this will help to raise awareness of grappling, feeding more people into clubs.

Also, too many people who want to dojo storm are proving nothing, since they are far stronger, more athletic and more skilled than the people they challenge. A fairer match would be to take the weakest person in each dojo and see how they get on.

All in all, I just don't think that martial arts are important enough to try to stop people training in the only thing that might be standing between them and the massive heart attack that stops them seeing their kids grow up, even if the martial art in question is tibetan candle pushing.

The purpose isn't to get everyone to take BJJ. The purpose is to force instructors to have some integrity and to educate people who are there for self defense as to which system is truely superior. If you don't watch MMA you probably think that the most effective form of fighting is what you see in the movies(at least I did), and probably have never heard of BJJ. Dojo storming would show students of a particular art how theirs would stack up with another in a realistic situation.

Visage

15-Apr-2007, 02:30 PM

Ghost Frog

15-Apr-2007, 02:31 PM

Well said!

You also said "Lets face it, even people who love training find it hard going most of the time". Could you elaborate?

Mike
All I mean by that is that BJJ is a very unforgiving art to train in. It takes a long time to get any good at it, its extremely physically demanding and progress is measured solely by your ability in sparring.

You have to get used to and learn to thrive in really uncomfortable positions where people are crushing your chest or have their knee in your solar plexus. You have to learn to tap 25 times in 10 minutes for the first few months you train.

If you are big, then you have to face up to the possibility that someone far smaller and weaker may be able to beat you. And if you are small, you have to realise that no matter how technically good you get, it will always be very hard work to beat someone bigger and stronger than you.

Its still great fun, though. :)

slipthejab

15-Apr-2007, 02:31 PM

this thread is heating up... :D

Ghost Frog

15-Apr-2007, 02:48 PM

The purpose isn't to get everyone to take BJJ. The purpose is to force instructors to have some integrity and to educate people who are there for self defense as to which system is truely superior. If you don't watch MMA you probably think that the most effective form of fighting is what you see in the movies(at least I did), and probably have never heard of BJJ. Dojo storming would show students of a particular art how theirs would stack up with another in a realistic situation.
I see where you're coming from, but I think its difficult to prove anything by dojo storming. If someone is lying to their students/ in denial that badly, they will always reason it away to themselves and their students - "he was bigger than me", "we weren't allowed to eye gouge", "it wasn't like a proper street fight", "I didn't use my fatal chi strike to his kidneys", etc. You can lead a person to UFC, but you can't make them think. :)

On the other hand, a lot of people in more traditional styles are interested in BJJ and MMA, but don't necessarily want to train full time. The most useful part of BJJ for self defence is the first 10% you learn and it doesn't take much to show people some basics. We would all benefit from greater exposure to and understanding of BJJ and MMA, just as many people would benefit from crosstraining generally.

Davey Bones

15-Apr-2007, 02:54 PM

The purpose isn't to get everyone to take BJJ. The purpose is to force instructors to have some integrity and to educate people who are there for self defense as to which system is truely superior. If you don't watch MMA you probably think that the most effective form of fighting is what you see in the movies(at least I did), and probably have never heard of BJJ. Dojo storming would show students of a particular art how theirs would stack up with another in a realistic situation.

So basically your way of "educating the martial arts world" is to "storm" a studio, act like a complete asshat, demand a throwdown of some sort, and expect to be taken seriously? It's disrespectful, irresponsible, and quite frankly childish.

If you asked to come into my studio in a polite and mature manner to exchange ideas and, oh, I don't know, maybe learn something on both sides, maybe the rest of us would take you seriously. And I somehow doubt you are anywhere in the Gracies' league that you can go around and just demand that local instructors throwdown with you. :rolleyes:

Thomas

15-Apr-2007, 03:46 PM

That sounds like a lot of fun Tom. Would you, as an instructor, spar kickboxing at your gym with someone from a different art? I think it'd be really fun to spar with someone of a pure TMA against my thai boxing. I've always been really attracted to art vs. art combat because it's so rare.

Usually when we have guests from other schools, we open up the possibility of some sparring, because let's face it, when you visit, you go to learn something new, get an idea of how other train and to see how you stack up. The problem for an instructor is evaluating whether the person is safe (has good control, can follow the safety rules, etc) or if they are there to hurt someone (especialy if the "sparring" doesn't go well for them). So, for us, we spend a class or two (sometimes more) with people from other styles so they can get to know us, let us know them and then open up the floor.

Oh, and if they want a piece of the "master instructor", they get a couple rounds with me first to check them out! :D

edit: Your school seems a lot better then the crap around my house so I don't think they'd be as open minded as you anyway.Thanks for the kind words - if you ever in the area, pop by!

stump

15-Apr-2007, 03:52 PM

I think inviting people to come train with you (rather than imposing yourself on them) is a far better way of opening people's eyes.

Agutrot-

15-Apr-2007, 06:17 PM

Bwa

Ha

Ha

Ha

Ha

Believe it or not, BJJ is NOT the Korean meatballs!!! You might find that hard to believe, but actually, there are a lot of good martial art styles out there MORE suitable for "realistic situations" than BJJ.

Get a life.

I never said it was. I said if you compare the two you'll find out which one is the best. Thanks for the meaningful comment though.

Atharel

15-Apr-2007, 06:36 PM

I think someone's a mite insecure about BJJ vis a vis his own art.

Visage

15-Apr-2007, 09:16 PM

I think someone's a mite insecure about BJJ vis a vis his own art.

Yeah, thats it :rolleyes:

I dont give a monkeys hoo-ha either way about BJJ. What I get narked about is stupid nutriders coming around saying how BJJ/MMA/Muay Thai etc is better than anything else.
If anyone has insecurities about their practice, its those idiots.

Agutrot-

15-Apr-2007, 09:51 PM

Yeah, thats it :rolleyes:

I dont give a monkeys hoo-ha either way about BJJ. What I get narked about is stupid nutriders coming around saying how BJJ/MMA/Muay Thai etc is better than anything else.
If anyone has insecurities about their practice, its those idiots.

No one said that...

I don't frown on other arts, I frown on poor instruction. Read more carefully before you flame someone for being a "nutrider."

Visage

15-Apr-2007, 09:58 PM

No one said that...

I don't frown on other arts, I frown on poor instruction. Read more carefully before you flame someone for being a "nutrider."

You harp on about how you think BJJ is a "guiding light" to all of those "lost souls" who don't practice styles common in MMA competitions. That makes you a nutrider.

Agutrot-

15-Apr-2007, 11:01 PM

You harp on about how you think BJJ is a "guiding light" to all of those "lost souls" who don't practice styles common in MMA competitions. That makes you a nutrider.

Not once did I say that. If you're having trouble understanding ask your mommy to read it out loud to you.

flashlock

16-Apr-2007, 01:41 AM

My BJJ has told me that he used to dojo storm all the karate clubs and kung fu clubs (to "clean them up") in our area. He also tacked posters all around town inviting challengers to come to his school. He did this initially to promote his club, and to test himself. So, he was out dojo storming (uninvited) but also accepting challengers at his own school who would show up randomly (and always got their asses kicked)--so, he could dish it out, and take it. I think it worked well for him to get students, but now he doesn't bother with it; he faced the major Melbourne schools and won every time.

If someone shows up to your school and you don't accept the challenge, or arrange one within a week or so, you're scared. That's all it really boils down to. I can understand not wanting to accept the challenge, more to lose than gain... but maybe you should consider that before you hang a shingle outside your door saying you're an expert in self-defense.

Like my teacher did, you have to at some point put up or shut the hell up.

Atharel

16-Apr-2007, 01:46 AM

You harp on about how you think BJJ is a "guiding light" to all of those "lost souls" who don't practice styles common in MMA competitions. That makes you a nutrider.

If you meant what you said about other arts being far more applicable, make a thread in the BJJ or General forums, lay out your position and the evidence for it, and we'll rationally debate it. Trolling just makes you look foolish. If you have some input on the merit or demerit of dojo storming, please contribute. Otherwise stop pointlessly being disruptive.

Davey Bones

16-Apr-2007, 02:16 AM

Kwan Jang

16-Apr-2007, 06:24 AM

I'm sorry, but I find it hard to believe that this kind of moronic behavior is still going on. I thought it died out decades ago along with the few remaining brain cells of the sophmoric idiots who practiced it. Anyone who indulges in such a practice is an embarrassment to the martial arts. If someone came into my school pulling such idiocy, I'd have a fear alright, one of being sued by the moron after I busted him up. The way the laws are though, I'd just have the police escort him off my property.

P.S.-Normally, I'm much more respectful in my posts and usually will ignore what I don't agree with, but this one was just too far over the top.

flashlock

16-Apr-2007, 06:43 AM

Uhm, no, it could also be that you're not intested in putting up with an egomaniacal 18 year old like the OP comes across. You don't get to waltz into a studio and DEMAND anything except being asked to leave, IMO. If you can't be polite, you'll probably get ignored and asked to leave. That seems to be the more important issue, AFAIC; attitude.

I don't see where you are coming from--who is being rude? It's a challenge. You want flowers with it? A thank-you note? You can WALK into a studio, meet politely with the teacher, and challenge him/her. If you're asked to leave, leave. You're creating a cartoon character, some slobbering kid wanting to fight everyone. This is a Brasilian tradition that has been going on for decades, part of BJJ culture it seems to me, but I'm just a beginner.

flashlock

16-Apr-2007, 06:47 AM

[QUOTE=Kwan Jang]I'd have a fear alright, one of being sued by the moron after I busted him up.QUOTE]

Mm hm.

Scarlet Mist

16-Apr-2007, 06:50 AM

It was brought up in a previous thread, but I wanted to know everyone's opinion about BJJ guys going to TKD, kung fu, etc dojos to challenge the people who train there. Do you find it disrespectful? Would you do it yourself? If you don't train in BJJ how would you feel about it?

Personally, I think it'd be fun and would love to try it. There are way too many McDojos around my area and I think by storming I could restore some integrity. Sigh, it'll never happen though.

Really? Do it. Run up in the club where the Eskrima guys I used to train with practice at. They'll treat you real nice, I promise. Careful though, you might end up fighting without body armour, so yoyu should be prepared for the possibility of several broken ribs. Someone might even challenge you to match with telescoping batons.

"Dojo storming" is idiocy. If you challenge some guys at a McDojo who can't fight and tap them out, you prove you can beat guys with no grappling experience. You can't fight them standing up, because you haven't trained fighting standing up (if you've only practiced BJJ, that is) and they would drag you across the floor.

So cut the crap. BJJ has a place, as do other martial arts. Not every non - grappling club is a McDojo.

Atharel

16-Apr-2007, 07:26 AM

Really? Do it. Run up in the club where the Eskrima guys I used to train with practice at. They'll treat you real nice, I promise. Careful though, you might end up fighting without body armour, so yoyu should be prepared for the possibility of several broken ribs. Someone might even challenge you to match with telescoping batons.

so many problems, where to start... Well, first that BJJ clearly claims to deal primarily with unarmed single combat (ref: Theory & Technique) and most emphatically does not pretend to be capable of defeating an armed combatant a significant % of the time. Your scenario is about as plausible as the idea of your Escrima guys dojo storming a BJJ place and challenging the senior students and instructor to unarmed combat, or even better, your Eskrima crew challenging a Marine Marksmanship camp to fights to the death from 100 paces.

"Dojo storming" is idiocy. If you challenge some guys at a McDojo who can't fight and tap them out, you prove you can beat guys with no grappling experience. You can't fight them standing up, because you haven't trained fighting standing up (if you've only practiced BJJ, that is) and they would drag you across the floor.

If you challenge some guys at a McDojo who can't fight and tap them out, you proved that they can't fight someone who knows what they're doing. The hypothetical BJJ stormer fought them standing up to begin with and chose to utilize a takedown of some sort, a completely legitimate standup technique against which we can presume this hypothetical McDojo Grand Sensei had ineffective defense. Standup grappling is still standup fighting. Storming BJJ'ers traditionally don't just lay down and invite people into their guards. They blitz through whatever blows thrown their way and clinch, taking the opponent down. This very effective answer to solely standup artists is precisely why BJJ has so handily beaten "pure" other styles. Barring Gun-fu and live-blade kenjutsu, of course. :rolleyes:

So cut the crap. BJJ has a place, as do other martial arts. Not every non - grappling club is a McDojo.

"Cutting the crap" is the point of Dojo Arashi, and some martial arts are just plain BS (Ashida Kim, other fake ninja clans, etc). Not every non-grappling club is a McDojo but if they claim their art is better than all others and they're tapped out by a shrimpy BJJ blue belt, that claim is laid bare as false for all Grand Sensei's $250/month students to see.

I don't fully support Dojo Storming but your post was riddled with holes. I hope that your impression of the practice has been clarified by my response; it is not intended to be inflammatory.

Garibaldi

16-Apr-2007, 12:52 PM

1bad65

16-Apr-2007, 02:39 PM

The funny thing about all the TMA guys calling it disrespectful is that in Japan it used to be common. If someone opened a dojo, the other dojos would send people over to test the new guy. If he held his own, he was allowed to teach in that city. It was done for 'quality control'. I don't know about Japan now, but I know the US TMA scene could use alot of housecleaning.

stump

16-Apr-2007, 02:56 PM

Not every non - grappling club is a McDojo

Personally I hate the term McDojo but anyone teaching self defence who is not teaching at least some form of grappling is not preparing it's students.

MacWombat

16-Apr-2007, 03:33 PM

Anyone who seriously considers dojo storming needs to grow up considerably and miss one or two of their testosterone injections

Not everyone trains for the same purpose as you and whether or not you can beat the local "McDojo" instructor doesn't mean jack. All it shows is that you have a lot to learn in martial arts and life in general.

If a school places outside of its establishment that the art taught is not for self defense and fighting then there would be no reason to storm it.

The people that talk about this sort of thing are normally the ones that just talk about it.

If you are that intent on proving yourself why not walk into a pub in the roughest part of your town and challenge the local hardnut...I'm sure people would be willing to point him out for you...at least you'll find out if you've really got balls rather a coward that only wants to prove he can beat someone that you know can't fight

So you're admitting that they can't fight?

Dojo storming is a nice idea in theory but can't really happen in todays climate. It also isn't fair to non-grappling systems. You might walk into the best MT camp in the world but be able to take them down fairly easily with only taking a few shots to your person. That hardly means they are Bullshido (McDojo is the wrong word as a good school can be a McDojo).

Now agreed upon challenge matches in advance I think would be fair for any schools claiming to teach self defense. It could be done in a public way so if the school refused to participate it would be known to others. Still to my above comment it should be done within its own ranges. Even if a self defense school trains for grappling a little, it won't be able to contend with the grappling of a BJJ blue belt. That's fairly unrealistic.

Where dojo storming should really have a place is within the art's own system. A BJJ school should be able to storm any other BJJ school that the first feels is not legit. Same with TKD or MT or WC or whatever style you choose.

Scarlet Mist

16-Apr-2007, 03:40 PM

so many problems, where to start... Well, first that BJJ clearly claims to deal primarily with unarmed single combat (ref: Theory & Technique) and most emphatically does not pretend to be capable of defeating an armed combatant a significant % of the time. Your scenario is about as plausible as the idea of your Escrima guys dojo storming a BJJ place and challenging the senior students and instructor to unarmed combat, or even better, your Eskrima crew challenging a Marine Marksmanship camp to fights to the death from 100 paces.

You're just repeating the point I made. If BJJ is for grappling a single unarmed opponent, then why go and fight in a way other than you've trained? If a BJJ student was to challenge a TKD school, how would they fight? If the TKD guy can't grapple, and the BJJ guy ins't good at striking, what's the point? It's like comparing the skill of a soccer player and a cricketer. They're both sports, but how do you tell which is the better athlete?

It was for this reason that I brought up eskrima. If you're going to "Dojo storm", you must prepare for the possibility that you will be asked to do things that are dangerous and that you have little or no experience in doing.

So what is this "Dojo storming" then? A way for jackasses all hyped up on how good they are to show off?

If you challenge some guys at a McDojo who can't fight and tap them out, you proved that they can't fight someone who knows what they're doing. The hypothetical BJJ stormer fought them standing up to begin with and chose to utilize a takedown of some sort, a completely legitimate standup technique against which we can presume this hypothetical McDojo Grand Sensei had ineffective defense. Standup grappling is still standup fighting. Storming BJJ'ers traditionally don't just lay down and invite people into their guards. They blitz through whatever blows thrown their way and clinch, taking the opponent down. This very effective answer to solely standup artists is precisely why BJJ has so handily beaten "pure" other styles. Barring Gun-fu and live-blade kenjutsu, of course. :rolleyes:

No. Tapping them out means you can outgrapple them. It's not that difficult to get someone on the ground. Just because you can doesn't mean you're the shizzle. If you know BJJ, you could walk into my Kung Fu school and own all the instructors, because they're not good at grounfightning. Just as it's very easy for someone to choke you out with a stick even while you have the advantage from the mount.

Grappling is different from stand up fighting, as much as armed melee combat is different unarmed combat as much as projectile combat is different from melee combat.

Martialist4hire

16-Apr-2007, 04:03 PM

BJJ is a fine art that has a place in any good fighters arsenal. However, I think that with the current popularity of MMA some people have come to believe that ground fighting is an acceptable tactic for street fighting.

This, in my opinion, is not the case, I have trained in Jujitsu in the past can see where it might be useful in a real fight. But there are other fighting systems that are better suited to real world applications.

I'd pay real money to see a BJJ black belt come into the Krav Maga school I train at and challenge some of our fighters. Perhaps after a few eye gouges, bites, and the introduction of a hidden weapon or two, the BJJ challenger would see that the ground is one of the most dangerous places to be when faced with a determined opponent. Joint locks and submissions are great but some styles train to win at all costs.

I'd be careful of dojo storming unless you're prepared to take a beating now and again.

Yohan

16-Apr-2007, 04:19 PM

It was brought up in a previous thread, but I wanted to know everyone's opinion about BJJ guys going to TKD, kung fu, etc dojos to challenge the people who train there. Do you find it disrespectful? Would you do it yourself? If you don't train in BJJ how would you feel about it?

Personally, I think it'd be fun and would love to try it. There are way too many McDojos around my area and I think by storming I could restore some integrity. Sigh, it'll never happen though.

This is something a lot of people are going to take real seriously. If you tried this at some schools, you might walk over everyone, you try it at others and you might be chewing on a metal pole, or pulling a blade out of your ribs, or at the very best, nursing a busted lip or a broken rib. Why would you want to risk an injury that will potentially make you unable to train in the art that you love just to get in a weiner measuring competition.

There are ways to respectfully challenge instructors or students of a school without risking getting stabbed or hit in the head with something heavy.

If a group came in to my school like bulls in a China shop, it wouldn't end well. Given my instructors leave, I wouldn't bother giving a fair fight and would do the exact same thing I would do if someone tried to impose themselves in my home, or my own place of business; I'd try to hurt somebody, most likely with a weapon.

stump

16-Apr-2007, 04:22 PM

Martialist4hire

16-Apr-2007, 04:30 PM

..this is right up there on a par with "None could ever get me to the floor..." and other such gems.

Get me on the floor yes, but getting back up is another thing.

Doublejab

16-Apr-2007, 04:34 PM

That actually happened to Geoff Thompson when he was teaching a karate class. A boxer came in and said karate was rubbish. Geoff ended up knocking him out!

To me, if someones teaching MA (especially as self defence) then they should be good enough to not be unduely worried about anyone coming in and challenging them. Otherwise why are they teaching? I attended a kung fu school for several years which emphasised self defence yet taught mainly unrealistic techniques through non-contact drills and forms (nothing wrong with either but that was it!). I thought it was the dogs bs and frankly if someone had come in and shown me how unworkable the stuff was in a real situation I might have not wasted so much time training there!

Personally I'd absolutely hate to be the person who challenged my current kung fu teacher or my judo coach or my thai coach and thats the way it should be!

stump

16-Apr-2007, 04:41 PM

Guess Krav Maga don't do one on one fights then....hidden weapons??? Please!

Have tried the eye gouging thing....relatively easy to deal with...and even easier when you're in a position of dominance. Can't BJJ people fight dirty? Isn't it easier to fight dirty when you're in control?

And I'd have more faith in a competitive style developing a never give up attitude in it's students than a non competitive one.

1bad65

16-Apr-2007, 04:59 PM

I'd pay real money to see a BJJ black belt come into the Krav Maga school I train at and challenge some of our fighters. Perhaps after a few eye gouges, bites, and the introduction of a hidden weapon or two, the BJJ challenger would see that the ground is one of the most dangerous places to be when faced with a determined opponent. Joint locks and submissions are great but some styles train to win at all costs.

I'd be careful of dojo storming unless you're prepared to take a beating now and again.

Yeah that KM is the greatest! The link below is to an MMA fight. Matt trains with me at an MMA/boxing gym, he is the taller guy. Steve actually runs/owns(?) a KM place here in Austin, he is the shorter, darker skinned guy. They both had about the same number of fights, ~5, and Matt was about a Blue Belt rank in BJJ (he only does no-gi and does not care about belts so he never has bothered to get promoted). There were also 2 others fighting that night from the KM school, they both lost. FYI, I'm the guy who jumped on the cage after the fight was over, and yes my hair was blue at the time. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9Y6zrYoi3M

Thomas

16-Apr-2007, 05:04 PM

If someone shows up to your school and you don't accept the challenge, or arrange one within a week or so, you're scared. That's all it really boils down to. I can understand not wanting to accept the challenge, more to lose than gain... but maybe you should consider that before you hang a shingle outside your door saying you're an expert in self-defense.

Like my teacher did, you have to at some point put up or shut the hell up.

I think the notion of "self defense" adds a different element to the mix. If a group of BJJers show up to challenge everyone to a grappling match (one-on-one, whatever), aren't they expecting the school they are "storming" to follow their rules. What if the invaded school decides it's not a "grappling match", and that is a test of "self defense" skills?

Let's see... self defense side

-Awareness and avoidance : stall the invaders while someone calls the police and have them taken out in handcuffs (maybe even pepper-sprayed :D )

-Set the rules- if it's a TKD school, have the "stormers" put on all of the gear and do WTF rules. Let's see who wins.

- Change up the rules: let them start out one-on-one and then pile on as soon as it hits the ground. See how the multiple atackers thing works.

-Weapons: if you go to the local FMA school to "storm" it, why can't they use their sticks and knives against whatever you have... this is self defense not "grappling championships". For that matter, I know of a lot of martial arts students who carry handguns... if I saw some trespassers coming in "storming" my school and hurting a student, I'd be tempted to shoot them (hopefully justifiable).

All this crap about one-on-one fair matches according to BJJ rules is well and good if it's arranged ahead of time. Show up out of the blue with agressive attitudes and expect people to agree to fighting under your preferred rules sets for your satisfaction - you're crazy.

Weener posturing aside, like I said before, if you want to share ideas about training, get on good terms with local schools, invite them in and show them what you do. Then visit their schools and learn what they do. Then, set up a way to do a clinic for them or at your place and open it it up later to sparring under their rules, rolling under your rules, and then a combination. I'll bet you'll learn a lot, share a lot and make for great relations in your area (and a lot of opportunities) - in this, I do speak from experience.

Kwan Jang

16-Apr-2007, 05:09 PM

I should just let it slide, but to Flashlock's snide little bit of sarcassm. I have been in JJ since 1971 and have taught Submission Grappling, including BJJ as part of our MMA system for many years and have tapped some UFC veterans as well (who will remain nameless to protect the guilty, plus in fairness, I do have a significant size and strength advantage). I have rolled with world class judoka, sambo practitioners and members of the U.S. Olympic wrestling teams in both freestyle and Greco-Roman. I have been a professional kickboxer and an amatuer boxer as well. (Plus a tactical trainer, bouncer and bodyguard).

In addition, I have been a national level strength athlete with a full squat of over 800 lbs and a bench press near 600. So, yes, I would be more scared of getting sued for busting up some idiot who feels he needs to prove himself than being shown up by him. The legal climate may be different in other countries here on MAP, but in the USA: "Don't fear the idiot in front of you, fear his lawyers." And even if that wasn't the case, though I despise the "bullshido masters", this is still an immature way to deal with them.

Kwan Jang

16-Apr-2007, 05:13 PM

Stevebjj

16-Apr-2007, 05:52 PM

Yeah, thats it :rolleyes:

I dont give a monkeys hoo-ha either way about BJJ. What I get narked about is stupid nutriders coming around saying how BJJ/MMA/Muay Thai etc is better than anything else.
If anyone has insecurities about their practice, its those idiots.LOL... you're acting like Martin Short's "Nathan Thurm" character on SNL: I'm not being defensive. You're the one who's being defensive. It's not me. It's you.

http://ironmouth.com/content/binary/MaSh-Nathan%20Thurm.jpg

1bad65

16-Apr-2007, 05:57 PM

I so remember that guy! And you are dead on too.

Stevebjj

16-Apr-2007, 05:58 PM

Davey Bones

16-Apr-2007, 06:50 PM

I don't see where you are coming from--who is being rude? It's a challenge. You want flowers with it? A thank-you note? You can WALK into a studio, meet politely with the teacher, and challenge him/her. If you're asked to leave, leave. You're creating a cartoon character, some slobbering kid wanting to fight everyone. This is a Brasilian tradition that has been going on for decades, part of BJJ culture it seems to me, but I'm just a beginner.

Basically you expect to come into a school, demand a fight, and if the instructor says "no", you publicly discredit the school in your testosterone-filled attempt to "clean up martial arts".

Really, who in nine hells are any of you thinking you have the right to tell me me what to do or how to train?!?

Whatever. :rolleyes:

EDIT: Here's the part of the post I responded to, let me highlight the sheer arrogance of your commentary:

If someone shows up to your school and you don't accept the challenge, or arrange one within a week or so, you're scared. That's all it really boils down to. I can understand not wanting to accept the challenge, more to lose than gain... but maybe you should consider that before you hang a shingle outside your door saying you're an expert in self-defense.

Like my teacher did, you have to at some point put up or shut the hell up.

Yohan

16-Apr-2007, 06:58 PM

Martialist4hire

16-Apr-2007, 07:00 PM

Testing skills is fine, but in my opinion, the whole premise behind dojo storming is that a cocky guy wants to go out and prove himself by picking fights in a controlled setting where he can use rules to his advantage. If one organization wants to get with another and have a friendly exhibition than thats fine.

I get tired of people touting the MMA style of fighting and thinking its the be all end all of martial arts. The truth is that these people are great fighters in the ring. They train for the ring and thus, they excel there. However, fighting on the street is a different thing entirely.

Martial artists don't like to here this. Nobody believes that their martial art has any weaknesses or that they may be learning to put themselves in danger by closing with and opponent that may or may not be armed or cracked out and immune to the pain you're about to inflict. People like to think that they will ever get attacked by some crazy on the street but it does happen. BJJ is a great system, as are all of the martial arts. They all have strengths and weaknesses.

People who engage in this practice of dojo storming don't seem to be interested in learning about other systems. If a person wanted to test their skills against another style, than there are better, more respectful ways of making the challenge.

I would consider it a great insult if some guy walked in off the street and challenged me or my students to a fight. I think that I just might give them one, minus all the rules that would give them an advantage.

Scarlet Mist

16-Apr-2007, 07:01 PM

Oh I was wondering where that went. Less than 6 months in BJJ, and you already think you're hot ***** in a champagne glass. Let me tell you something brother, you're just cold diarrhea in a dixie cup.

Welcome to the internet tough guy club.

Hahahahahahahahahahaha. I could not have said it better.

stump

16-Apr-2007, 07:08 PM

I totally agree that it's not really acceptable behaviour but bringing out the old "too deadly" or " we only fight to the death" lines is equal foolishness.

Davey Bones

16-Apr-2007, 07:10 PM

I totally agree that it's not really acceptable behaviour but bringing out the old "too deadly" or " we only fight to the death" lines is equal foolishness.

Not going to argue with the last part either, I'm sick of hearing it as well, especially since we all know it's untrue.

1bad65

16-Apr-2007, 07:13 PM

wild_pitch

16-Apr-2007, 07:15 PM

I wouldn't take part in any dojo storming, but this sounds fun. More along the lines and in the spirit of sharing information/techniques than making anyone look bad, I think it would be really cool to test skills in this sort of environment. Of course, you're presuming that the Krav Maga guys would win. :)

My school hosted a Bullshido *throwdown* a few weeks ago. It was a lot of fun and good to train with people from other schools. Everyone was friendly and pretty laid back. It gives you a realistic understanding of what works and what does not. I fought people who trained in Systemma, MMA, and Combat Submission Wrestling.

I would totally recommend it to anyone who is interested in really seeing how well their training stands up.

Stevebjj

16-Apr-2007, 07:17 PM

I get tired of people touting the MMA style of fighting and thinking its the be all end all of martial arts. The truth is that these people are great fighters in the ring. They train for the ring and thus, they excel there. However, fighting on the street is a different thing entirely. Well, here I have to disagree. Not so much to assert that the MMA style of fighting is the be all and end all. More that you are stating your opinion and calling it "the truth". Ring fighting vs street fighting is not something that you (or I) can define. I will say, though, that in my opinion, you'd be foolish to ignore the lessons learned by those guys in the MMA rings. They're pressure testing a lot of techniques, and many of them work. That's a quantifiable truth.Martial artists don't like to here this. Nobody believes that their martial art has any weaknesses or that they may be learning to put themselves in danger by closing with and opponent that may or may not be armed or cracked out and immune to the pain you're about to inflict. People like to think that they will ever get attacked by some crazy on the street but it does happen. BJJ is a great system, as are all of the martial arts. They all have strengths and weaknesses. I disagree. Some martial arts systems are complete crap. Now, these martial artists certainly don't like to hear this, but that doesn't make it untrue. So, specifically to address your assertion that all martial arts systems are "great", I disagree. Some have just weaknesses. People who engage in this practice of dojo storming don't seem to be interested in learning about other systems. If a person wanted to test their skills against another style, than there are better, more respectful ways of making the challenge. This I agree with. But this...I would consider it a great insult if some guy walked in off the street and challenged me or my students to a fight. I think that I just might give them one, minus all the rules that would give them an advantage.This I think is the point. If you escalate the encounter, you (as a student or sensei/instructor) should be prepared for whatever consequences will occur, and you'd have to accept some responsibility for any fallout.

As with the guy from Australia (the kung fu guy and the BJJ instructor who popped his elbow), if you escalate the nature of the encounter, you may get injured. You may get someone else injured. If that's your goal or you'd allow anger or whatever else to influence you to this end, then I'd say it's good that you don't run a school right now.

Yohan

16-Apr-2007, 07:27 PM

I love how all the anti-storming guys are experts on it. As cocky as some of the Gracies were, they used to do it to test themselves, not show off. And if you ever seen the clip with the Gracies vs a Karate school where Rolls fights last, the Karate school owner was all over TV demanding the fights. Speaking of Rolls, he was well known to cross train, especially in Judo and Wrestling. He was not a 'BJJ is the ultimate' guy. And Rorion himself at UFC 1 actually said, 'no one is punch-proof'.

Go back and look at the videos. Untill you post some evidence showing where the Gracies "stormed" another school and cleaned house, I'm calling BS on this one. If you look at most of the Gracie's challenge match vids, they occured:

1. In a Gracie gym, where someone had come in from the outside and challenged a la Jason Delucia.

2. Out in public, a la the beach fight.

3. In a public venue, a la the Karate challenge vid posted recently by BigBoss.

Atharel

16-Apr-2007, 07:30 PM

You're just repeating the point I made. If BJJ is for grappling a single unarmed opponent, then why go and fight in a way other than you've trained? If a BJJ student was to challenge a TKD school, how would they fight? If the TKD guy can't grapple, and the BJJ guy ins't good at striking, what's the point? It's like comparing the skill of a soccer player and a cricketer. They're both sports, but how do you tell which is the better athlete?

They should fight under a ruleset that allows both arts' techniques. And I did not say BJJ is for just "grappling" a single unarmed opponent. It's for fighting a single unarmed opponent.

It was for this reason that I brought up eskrima. If you're going to "Dojo storm", you must prepare for the possibility that you will be asked to do things that are dangerous and that you have little or no experience in doing.

Like fight under a ruleset that doesn't disallow grappling? :rolleyes:

So what is this "Dojo storming" then? A way for jackasses all hyped up on how good they are to show off?
It's a way to test the claims and skill of the receiving Dojo.

No. Tapping them out means you can outgrapple them. It's not that difficult to get someone on the ground. Just because you can doesn't mean you're the shizzle. If you know BJJ, you could walk into my Kung Fu school and own all the instructors, because they're not good at grounfightning.
Exactly. So anyone who says that their style is infallible, the best, or even just "better than that groundfighting crap" would almost certainly be exposed as a liar.
Just as it's very easy for someone to choke you out with a stick even while you have the advantage from the mount.
Uh. No it isn't. Ever watch Dog Brother fights? Sticking your arm up with a stick in it results in an armbar just as much as sticking an arm up without one.

Grappling is different from stand up fighting,
Ground grappling is different from standup fighting, but it takes standup grappling to get there. Standup grappling is part of standup fighting. If your standup system has no answer to a takedown, whether it be a standing throw or a shoot, from a new blue belt in BJJ, that shows a weakness in its overall standup fighting.

This is something a lot of people are going to take real seriously.
Good, quality control is a serious matter.
If you tried this at some schools, you might walk over everyone, you try it at others and you might be chewing on a metal pole, or pulling a blade out of your ribs
Shows their unarmed combat skill really well :rolleyes:
or at the very best, nursing a busted lip or a broken rib.
Good! If they're capable of holding their own, that proves the school's quality! That's the point, you're acting like it's some ego trip when Dojo Arashi, as MacWombat pointed out, has always been about prevent fakes from teaching substandard crap.

There are ways to respectfully challenge instructors or students of a school without risking getting stabbed or hit in the head with something heavy.
Dojo storming is not necessarily more disrespectful than the mere fact that there is a challenge. This is up to the individual stormers.

If a group came in to my school like bulls in a China shop, it wouldn't end well. Given my instructors leave, I wouldn't bother giving a fair fight and would do the exact same thing I would do if someone tried to impose themselves in my home, or my own place of business; I'd try to hurt somebody, most likely with a weapon.
Hah, keep creating this strawman of a dojo stormer so you can talk about how badly you'd beat them down (who're the ego-strokers here?) but there is no reason for a dojo storming to be a bunch of bulls in a China shop. What if a crew from some San Shou or MT place showed up and said, in normal tones without posturing, that they had heard that your school was teaching ineffective unarmed skills and wished to put your school to the test? That is a far more likely scenario than these imaginary roid-raging MMAers you could finally find a use for your dao with.

All this crap about one-on-one fair matches according to BJJ rules is well and good(+rest of the post)
Thomas, you seem to be under the impression that BJJ stormers would demand fights under BJJ rules. Historically it's always been under NHB or MMA rules allowing both styles to use their strategies and techniques. Otherwise it defeats the purpose - unless the school being challenged is a grappling school, I suppose. As to the rest - if it was a BJJ crew storming, the challenge would be unarmed single combat. And if you started shooting (What?? Take a deep breath and relax here...) please be aware that there are a very disproportionate number of police officers in BJJ - about a dozen in my school alone. Also, the "pile on as soon as it hits the ground" would be hilarious if the other hypothetical BJJ stormers joined in as soon as these TKDers did. In a "that's so sad" hilarious way. One of the self-defense lessons I regularly hear from my BJJ instructor is "always have friends with you", after all... if "self-defense" principles are going to be tested, why not both ways? Of course, this just shows how "cheating" like that destroys the line between sparring and "stuff that gets everyone involved arrested".

Your suggestion on how to go about sharing ideas and skills is fantastic for that purpose. Sharing ideas is, however, different from getting a strip mall made-up-ryu Karate master, who mysteriously acquired a BJJ black belt, to shut up shop or at least remove that claim. The threat of challenge is of course often sufficient itself - but removing all threat.. well, there's a reason that no one in Brazil falsely claims to have a high rank in BJJ. That's what dojo storming is all about, and not just by or about BJJ: it's quality control in the martial arts.

Kwan Jang - if some people showed up and asked to be shown your school's skills through sparring matches, what's essentially wrong with that? And that's what dojo storming is at the base level. Disrespectful ego trips is another issue that would cloud any and all interactions between people. Ego tripping dojo storming, ego tripping building inspectors, ego tripping reporters talking about how brutal and lowbrow your gym is - see a pattern?

edit: I would never take part in a dojo storming, to make that clear. Bad arguments are still bad arguments regardless, though.

Yohan

16-Apr-2007, 07:39 PM

Hah, keep creating this strawman of a dojo stormer so you can talk about how badly you'd beat them down (who're the ego-strokers here?) but there is no reason for a dojo storming to be a bunch of bulls in a China shop. What if a crew from some San Shou or MT place showed up and said, in normal tones without posturing, that they had heard that your school was teaching ineffective unarmed skills and wished to put your school to the test? That is a far more likely scenario than these imaginary roid-raging MMAers you could finally find a use for your dao with.

That's not a dojo storm - in my opinion. That's a semi-respectful challenge.

Maybe we aren't on the same page here. I'm thinking that storming a dojo would be the same thing as storming a garage, or storming a bar. You bust in and start throwing blows.

What you are talking about is a challenge match, not a dojo storm (in my estimation anyways).

Hah, keep creating this strawman of a dojo stormer so you can talk about how badly you'd beat them down (who're the ego-strokers here?) but there is no reason for a dojo storming to be a bunch of bulls in a China shop. What if a crew from some San Shou or MT place showed up and said, in normal tones without posturing, that they had heard that your school was teaching ineffective unarmed skills and wished to put your school to the test? That is a far more likely scenario than these imaginary roid-raging MMAers you could finally find a use for your dao with.

What are you talking about? First off, I'm not stroking my ego. If someone busted in your place of business or home, uninvited, and started picking a fight with your wife or your co-workers, I'd hope you'd put the hurtin' on them old-school stylee with the quickness! If someone came in to my school and told my instructor he thought that what we are teaching is ineffective and he wanted to challenge my instructor, well, he'd get what he was looking for - a fair challenge match!

Yohan

16-Apr-2007, 07:41 PM

Ok let's get on the same page here. Is there anyone in the thread who doesn't understand the difference between storming a dojo, and requesting a challenge match?

Atharel

16-Apr-2007, 07:43 PM

A (series) of challenge match(es) is a dojo storm IMO. The phrase "Dojo Arashi" is the origin of the term "dojo storm" and is a literal translation. It describes the practice of challenge matches between schools to maintain quality in Japan's history. These challenge matches were usually civil, if intense.

This practice is still kept in Brazil (and possibly Japan? I don't know).

Atharel

16-Apr-2007, 07:49 PM

Ok let's get on the same page here. Is there anyone in the thread who doesn't understand the difference between storming a dojo, and requesting a challenge match?

Storming a dojo is just going in numbers and requesting a series of challenge matches. This is what differentiates it from a challenge match - it is designed not to showcase the skill of one fighter, but the entire school. "Requesting" is a bit weak, though.

Yohan

16-Apr-2007, 07:57 PM

Storming a dojo is just going in numbers and requesting a series of challenge matches. This is what differentiates it from a challenge match - it is designed not to showcase the skill of one fighter, but the entire school. "Requesting" is a bit weak, though.

Ok then - I can live with that. I wouldn't try to hit anyone in the head with anything heavy over what you have described. It's not quite what I had in mind.

What you are describing sounds like fun actually, though not quite as exciting as hitting some roid-junkie in the head witth a metal pipe after he kicked down the door!

:D :D

Yohan

16-Apr-2007, 08:01 PM

Atharel

16-Apr-2007, 08:05 PM

http://sydlexia.com/imagesandstuff/sor1/Streets%20of%20Rage%20031.jpg

1bad65

16-Apr-2007, 08:13 PM

Go back and look at the videos. Untill you post some evidence showing where the Gracies "stormed" another school and cleaned house, I'm calling BS on this one. If you look at most of the Gracie's challenge match vids, they occured:

Not sure what you are asking for here??? That certain 'challenge' was done on concrete if you missed it. This was at the Karate guys' request. He actually felt the Gracies could not fight on concrete, only mats.

There is video out there of them 'storming' a Judo dojo. I'll look for that.

Agutrot-

16-Apr-2007, 08:14 PM

I think it'd be a great way to get students if you start up your own gym. It would do all the people at the crappy dojos a favor too.

Yohan

16-Apr-2007, 08:23 PM

Not sure what you are asking for here??? That certain 'challenge' was done on concrete if you missed it. This was at the Karate guys' request. He actually felt the Gracies could not fight on concrete, only mats.

There is video out there of them 'storming' a Judo dojo. I'll look for that.

Well, it's kind of a moot point now that the concept of dojo storming has been explained to me. I just didn't understand what you guys were discussing.

Kwajman

16-Apr-2007, 08:27 PM

I just think it would have the potential for an escalation into something you wouldn't want. I think the two arts are so far apart in style that it would be difficult to come to terms on the rules.

Yohan

16-Apr-2007, 08:34 PM

I just think it would have the potential for an escalation into something you wouldn't want. I think the two arts are so far apart in style that it would be difficult to come to terms on the rules.

Why not just let them have it out?

Atharel

16-Apr-2007, 08:40 PM

Agutrot-

16-Apr-2007, 10:20 PM

I believe if you allow all the techniques that are legal in both art there wouldn't be any problem. You can do everything you know. The only reason you wouldn't agree to this is if you're afraid that allowing something different will show the holes in your training.

Davey Bones

16-Apr-2007, 11:58 PM

P.S.-My apologies to everryone else on this thread for my own showing of testosterone/ego, but sometimes these "nut hugging" noobs get really annoying. This is why I usually refrain from making comments on threads like these.

Oh, please, continue to comment. We need more intelligent posts from the straightforward TMAers who simply don't think much of the 'tude we're seeing (and fewer comments from the "we're too deadly to spar" set, please).

Thomas

17-Apr-2007, 01:09 AM

They should fight under a ruleset that allows both arts' techniques. And I did not say BJJ is for just "grappling" a single unarmed opponent. It's for fighting a single unarmed opponent.

Like fight under a ruleset that doesn't disallow grappling? :rolleyes:

It's a way to test the claims and skill of the receiving Dojo.
I think that's a pretty key point in bold face - if you show up at a TKD school that says it teaches WTF Olympic style Taekwondo,looks like you'll have to follow their rules to see if they backing up their "claims and skills".

If it's "self defense" you are going in to check... be ready for the full range of "self defense" and not just a one-on-one MMA rules situation.

Again, my comments here are based on my current working definition of "dojo storming" - namely "a large group of BJJ students showing up unannounced and uninvited and demanding one-on-one challenge matches that at the very least allow grappling."

Dojo storming is not necessarily more disrespectful than the mere fact that there is a challenge. This is up to the individual stormers.
If you want to be mature, professional, reflective students and see how you stack up with local schools, visit them and train with them to get an idea of what they do. Once they get to know you and know you aren't some slobbering maniac, you'll get a chance to roll. Such an environment is much more suited to learning and sharing than "storming the place."

(+rest of the post)
Thomas, you seem to be under the impression that BJJ stormers would demand fights under BJJ rules. Historically it's always been under NHB or MMA rules allowing both styles to use their strategies and techniques. Otherwise it defeats the purpose - unless the school being challenged is a grappling school, I suppose. As to the rest - if it was a BJJ crew storming, the challenge would be unarmed single combat. And if you started shooting (What?? Take a deep breath and relax here...) please be aware that there are a very disproportionate number of police officers in BJJ - about a dozen in my school alone. Also, the "pile on as soon as it hits the ground" would be hilarious if the other hypothetical BJJ stormers joined in as soon as these TKDers did. In a "that's so sad" hilarious way. One of the self-defense lessons I regularly hear from my BJJ instructor is "always have friends with you", after all... if "self-defense" principles are going to be tested, why not both ways? Of course, this just shows how "cheating" like that destroys the line between sparring and "stuff that gets everyone involved arrested".

Re-read my posts.

By the way, why does the challenge have to be unarmed single combat (ooooh - define "combat"). If you are showing up to test how well we teach what we advertise you need to be ready to handle the whole curriculum, not "just" the grappling and standup under MMA rules (unless we are a MMA school and say that's what we do).

As an instructor, there's no way I am going to get involved in a "challenge" match with some stranger who shows up to my school. One, if I lose or get hurt (especially if the opponent doesn't follow the rules) I am off teaching for a while/have medical bills/out of work/etc or Two, if I win and hurt the guy I open myself up to a lawsuit or maybe even criminal charges. I don't see where the benefit is for me to roll around with some stranger on the floor. If you want to know what we do and try us out, be a man (or woman) and call us up, set up an appointment to try out a few classes and once we get to know you (at least your control and respect) then we can roll a buit. Who knows - you might learn something.

Your suggestion on how to go about sharing ideas and skills is fantastic for that purpose.
Thank you.

Sharing ideas is, however, different from getting a strip mall made-up-ryu Karate master, who mysteriously acquired a BJJ black belt, to shut up shop or at least remove that claim. The threat of challenge is of course often sufficient itself - but removing all threat.. well, there's a reason that no one in Brazil falsely claims to have a high rank in BJJ. That's what dojo storming is all about, and not just by or about BJJ: it's quality control in the martial arts.
It's one thing to police your own style (e.g. your BJJ example) but expecting all other martial arts schools to conform to what "you" see as a valid art is a bit off in my opinion. I have no problem with bashing a school for "saying" they teach something they don't , but as long as they deliver what they say, I don't have a problem with it. If the local TKD school advertises WTF Olympic sparring and fitness... great. If they suddenly begin offering the "Perfect Korean Ninja anti-grappling street self defense"... I can see why it might be nice to check them out and spread the word on what they do.

Challenging them to fights though - I don't think so. Generally a few lessons and a few rounds with them in class should give you most of what you need to know without having to get into ego-fights. That's my 2 cents though.

flashlock

17-Apr-2007, 01:23 AM

Challenging them to fights though - I don't think so. Generally a few lessons and a few rounds with them in class should give you most of what you need to know without having to get into ego-fights. That's my 2 cents though.

If I thought your school and methods were--forgive me--crap, why would I spend time and money getting lessons from you? You don't make much sense to me. With combat, things would be settled very quickly. Again and again, people forget that what we do is supposed to be BUDDO, that is, FIGHTING. BJJ guys are willing to have no rules: eye gouge us, rip our balls off, whatever--you won't be able to do it. My teacher accepted this challenge (see my thread entitled "BJJ Etiquette"... I think where this thread developed from).

You can have rules if you don't want to be that extreme. You can't say, "We teach ITF TKD, and only that. In the street, or for real self defense, you might as well take ballet, because our stuff won't work, so don't challenge us." I don't care how you wrap it, TKD, Kung Fu, Aikido--it's all supposed to be buddo, it should all be tested for real life combat, or what are we doing? I think what you and people like you have to ask yourselves is: "What are we afraid of?... and WHY?"--for you are afraid your whole artificial construct will collapse like a house of cards when faced with a true challenge.

Thomas

17-Apr-2007, 01:37 AM

If I thought your school and methods were--forgive me--crap, why would I spend time and money getting lessons from you? You don't make much sense to me.
Actually we offer students 3 free lessons for newbies and for people coming from other styles we let them train for free for a while until they decide whether they want to stay or not (we've picked up a nice collection of people along the way).

Spending time with an instructor and a class on the mats is a good to see what they do a regular basis and gives you a good chance to see how good the instructors are, and even more telling, how good their students are.

Make sense now?

With combat, things would be settled very quickly. Again and again, people forget that what we do is supposed to be BUDDO, that is, FIGHTING. BJJ guys are willing to have no rules: eye gouge us, rip our balls off, whatever--you won't be able to do it. My teacher accepted this challenge (see my thread entitled "BJJ Etiquette"... I think where this thread developed from).
Great for your teacher.

Now, what do you mean by "combat"? Ever served in "Combat"? Do you realize that there is a big difference between "competing" and "combat"?

By the way, my impression is that Budo (Korean Mudo )is actually a lot more than "just" fighting, it's about a way of life, economy of force, preserving life, creativity and whole lot more than "just" fighting.

You can have rules if you don't want to be that extreme. You can't say, "We teach ITF TKD, and only that. In the street, or for real self defense, you might as well take ballet, because our stuff won't work, so don't challenge us." I don't care how you wrap it, TKD, Kung Fu, Aikido--it's all supposed to be buddo, it should all be tested for real life combat, or what are we doing? I think what you and people like you have to ask yourselves is: "What are we afraid of?... and WHY?"--for you are afraid your whole artificial construct will collapse like a house of cards when faced with a true challenge.
My honest advice to you is to get out, visit some schools, travel around the world and try out different arts/styles/instructors and see what it's all about. Personally I get the idea you don't know what you're talking about.

I'm a big fan of BJJ and see the importance of ground grappling in self defense. But it isn't the end-all, be-all of "combat". Get out in the real world and challenges aren't settled by one-on-one MMA-rules challenges... things are a lot more gray than black and white and you may find yourself in a lot more danger than you expected.

As for a "true challenge" - well, I've done pretty well travelling around the world (as a civilian and soldier) and have a good life and live well. I fell pretty good about protecting myself and my loved ones and train hard to be able to do so. Can I beat a teenage BJJ brown belt in a dojang MMA challenge match? Probably not. Can I teach a handicapped man to protect himself downtown? Yes. Can I teach college students to escape from men with bad inetntions at the local bars? Yes. Can I teahc students to deal with situations with a minimum of force and keep them from injury, lawsuits and criminal procedings? Yes.

Looking at martial arts from a Mudo (or "Budo") perspective is a lot more challenging than rolling around on the floor and thinking that's "combat".

flashlock

17-Apr-2007, 01:46 AM

Actually we offer students 3 free lessons for newbies and for people coming from other styles we let them train for free for a while until they decide whether they want to stay or not (we've picked up a nice collection of people along the way).

Spending time with an instructor and a class on the mats is a good to see what they do a regular basis and gives you a good chance to see how good the instructors are, and even more telling, how good their students are.

Make sense now?

Great for your teacher.

Now, what do you mean by "combat"? Ever served in "Combat"? Do you realize that there is a big difference between "competing" and "combat"?

By the way, my impression is that Budo (Korean Mudo )is actually a lot more than "just" fighting, it's about a way of life, economy of force, preserving life, creativity and whole lot more than "just" fighting.

My honest advice to you is to get out, visit some schools, travel around the world and try out different arts/styles/instructors and see what it's all about. Personally I get the idea you don't know what you're talking about.

I'm a big fan of BJJ and see the importance of ground grappling in self defense. But it isn't the end-all, be-all of "combat". Get out in the real world and challenges aren't settled by one-on-one MMA-rules challenges... things are a lot more gray than black and white and you may find yourself in a lot more danger than you expected.

As for a "true challenge" - well, I've done pretty well travelling around the world (as a civilian and soldier) and have a good life and live well. I fell pretty good about protecting myself and my loved ones and train hard to be able to do so. Can I beat a teenage BJJ brown belt in a dojang MMA challenge match? Probably not. Can I teach a handicapped man to protect himself downtown? Yes. Can I teach college students to escape from men with bad inetntions at the local bars? Yes. Can I teahc students to deal with situations with a minimum of force and keep them from injury, lawsuits and criminal procedings? Yes.

Looking at martial arts from a Mudo (or "Budo") perspective is a lot more challenging than rolling around on the floor and thinking that's "combat".

You're patronizing. I would not take "free lessons" from a school I thought was garbage (not implying your is, I have no idea and it's neither here nor there for this discussion).

I agree, self-defense and rolling with BJJ guys is different. But if you can defend yourself against a BJJ greenbelt or above, you're probably going to fare pretty well against anyone.

I just got back from a "Street Survival Seminar", and up front, the instructor said most of the people you will face are not going to be highly trained. It's very doubtful, almost impossible, your attacker will be a BJJ guy. I don't see BJJ guys dorm storming a women's rape prevention club, or self-defense only oriented "joint", but it depends on what they claim.

Now, this instructor at the self-defense seminar at least mentioned BJJ--the only MA he DID mention, funny that. His answers from the mount, knee on chest, and in the guard, were adequate (palm heel the head or balls)... but he had nothing for if you were the one in danger on your back stuck in the mount. As a self-defense person, don't you have to teach BJJ, at least for ground techniques? And if you don't, aren't you open to challenges from BJJ guys? And if you lose, don't you have to quit what you teach and teach BJJ, or admit you're dishonest and inadequate?

Thomas

17-Apr-2007, 02:01 AM

You're patronizing. I would not take "free lessons" from a school I thought was garbage (not implying your is, I have no idea and it's neither here nor there for this discussion).
Yup - I am. And you are closed-minded. :D

I agree, self-defense and rolling with BJJ guys is different. But if you can defend yourself against a BJJ greenbelt or above, you're probably going to fare pretty well against anyone.
Believe it or not, I agree in some sense. The ground material is necessary. However, "real" self defense is more than just being able to grapple at a green belt level... there's a lot more involved.

As a self-defense person, don't you have to teach BJJ, at least for ground techniques?
You do need to have somethiong for the ground. For us, Hapkido provides a decent foundation and we use elements of BJJ to round it out. Again, we are generalists and not specialists. Our goal is primarily to stay on our feet and escape or strike, prevent a takedown (using range or sprawling) if need be, survive on the ground if we end up there. I teach use of the guard, mount, side mount along with some striking/submissions/escapes for each all with a philosophy of returning to our feet and escaping.

We aren't ground specialists and one-on-one under ground rules against a specialist, we will probably lose. However, we don't plan to have to take on ground specialists in their element only to be able to survive in a basic way until we can escape (run away), or at least return to a position of our advantage, even if that involves use of a weapon, a buddy, etc.

And if you don't, aren't you open to challenges from BJJ guys? And if you lose, don't you have to quit what you teach and teach BJJ, or admit you're dishonest and inadequate?
No. We don't teach BJJ and that's not our area. We have a decent ground survival game (and have done well working with the local NHB guys in general) but our entire philosophy is different. Our goal is to escape and get away and/or survive on the ground long enough to find our way back up to our feet where we can use our other aspects of the art.

So, if I was attacked by a rabid BJJer downtown and I managed to escape and run away, I call that a "win"... I doubt he would though. :D
Different perspectives.

The notion of quitting what you do if you lose to a BJJer and have to teach that is a bizarre concept. Helio Gracie didn't end up learning Kimura's art, did he? Did Royce start training under Sakuraba or Hughes yet? I don't recall either ever giving up BJJ anr even saying their art was dishonest or inadequate.

Martial arts are more than about one aspect of competition.

Davey Bones

17-Apr-2007, 02:03 AM

I think what you and people like you have to ask yourselves is: "What are we afraid of?... and WHY?"--for you are afraid your whole artificial construct will collapse like a house of cards when faced with a true challenge.

Really, at this point, all that needs to be said is "get over yourself". :rolleyes: Every time I delude myself into thinking one of the nutriders is about to say something even remotely reasonable... *POW*.

flashlock

17-Apr-2007, 02:08 AM

Really, at this point, all that needs to be said is "get over yourself". :rolleyes: Every time I delude myself into thinking one of the nutriders is about to say something even remotely reasonable... *POW*.

What have you contributed that was reasonable? Not a goddamn thing. You just sit back and say how stupid people who advocate dojo storming are, followed by a lame smilie. Why don't you make a single clear argument why dojo storming should never be done, or kindly retire to whatever gay pornsite you got your avatar from.

NewLearner

17-Apr-2007, 02:13 AM

You're patronizing. I would not take "free lessons" from a school I thought was garbage (not implying your is, I have no idea and it's neither here nor there for this discussion).

I agree, self-defense and rolling with BJJ guys is different. But if you can defend yourself against a BJJ greenbelt or above, you're probably going to fare pretty well against anyone.

I just got back from a "Street Survival Seminar", and up front, the instructor said most of the people you will face are not going to be highly trained. It's very doubtful, almost impossible, your attacker will be a BJJ guy. I don't see BJJ guys dorm storming a women's rape prevention club, or self-defense only oriented "joint", but it depends on what they claim.

Now, this instructor at the self-defense seminar at least mentioned BJJ--the only MA he DID mention, funny that. His answers from the mount, knee on chest, and in the guard, were adequate (palm heel the head or balls)... but he had nothing for if you were the one in danger on your back stuck in the mount. As a self-defense person, don't you have to teach BJJ, at least for ground techniques? And if you don't, aren't you open to challenges from BJJ guys? And if you lose, don't you have to quit what you teach and teach BJJ, or admit you're dishonest and inadequate?

I imagine that any halfway responsible adult would respond to such a challenge by calling the cops and having you arrested for trespassing at their school.

Atharel

17-Apr-2007, 02:17 AM

flashlock - you should tone down the confrontational attitude. friendly advice. Thomas is being calm and reasonable even in his disagreements, no reason you can't do the same.

And if you lose, don't you have to quit what you teach and teach BJJ,

This is possibly the craziest thing to come out of this thread so far, and that's saying a lot.

flashlock

17-Apr-2007, 02:32 AM

flashlock

17-Apr-2007, 02:34 AM

flashlock

17-Apr-2007, 02:37 AM

I imagine that any halfway responsible adult would respond to such a challenge by calling the cops and having you arrested for trespassing at their school.

Based on what charges? If they're asked to leave, and don't leave, yes, call the cops (seems a bit yellow to me, but I'm hardly mature or responsible). It's not trespassing, or is it unprescedented for fighters to issue challenges for matches.

NewLearner

17-Apr-2007, 02:39 AM

Why? If you can't beat it... my BJJ coach actually did this. It's not crazy, it's being honest and wanting to train in the best system.

So your bjj coach was something else, got publicly humiliated by being challenged in front of his own school, lost badly, quit his old system and denounces it at every opportunity, and took up BJJ?

Or did your bjj coach go and challenge others to build up a reputation?

My guess is the second.

NewLearner

17-Apr-2007, 02:49 AM

Based on what charges? If they're asked to leave, and don't leave, yes, call the cops (seems a bit yellow to me, but I'm hardly mature or responsible). It's not trespassing, or is it unprescedented for fighters to issue challenges for matches.

I specified trespassing as the charge. Gangrel can probably explain the concept a little better than I can, but you don't have a right to enter private property inconsistent with it's business. Entering a martial arts school during business hours to sign up for classes is ok. Doing so to do something else, whether just to ogle the girls or make fun of the students, is not.

Scarlet Mist

17-Apr-2007, 02:50 AM

If I thought your school and methods were--forgive me--crap, why would I spend time and money getting lessons from you? You don't make much sense to me. With combat, things would be settled very quickly. Again and again, people forget that what we do is supposed to be BUDDO, that is, FIGHTING. BJJ guys are willing to have no rules: eye gouge us, rip our balls off, whatever--you won't be able to do it. My teacher accepted this challenge (see my thread entitled "BJJ Etiquette"... I think where this thread developed from).

You can have rules if you don't want to be that extreme. You can't say, "We teach ITF TKD, and only that. In the street, or for real self defense, you might as well take ballet, because our stuff won't work, so don't challenge us." I don't care how you wrap it, TKD, Kung Fu, Aikido--it's all supposed to be buddo, it should all be tested for real life combat, or what are we doing? I think what you and people like you have to ask yourselves is: "What are we afraid of?... and WHY?"--for you are afraid your whole artificial construct will collapse like a house of cards when faced with a true challenge.

Combat? No rules? Fighting? Budo? Whatever?
So why don't you 'dojo storm' an eskrima school. They'll hook you up with some nice stick on stick action. Can you handle it?

For real self defense?
The last time I heard of an unarmed attack was ... damn, I can't remember. Most people where I'm from get attacked with metal pipes, or knives or guns.
So if you're dealing with real self defense, be prepared for someone to pull some kind of weapon out. Are you prepared for that? If all you know is unarmed combat, you are no more prepared for handling your scandal than an athletic person at your local karate dojo.

Atharel

17-Apr-2007, 02:55 AM

He calls me a nutrider, and unreasonable, etc., and *I* am asked to tone it down? Yeah, sure...
Don't feed the loop. And I don't believe Thomas was the one calling you a nutrider and unreasonable.
Why? If you can't beat it... my BJJ coach actually did this. It's not crazy, it's being honest and wanting to train in the best system.
Pure art versus pure art it's well established BJJ will win a large majority of the time. The problem is that other arts do have value even if they can't win against BJJ - after all, Dekkers lost to Genki Sudo, and I don't think anyone's denying that Muay Thai is worth training in. Your proposition, if followed, would result in everyone training just BJJ, even though BJJ + (insert good standup art here) is better than pure BJJ. Counterproductive.

Scarlet Mist

17-Apr-2007, 03:04 AM

They should fight under a ruleset that allows both arts' techniques. And I did not say BJJ is for just "grappling" a single unarmed opponent. It's for fighting a single unarmed opponent.

OK. Fairly useful skill. How do you propose to deal with dojos' claims of being able to handle multiple attackers?

Like fight under a ruleset that doesn't disallow grappling? :rolleyes:

No. Like fight under a ruleset that allows melee wepons.

It's a way to test the claims and skill of the receiving Dojo.

And that is your business because?

edit: I would never take part in a dojo storming, to make that clear. Bad arguments are still bad arguments regardless, though.

That's good to hear. One less idiot to deal with.

Uh. No it isn't. Ever watch Dog Brother fights? Sticking your arm up with a stick in it results in an armbar just as much as sticking an arm up without one.

That's not necessarily true. People have been choked from the beneath the mount. You should stop watching the dogbrothers and actually go do some of that stuff yourself.

Stevebjj

17-Apr-2007, 03:13 AM

flashlock - you should tone down the confrontational attitude. friendly advice. Thomas is being calm and reasonable even in his disagreements, no reason you can't do the same.

This is possibly the craziest thing to come out of this thread so far, and that's saying a lot.Seconded, and I'd say the same to Gangrel. Neither are doing much to keep the discussion civil.

I do wonder, flashlock, whether your instructor knows how one of his newest students is representing him and his school on the internet. He may, and he may be okay with it. I know I'd be very irritated to be trotted out as a BJJ stereotype to support a brand new student's zealous nutriding. And yes, you are the quintessential nutrider. It's not libel if it's true.Pure art versus pure art it's well established BJJ will win a large majority of the time. The problem is that other arts do have value even if they can't win against BJJ - after all, Dekkers lost to Genki Sudo, and I don't think anyone's denying that Muay Thai is worth training in. Your proposition, if followed, would result in everyone training just BJJ, even though BJJ + (insert good standup art here) is better than pure BJJ. Counterproductive.Agreed.

I think that BS schools selling belts or bogus "self defense" are irritating and that we as members of a relatively small community should work to publicize the good and the bad among our local schools. But this can be done without acting like a dick. And that's what it really comes down to for me.

I really like BJJ and am glad I finally found the MA that suits me. I take pride in learning and being affiliated with my school, representing my instructor. I have to admit that I have some arrogant thoughts and may even smirk a little every time I walk by the kung fu for kids dojo down at the local outdoor mall or any of the Kim's or Lee's TKD schools (of which there are several). But at the very least, I try not to be a complete dick about it. Seems like that's reasonable to me.

Stevebjj

17-Apr-2007, 03:18 AM

That's not necessarily true. People have been choked from the beneath the mount. You should stop watching the dogbrothers and actually go do some of that stuff yourself.People get choked from beneath a mount all the time. They also get armbarred from beneath a mount, too. Not sure what you're driving at here.

And watching more dog brothers might be just the thing. They "spar" full contact with weapons. They go with one or two sticks often with only a mask to protect their faces, gloves and a cup. Those guys are bona fide badasses, and if you really want to test your 'art', that would seem to be a great place to start. I don't know, but they seem like a group that would be perfectly willing to test multiple opponents, as well.

flashlock

17-Apr-2007, 03:21 AM

Yup - I am. And you are closed-minded. :D

Believe it or not, I agree in some sense. The ground material is necessary. However, "real" self defense is more than just being able to grapple at a green belt level... there's a lot more involved.

You do need to have somethiong for the ground. For us, Hapkido provides a decent foundation and we use elements of BJJ to round it out. Again, we are generalists and not specialists. Our goal is primarily to stay on our feet and escape or strike, prevent a takedown (using range or sprawling) if need be, survive on the ground if we end up there. I teach use of the guard, mount, side mount along with some striking/submissions/escapes for each all with a philosophy of returning to our feet and escaping.

We aren't ground specialists and one-on-one under ground rules against a specialist, we will probably lose. However, we don't plan to have to take on ground specialists in their element only to be able to survive in a basic way until we can escape (run away), or at least return to a position of our advantage, even if that involves use of a weapon, a buddy, etc.

No. We don't teach BJJ and that's not our area. We have a decent ground survival game (and have done well working with the local NHB guys in general) but our entire philosophy is different. Our goal is to escape and get away and/or survive on the ground long enough to find our way back up to our feet where we can use our other aspects of the art.

So, if I was attacked by a rabid BJJer downtown and I managed to escape and run away, I call that a "win"... I doubt he would though. :D
Different perspectives.

The notion of quitting what you do if you lose to a BJJer and have to teach that is a bizarre concept. Helio Gracie didn't end up learning Kimura's art, did he? Did Royce start training under Sakuraba or Hughes yet? I don't recall either ever giving up BJJ anr even saying their art was dishonest or inadequate.

Martial arts are more than about one aspect of competition.

Nice points. Sounds like you have a good program, too.

flashlock

17-Apr-2007, 03:22 AM

So your bjj coach was something else, got publicly humiliated by being challenged in front of his own school, lost badly, quit his old system and denounces it at every opportunity, and took up BJJ?

Or did your bjj coach go and challenge others to build up a reputation?

My guess is the second.

He went to the BJJ club because he thought they were all hype, and he got his ass kicked (he was a 2nd degree TKD black belt, and had 10 years experience before that, has tried many striking arts).

flashlock

17-Apr-2007, 03:24 AM

I specified trespassing as the charge. Gangrel can probably explain the concept a little better than I can, but you don't have a right to enter private property inconsistent with it's business. Entering a martial arts school during business hours to sign up for classes is ok. Doing so to do something else, whether just to ogle the girls or make fun of the students, is not.

So if a boxer went up and challenged the instructor to a boxing match in a week, you'd call the police? Whatever, dude.

Scarlet Mist

17-Apr-2007, 03:29 AM

People get choked from beneath a mount all the time. They also get armbarred from beneath a mount, too. Not sure what you're driving at here.

And watching more dog brothers might be just the thing. They "spar" full contact with weapons. They go with one or two sticks often with only a mask to protect their faces, gloves and a cup. Those guys are bona fide badasses, and if you really want to test your 'art', that would seem to be a great place to start. I don't know, but they seem like a group that would be perfectly willing to test multiple opponents, as well.

Ummm. I have watched the dog brothers. What I'm saying is I've actually done stick sparring, and stick grappling. Cats have tapped my by ramming the puno of the stick into my neck while I was on top. I was responding to Atharael's comment that if you stick your arm with a stick up from the mount, you'll get armbarred.

Atharel

17-Apr-2007, 03:37 AM

I think that's a pretty key point in bold face - if you show up at a TKD school that says it teaches WTF Olympic style Taekwondo,looks like you'll have to follow their rules to see if they backing up their "claims and skills".
If I'm there to test their WTF ability, yes. If I dispute their single unarmed combat skills, sparring should commence under rules that allow both styles free reign.

If it's "self defense" you are going in to check... be ready for the full range of "self defense" and not just a one-on-one MMA rules situation.
If I, as a dojo stormer (again, not something I'd actually do, far too lazy ;)) were there to test this hypothetical TKD dojang's self-defense capabilities, wouldn't it be multiple BJJ guys jumping on one TKDer, not the other way around?

Again, my comments here are based on my current working definition of "dojo storming" - namely "a large group of BJJ students showing up unannounced and uninvited and demanding one-on-one challenge matches that at the very least allow grappling."
I believe my definition is more accurate. It is not necessarily BJJ'ers doing the storming (though many well-known stormings were done by BJJers), and "allowing" grappling is nothing more than an extension off the natural order of real fighting. There's no rule against grappling in a real fight. I would describe it as the absence of rules banning grappling.

If you want to be mature, professional, reflective students and see how you stack up with local schools, visit them and train with them to get an idea of what they do. Once they get to know you and know you aren't some slobbering maniac, you'll get a chance to roll. Such an environment is much more suited to learning and sharing than "storming the place."
This would obviously be ideal but is more suited for dealing with a school that already has some modicum of respect. What if the stormers, from the reputation of the place, believe that they have nothing to learn from the dojo? Why must stormers train for a week under Ashida Kim before challenging him, other than an artificial requirement for respect?

By the way, why does the challenge have to be unarmed single combat (ooooh - define "combat"). If you are showing up to test how well we teach what we advertise you need to be ready to handle the whole curriculum, not "just" the grappling and standup under MMA rules (unless we are a MMA school and say that's what we do).
Combat, in this context, is fighting until knockout, pass-out, or submission due to acknowledgment of insurmountable advantage or threat. Please don't bring "the deadly" into this, I know you're more reasonable than that. The rest of this segment is a bit.. unquantifiable. How do you test situational awareness? How do you test.. well, all this vague stuff that isn't combat? It is on the other hand quite simple and straightforward to test single unarmed combat skills. And that is all this test would cover, of course. I know of several self-defense instructors that teach mostly crap fighting skills but have still saved lives through teaching good self-protection habits.

As an instructor, there's no way I am going to get involved in a "challenge" match with some stranger who shows up to my school. That is of course your prerogative.

One, if I lose or get hurt (especially if the opponent doesn't follow the rules) I am off teaching for a while/have medical bills/out of work/etc or Two, if I win and hurt the guy I open myself up to a lawsuit or maybe even criminal charges. I don't see where the benefit is for me to roll around with some stranger on the floor. If you want to know what we do and try us out, be a man (or woman) and call us up, set up an appointment to try out a few classes and once we get to know you (at least your control and respect) then we can roll a buit. Who knows - you might learn something.
I don't believe you teach the sort of school that is likely to be stormed, so this is all rather built in the clouds, so to speak... but the whole idea of storming is a statement of belief that there isn't much worth learning at a school, and an attempt to prove things one way or the other.

It's one thing to police your own style (e.g. your BJJ example) but expecting all other martial arts schools to conform to what "you" see as a valid art is a bit off in my opinion. I have no problem with bashing a school for "saying" they teach something they don't , but as long as they deliver what they say, I don't have a problem with it. If the local TKD school advertises WTF Olympic sparring and fitness... great.If all they are teaching is Olympic sparring and fitness, they won't be challenged (except by these a-hole imaginary roid-stormers out to prove their egos, of course). If they suddenly begin offering the "Perfect Korean Ninja anti-grappling street self defense"... I can see why it might be nice to check them out and spread the word on what they do. Exactly. Policing of one's own style of course takes priority and BJJ nicely has an auto-correction mechanism of open competition, but... Wouldn't you be suspicious of a TKD school that never entered competition, refused to do any interschool lessons or sparring, yet claimed to be the best around? Would you really mind if some Karate place put them solidly in their place?

Challenging them to fights though - I don't think so. Generally a few lessons and a few rounds with them in class should give you most of what you need to know without having to get into ego-fights. That's my 2 cents though.
This would be a better way to go about it if the school is less questionable and indeed is done all the time. I've done it myself, and spread the word about how a Judo white belt with minimal BJJ experience at the time (me) soundly and repeatedly beat a green belt in that style (made-up Ju-jutsu). However, some schools have a great propaganda machine, great advertisements, and ability to suppress "naysayers" - in this case, something more public is required. IMO.

1bad65

17-Apr-2007, 03:37 AM

I do wonder, flashlock, whether your instructor knows how one of his newest students is representing him and his school on the internet. He may, and he may be okay with it. I know I'd be very irritated to be trotted out as a BJJ stereotype to support a brand new student's zealous nutriding.

This is correct. There are some BJJ instructors that will throw you out of their academy for dojo storming.

Mine has never actually said he would, but once I was gonna go to a certain dojo and wreck a certain instructor for personal reasons. My instructor asked me not to, and said he would take care of it with a phone call. He apparently did, the guy never did what set me off again.

Atharel

17-Apr-2007, 03:52 AM

OK. Fairly useful skill. How do you propose to deal with dojos' claims of being able to handle multiple attackers?
Well, I'd have one of their guys try to defend against me and a couple friends (if I were storming, which is again highly unlikely). Simple, straightforward.

No. Like fight under a ruleset that allows melee wepons.Stickfighting's applicability to self-defense is at least as questionable as BJJ's. Do you carry a rattan with you on the street? A blade? More likely you train to defend against an armed attacker.. let the BJJ stormer start with a weapon, escrimador without, and see how it goes, how's that?
And that is your business because?
Consumer interest. Why does the BBB exist? Why do you call in complaints about credit cards giving you sneaky fees? If they don't actually follow through on what they claim, people deserve to know.
That's good to hear. One less idiot to deal with.
:rolleyes:
That's not necessarily true. People have been choked from the beneath the mount. You should stop watching the dogbrothers and actually go do some of that stuff yourself.
The school I train at includes Kali, and I was briefly involved in some doce pares/escrima myself at another location. One of the things I was told was that the stick doesn't essentially change groundfighting. I will inquire from one of my instructors (full instructor under Inosanto/Bustillo, Kali blackbelt in some system, BJJ blue, has done some DBMA training) as to whether this is possible as more than a "jab em in the throat and hope they don't posture up to escape" but I am severely doubtful. Please stop imagining me as some stereotypical BJJ nutrider, it's highly inaccurate.

Stevebjj

17-Apr-2007, 03:58 AM

Ummm. I have watched the dog brothers. What I'm saying is I've actually done stick sparring, and stick grappling. Cats have tapped my by ramming the puno of the stick into my neck while I was on top. I was responding to Atharael's comment that if you stick your arm with a stick up from the mount, you'll get armbarred.Regarding Dog Brothers, you suggested that people not watch them. I was simply saying that in my opinion, watching more Dog Brothers might actually help.

For the rest, you were saying that you have been choked from someone whom you have mounted? Makes more sense now. From what you posted, it read like someone from under mount got choked. Still, I'd have to see it to believe it. The only way I could imagine being choked by a mounted opponent is if you were somehow unwilling to move to side control, posture up, transition to north/south or strike on your own. I'm not saying it's not possible... just that I can't "see" it in my head. Probably my own lack of experience.

Scarlet Mist

17-Apr-2007, 04:28 AM

Regarding Dog Brothers, you suggested that people not watch them. I was simply saying that in my opinion, watching more Dog Brothers might actually help.

For the rest, you were saying that you have been choked from someone whom you have mounted? Makes more sense now. From what you posted, it read like someone from under mount got choked. Still, I'd have to see it to believe it. The only way I could imagine being choked by a mounted opponent is if you were somehow unwilling to move to side control, posture up, transition to north/south or strike on your own. I'm not saying it's not possible... just that I can't "see" it in my head. Probably my own lack of experience.

I was aiming at suggesting that people go and do it themselves instead of just watching.
I mounted someone, I think I got the puno of the stick rammed into my back/ kidney. That was quite distracting to say the least. Then, they went off to one side, got got the stick across my head, then used their hands to wedge my neck against the stick. I tapped.
Of course, this happened a few years ago before I had any BJJ experience. If I did, maybe I would have seen it coming.
Still, that stuff hurt.
What sucks, is that the cats who used to run the eskrima club graduated, then I started BJJ, so I've never gotten to try my small amount of stick grappling experience in BJJ.

Garibaldi

17-Apr-2007, 07:53 AM

If I'm there to test their WTF ability, yes.

If I, as a dojo stormer (again, not something I'd actually do, far too lazy ;))

As I said a few pages back...the people that talk about this and how great it is for showing up other dojos are people that just talk about it.

Garibaldi

17-Apr-2007, 08:01 AM

Testing skills is fine, but in my opinion, the whole premise behind dojo storming is that a cocky guy wants to go out and prove himself by picking fights in a controlled setting where he can use rules to his advantage. .
Absolutely true!!!

Strange how dojo storming never happens to schools where weapons are involved (whether the school is good or "mcdojo")

flammee

17-Apr-2007, 08:05 AM

If someone shows up to your school and you don't accept the challenge, or arrange one within a week or so, you're scared. That's all it really boils down to.

Well, I wouldn't exactly call it bravery to challenge people you expect to win easily, either.

I can understand not wanting to accept the challenge, more to lose than gain...

I have seen enough ufc to know that defending takedowns is not easy so challenge match should be full contact, no gloves or padding and allow dirty tricks.. But in such match it's possible to get hurt easily, I would rather avoid such matches, especially against strangers. You can call it cowardice if you wish, I call it wisdom. ;)

but maybe you should consider that before you hang a shingle outside your door saying you're an expert in self-defense.

Well, I trained in ITF TKD, we did some ground grappling, some wristlocks, and mostly ITF-rules sparring. Althought ITF-sparring isn't too close to self defence I learnt defence against punches to head, timing, distancing and such stuff that is useful in self defence. My ground skills are not exactly great, but I have improved my skills from the beginning. So, I would say that ITF-TKD school I attended were teaching good self defence, althought self defence was just a small component of whole system.

I have seen some american advertisements, aren't they all kinda over the top style, why not in the martial arts too?

By the way, when I still trained tkd and aikido, I challenged a taido guy to friendly sparring match on taido rules, just wanted to see what their ruleset is about, did some less restricted sparring too.. That actually converted me into taidoka. :D

And one should remember that most self defence situations don't go to ground. It seems that decent BJJer can win many traditional martial artists, but TMAers can use their skills in self defence situations too. That's because fighting BJJer is very different than typical self defence situation.

Here's quote from another forum about fights going to ground thing:

Fighting Myths - notes from the American Society of Law Enforcement Trainers Conference

One of the myths about personal protection is the old misquoted statistic, "90% of all fights wind up on the ground." This statistic has been used to sell ground fighting systems as the ultimate in self defense. If you have been in the martial arts or personal protection game long enough you have certainly heard this thing tossed around. You may have even heard the source - "according to the LAPD".

That statistic is wrong, AND misused.

The ASLET conference featured training in joint lock takedowns with retired sergeant John L. Sommers, the very man who conducted the use of force study with the LAPD and designed their defensive tactics program. His study looked at 6000 use of force reports from the LAPD and found that 60% of the time the arresting officer was knocked to the ground. One of the major reasons for this is that California has the 3 strikes rule and recidivist criminals are more likely to fight back to try to get away. Here are some of the main problems with the way this statistic is misused:

1. The percentage is 60% not 90% the numbers are frequently inflated to seem more convincing. While 60% is a majority, that means that more than one third of incidents did not result in an officer being knocked down. Also, the statistics did not measure "fights" but officer use of force reports.

2. The actual study was of officer use of force incidents in LA and did not study self defense situations involving civilians. You cannot apply the data from one representative sample to an entirely different population. If 98% of the population of the Philippines eats rice for three meals a day, you cannot also say that people living in Kansas also eat rice for three meals a day. It is a non-representative sample.

3. The use (misuse) of statistics is frequently combined with false but logical-sounding conclusions. A single data point is used to represent conclusions that the data does not indeed support. This makes an argument sound very credible even when it is not. Example = 100% of all people that consumed carrots in 1889 are now dead - therefore carrots kill you, so you better stop eating them.

On top of all this, the statistic is used to make people think that going to the ground is a good idea.

To quote Sergeant Sommers, (who worked with the Gracies, the Machados, Benny Urquidez and several other top martial artists) "I don't ever recommend you go to the ground." The very author of the study and designer of the training program thinks going to the ground is a very bad idea.

It sounds to me like it is a good idea to stay off the ground but know what to do if you do wind up there. This is what I have been saying, and what law enforcement and military folks have told me for years. Notice I did NOT say that you shouldn't study ground fighting. On the contrary, I think it's very important. But you do not want to waste time doing arm bars and triangle chokes, you want to do what you must to get back on your feet as fast as possible.

Also keep in mind that the moment you throw somebody to the ground, climb on them, and punch them - you are committing assault and battery in most jurisdictions. The hockey dad case in Massachusetts is an example. Thomas Junta was assaulted in front of his children. He then grounded and punched his assailant who hit his head on the concrete and died. Mr. Junta is now serving time for involuntary manslaughter.

Additional information regarding civilian fights.

Male versus Male - Age 18 and up

In studying real life fights involving this group of civilians, we find that no more than 40% fights ever went to the ground. When the fights did go to the ground, it was typically due to two main reasons:

1. Ineffective technique that led to the combatants becoming fatigued and frustrated and proceeding to a grapple, and then to falling on the ground.

2. One of the combatants actually tripping and falling.

Male versus Female - Age 18 and up

The percentage is much higher with male versus female. This is due to the nature of the attack. Men attack women for the purpose of control and exploitation, such as rape. Going to the ground is typical for these assaults.

Children versus Children

It is not uncommon for the typical schoolyard brawl to end up in a wrestling match on the ground. The assaults are usually not intended to inflict physical harm but rather to control. Hence punches and strikes may not be considered. The outcome of these altercations are typically much less severe than real adult confrontations.

That text is written by Mike Young, author of this book. (http://www.amazon.com/Martial-Arts-Techniques-Enforcement-Tuttle/dp/0804837945/sr=8-1/qid=1169653162/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-1358144-2039959?ie=UTF8&s=books) In that book he wrote that 78% of fights go to ground, but has changed his views after that and explains it in that quote.

Atharel

17-Apr-2007, 08:13 AM

As I said a few pages back...the people that talk about this and how great it is for showing up other dojos are people that just talk about it.

Your previous point was deliberately not replied to as it is not a point. The fact that I have never had to defend my home from a forced entry does not negate my opinion on the matter of home defense. I have never had to kill someone who was attempting to kill me, but I can logically support the practice with good arguments. If we only allowed those who have killed in self-defense to discuss the practice, I would call that absurd. Your requirement that I be part of a dojo storming to defend the practice is also absurd. However, I can make arrangements for a challenge match or two and report the results if you feel it necessary to substantiate my position. :rolleyes:

(Un?)fortunately, my area is relatively free of crap instruction - even the local Ninjutsu place is really mostly American Ju-jitsu, so I can't really think of any places to storm. I hope you'll settle for a challenge match?

This is obviously all sarcastic, but really. What reply did you expect?

Strange how dojo storming never happens to schools where weapons are involved (whether the school is good or "mcdojo")
How likely are escrimadors to test their unarmed combat skills in any situation? I'm sure they'd laugh at the very idea. As that is what dojo storming generally testing, there's little point. And I doubt that Kendoka are known for making claims for being the greatest art out there, being the best for self-defense, etc... they aren't stormed because there's no reason/provocation and no point. Give a man a baton/stick, a knife, or a katana, and he's got all the self-defense he needs in the form of a scary deterrent - be he Grandmaster of Doce Pares or rank newbie. The question is how good they are without said weapons, and most weapons places will not even entertain such challenges.

I'd add that I believe it's only a matter of time before Dog Brothers-like fighters challenge even weapon styles' dojos.

Atharel

17-Apr-2007, 08:44 AM

That's because fighting BJJer is very different than typical self defence situation.
that's part of BJJ's appeal for self-defense! Very few people are prepared at all to deal with someone who knows how to fight on the ground. If you're capable of beating most other martial artists, you have little to fear from an untrained attacker. Unarmed, of course *sigh* The other part is discussed in that excellent article you posted. Obtaining a dominant position to restraint or disengage and flee - BJJ's mantra is "position before submission" - if you control your opponent by having a dominant position, your options are maximized while theirs are minimized. You can choose to get up and run, strike them, choke them unconscious and run, whatever. All they can do is try (unsuccessfully if you're a better grappler) to escape.

flammee

17-Apr-2007, 09:08 AM

that's part of BJJ's appeal for self-defense! Very few people are prepared at all to deal with someone who knows how to fight on the ground. If you're capable of beating most other martial artists, you have little to fear from an untrained attacker. Unarmed, of course *sigh* The other part is discussed in that excellent article you posted. Obtaining a dominant position to restraint or disengage and flee - BJJ's mantra is "position before submission" - if you control your opponent by having a dominant position, your options are maximized while theirs are minimized. You can choose to get up and run, strike them, choke them unconscious and run, whatever. All they can do is try (unsuccessfully if you're a better grappler) to escape.

So, a BJJer can defend himself. But when BJJer wins TMAist, it doesn't prove that TMAist isn't good in self defence, because typical self defence is not so much about ground grappling. There are other ways to survive the self defence situation. So, group of BJJers doing a dojo storm into TMA dojo and BJJ guys winning challenge matches doesn't prove that that TMA school teaches bad self defence.

Atharel

17-Apr-2007, 09:53 AM

True, a lot of the information provided by a challenge match concerns the relative values of the styles in question, not their absolute values. However, their (imo) more important use is objective testing of specific claims, such as "I'd never get taken down" or "our punches have special structure that make them much harder hitting than those Hapkido guys" and so on.

flashlock

17-Apr-2007, 10:38 AM

Well, I wouldn't exactly call it bravery to challenge people you expect to win easily, either.

I have seen enough ufc to know that defending takedowns is not easy so challenge match should be full contact, no gloves or padding and allow dirty tricks.. But in such match it's possible to get hurt easily, I would rather avoid such matches, especially against strangers. You can call it cowardice if you wish, I call it wisdom. ;)

Well, I trained in ITF TKD, we did some ground grappling, some wristlocks, and mostly ITF-rules sparring. Althought ITF-sparring isn't too close to self defence I learnt defence against punches to head, timing, distancing and such stuff that is useful in self defence. My ground skills are not exactly great, but I have improved my skills from the beginning. So, I would say that ITF-TKD school I attended were teaching good self defence, althought self defence was just a small component of whole system.

I have seen some american advertisements, aren't they all kinda over the top style, why not in the martial arts too?

By the way, when I still trained tkd and aikido, I challenged a taido guy to friendly sparring match on taido rules, just wanted to see what their ruleset is about, did some less restricted sparring too.. That actually converted me into taidoka. :D

And one should remember that most self defence situations don't go to ground. It seems that decent BJJer can win many traditional martial artists, but TMAers can use their skills in self defence situations too. That's because fighting BJJer is very different than typical self defence situation.

Here's quote from another forum about fights going to ground thing:

That text is written by Mike Young, author of this book. (http://www.amazon.com/Martial-Arts-Techniques-Enforcement-Tuttle/dp/0804837945/sr=8-1/qid=1169653162/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-1358144-2039959?ie=UTF8&s=books) In that book he wrote that 78% of fights go to ground, but has changed his views after that and explains it in that quote.

I was just at a seminar this weekend that cited the exact same information (with an Australian bend). The instructor talked about how going to the ground was way less than 90%, and showed a video of two different guys getting sucker punched to demonstrate how they didn't grapple.

That's not a fight, that's an ambush.

I find more convincing the US Army statistics taken from field reports in Afghanistan and Iraq: 100% of H2H combat incidents involved grappling, 0% involved striking only.

You need to train for the worst case scenario. If you can stay on your feet and get away, or knock the guy out after 3 unanswered palm-strikes to the face, well, lucky you... but what about when you both blunt each other, end up pushing and pulling, then you're on the ground under him. Horrible thought, but that's where I focus my training... the worst place to be. Stand up's a picnic. (An old adage: "War should be a vacation from training.")

flashlock

17-Apr-2007, 10:42 AM

that's part of BJJ's appeal for self-defense! Very few people are prepared at all to deal with someone who knows how to fight on the ground. If you're capable of beating most other martial artists, you have little to fear from an untrained attacker. Unarmed, of course *sigh* The other part is discussed in that excellent article you posted. Obtaining a dominant position to restraint or disengage and flee - BJJ's mantra is "position before submission" - if you control your opponent by having a dominant position, your options are maximized while theirs are minimized. You can choose to get up and run, strike them, choke them unconscious and run, whatever. All they can do is try (unsuccessfully if you're a better grappler) to escape.

I'd like to echo your point about one of the appeals of BJJ, regarding the strange comments: "Well, it's not like normal self-defense." That is indeed one of the major points! Most people, when they lose control and go into violent-mode, strike (sloppily, and it jumbles into a grappling range usually). The BJJ artist skips (or tires to minimize) the striker's whole strategy and put him on alien ground (literally). It goes back to Sun Tzu: strategy (war) is deception.

NewLearner

17-Apr-2007, 11:17 AM

So if a boxer went up and challenged the instructor to a boxing match in a week, you'd call the police? Whatever, dude.

If he came in and disrupted a class, he would either leave quickly on his own or he would leave with a police escort.

If someone came in during off hours, was respectful, legitimately wanted to test themselves and learn, that's fine. But that isn't what is being discussed here.

flammee

17-Apr-2007, 11:20 AM

I was just at a seminar this weekend that cited the exact same information (with an Australian bend). The instructor talked about how going to the ground was way less than 90%, and showed a video of two different guys getting sucker punched to demonstrate how they didn't grapple.

That's not a fight, that's an ambush.

I find more convincing the US Army statistics taken from field reports in Afghanistan and Iraq: 100% of H2H combat incidents involved grappling, 0% involved striking only.

Self defence is much more close to sucker punching than army H2H combat incidents. What kind of H2H combat incidents those were? Was the goal to take control of opponent? Was there other soldiers securing the area? Army combat is team work..

In self defence, goal is to survive, get out of situation. In self defence you cannot assume that it's one on one fighting or that your friends will help. Because those people that might attack you on the streets usually choose to attack lonely targets.

You need to train for the worst case scenario. If you can stay on your feet and get away, or knock the guy out after 3 unanswered palm-strikes to the face, well, lucky you... but what about when you both blunt each other, end up pushing and pulling, then you're on the ground under him. Horrible thought, but that's where I focus my training... the worst place to be. Stand up's a picnic. (An old adage: "War should be a vacation from training.")

And what about the situation where you take your opponent down and his friends come and kick you? For a "bad guy", it's much more tempting to attack someone whose sitting on his friend's chest than someone who has just broken his friend's nose and is ready for more action..

NewLearner

17-Apr-2007, 11:28 AM

He went to the BJJ club because he thought they were all hype, and he got his ass kicked (he was a 2nd degree TKD black belt, and had 10 years experience before that, has tried many striking arts).

As a 2nd degree in TKD, he probably had 5 years experience in TKD. And he had 10 years experience before that. You do realize that a Black Belt in TKD doesn't mean you have mastered anything, but that you have a grasp on the basics, don't you?

So? is this the instructor that

My BJJ has told me that he used to dojo storm all the karate clubs and kung fu clubs (to "clean them up") in our area. He also tacked posters all around town inviting challengers to come to his school. He did this initially to promote his club, and to test himself. So, he was out dojo storming (uninvited) but also accepting challengers at his own school who would show up randomly (and always got their asses kicked)--so, he could dish it out, and take it. I think it worked well for him to get students, but now he doesn't bother with it; he faced the major Melbourne schools and won every time.

If someone shows up to your school and you don't accept the challenge, or arrange one within a week or so, you're scared. That's all it really boils down to. I can understand not wanting to accept the challenge, more to lose than gain... but maybe you should consider that before you hang a shingle outside your door saying you're an expert in self-defense.

Like my teacher did, you have to at some point put up or shut the hell up.

It sounds like your instructor likes to go visit other schools and try to bully whoever he can. If so, not exactly a person of character. Or am I misreading what you are saying?

flammee

17-Apr-2007, 11:37 AM

I'd like to echo your point about one of the appeals of BJJ, regarding the strange comments: "Well, it's not like normal self-defense." That is indeed one of the major points! Most people, when they lose control and go into violent-mode, strike (sloppily, and it jumbles into a grappling range usually). The BJJ artist skips (or tires to minimize) the striker's whole strategy and put him on alien ground (literally). It goes back to Sun Tzu: strategy (war) is deception.

Well, it's BJJ's strategy for self defence. It might be good for some situations and bad in some other situations. But that has nothing to do with efficiency of other strategies. If you can drive fast with motorcycle, it doesn't mean that you cannot drive fast with sports car too. :D Which one goes faster? Well, there are different roads and weathers..

NewLearner

17-Apr-2007, 11:41 AM

If I'm there to test their WTF ability, yes. If I dispute their single unarmed combat skills, sparring should commence under rules that allow both styles free reign.

The single biggest question is why the stormers decide they have the right to test anyone.

If I, as a dojo stormer (again, not something I'd actually do, far too lazy ;)) were there to test this hypothetical TKD dojang's self-defense capabilities, wouldn't it be multiple BJJ guys jumping on one TKDer, not the other way around?

As a person primarily with grappling experience but a fair amount of striking too, I would say the multiple opponents is harder for the grappler than the striker.

This would obviously be ideal but is more suited for dealing with a school that already has some modicum of respect. What if the stormers, from the reputation of the place, believe that they have nothing to learn from the dojo? Why must stormers train for a week under Ashida Kim before challenging him, other than an artificial requirement for respect?

Why would they care if you respect them or not?

I don't believe you teach the sort of school that is likely to be stormed, so this is all rather built in the clouds, so to speak... but the whole idea of storming is a statement of belief that there isn't much worth learning at a school, and an attempt to prove things one way or the other.

There are always those that believe that someone else is doing the wrong thing. The fact the he teaches a Korean art and not BJJ would be enough for some.

If all they are teaching is Olympic sparring and fitness, they won't be challenged (except by these a-hole imaginary roid-stormers out to prove their egos, of course). Exactly. Policing of one's own style of course takes priority and BJJ nicely has an auto-correction mechanism of open competition, but... Wouldn't you be suspicious of a TKD school that never entered competition, refused to do any interschool lessons or sparring, yet claimed to be the best around? Would you really mind if some Karate place put them solidly in their place?

I think that pretty much fits all of the dojo stormers.

This would be a better way to go about it if the school is less questionable and indeed is done all the time. I've done it myself, and spread the word about how a Judo white belt with minimal BJJ experience at the time (me) soundly and repeatedly beat a green belt in that style (made-up Ju-jutsu). However, some schools have a great propaganda machine, great advertisements, and ability to suppress "naysayers" - in this case, something more public is required. IMO.

Would you go and deface a car lot that you felt was selling junk cars? If you believed that some other type of business was lying to it's customers, would you do anything even remotely like what you saying is acceptable in this case? I rather doubt it.

NewLearner

17-Apr-2007, 11:55 AM

How likely are escrimadors to test their unarmed combat skills in any situation? I'm sure they'd laugh at the very idea. As that is what dojo storming generally testing, there's little point.

Dojo storming is about testing what the tester is good at, not what the one being tested is good at?

Self defense is not about one on one unarmed combat. To think it is, is a huge mistake. Most attacks will have little or no warning, occur when the attacker believes they have the upper hand, often involve multiple people or at least the risk of them, and quite often a weapon or the ability to use something as a weapon.

Storming seems to be a case of unexpected "test" with large numbers of people who think they have the upper hand who want to avoid the possibility of their opponent using a weapon to defend themselves.

NewLearner

17-Apr-2007, 12:04 PM

I was just at a seminar this weekend that cited the exact same information (with an Australian bend). The instructor talked about how going to the ground was way less than 90%, and showed a video of two different guys getting sucker punched to demonstrate how they didn't grapple.

Sorry you don't like it, but it not even remotely true that the majority of fights go to the ground.

That's not a fight, that's an ambush.

Was there a physical confrontation? There was a fight. It just didn't happen the way you think it should have. The reality is that a sucker punch is the most common thing in self defense.

I find more convincing the US Army statistics taken from field reports in Afghanistan and Iraq: 100% of H2H combat incidents involved grappling, 0% involved striking only.

Cite the study please. I don't believe the reality matches the implied.

You need to train for the worst case scenario. If you can stay on your feet and get away, or knock the guy out after 3 unanswered palm-strikes to the face, well, lucky you... but what about when you both blunt each other, end up pushing and pulling, then you're on the ground under him. Horrible thought, but that's where I focus my training... the worst place to be. Stand up's a picnic. (An old adage: "War should be a vacation from training.")

How exactly do I train for being shot and stabbed with ten guys pounding on me? That is the worst case. Going to the ground and fighting one on one unarmed is not even remotely worst case. That is going to what a small percentage of people are best at.

Garibaldi

17-Apr-2007, 12:13 PM

Look, all you dojo storming meatheads (I should say "keyboard warriors" because in reality you just talk about it) why do you think that think you have the right to "storm" anyone else's club?

As newlearner has pointed out, you are only testing what you are good at, not what the other club is good at.

Imagine a scenario...Olympic TKD club opens round the corner from you & claims it is also useful for self-defence. You challenge the instructor & win. Does that prove his art is useless!? Or his art wouln't be any good as it is intended (ie Olympic sport). Or that none of his students could ever use it for "self-defence"!?!?

Here's another one...you storm your local neighbouring dojo, the sensei refuses to fight...does that mean his art is useless and he has no faith in his own abilities or he has some brains & wisdom about him?

Learning and teaching "self-defence" is more about more than fighting, it is also about the ability NOT to fight!!!

You need to take your macho MMA gloves off a while and learn a little humility and respect and understanding that the world does not revolve around your "superior" art that has to rely on set rules and set one-on-one challenge matches.

slipthejab

17-Apr-2007, 12:57 PM

Actually this dojo-storming is all fine and well (or not) but surely if it was as prevalent as some are making out... there'd be some footage of it. Anyone have any?

I mean seriously...

Davey Bones

17-Apr-2007, 01:01 PM

What have you contributed that was reasonable? Not a goddamn thing. You just sit back and say how stupid people who advocate dojo storming are, followed by a lame smilie. Why don't you make a single clear argument why dojo storming should never be done, or kindly retire to whatever gay pornsite you got your avatar from.

First of all, did it ever occur to you that there's a reason several gents who have supported the idea of storming have specifically said their instructors are against the idea? Think about it, if the instructors say it's a bad idea, why the hell should I take you seriously?

Secondly, I haven't jumped all over the gentleman posting below because he's been somewhat reasonable; I even gave the OP some of the benefit of the doubt. You? You throw around terms like "coward", "scared", etc, for folks who disagree with your mentality (and I'll ignore the comment about my avatar, who happens to be a well-known French kickboxer). You get back what you earn, sweetie. You don't wanna be called a "nutrider" or "meathead", maybe you ought not act like one!

Thirdly, well, I'm just not as nice as Thomas. I'm not going to sit at my keyboard and recite my kwoon's entire training program so I can make nice with some dude with an internet attitude. I don't want or care for you thoughts on what I do and when I do it. He chose to suck up to you; I'm choosing not to.

So if a boxer went up and challenged the instructor to a boxing match in a week, you'd call the police? Whatever, dude.

If you handle yourself in person and at the challenge even half as bad as you've come across in this thread, in a heartbeat. It's called disorderly conduct and defiant trespassing.

Ghost Frog

17-Apr-2007, 01:02 PM

I have witnessed verbal dojo-storming on a number of occasions, but the only people who actually wanted to step in and spar were like minded crosstraining types who really wanted to share stuff.

slipthejab

17-Apr-2007, 01:04 PM

Get over yourself, you ain't all that.

Do you ever get to say that in court? :confused: :p :D

Davey Bones

17-Apr-2007, 01:05 PM

Do you ever get to say that in court? :confused: :p :D

Once in a while, but usually behind the ADA's back :p

Atharel

17-Apr-2007, 01:09 PM

Look, all you dojo storming meatheads (I should say "keyboard warriors" because in reality you just talk about it) why do you think that think you have the right to "storm" anyone else's club?
What right does anyone have to question other peoples' claims? The right of skepticism.

Imagine a scenario...Olympic TKD club opens round the corner from you & claims it is also useful for self-defence. You challenge the instructor & win. Does that prove his art is useless!? Or his art wouln't be any good as it is intended (ie Olympic sport). Or that none of his students could ever use it for "self-defence"!?!?
As I stated before, style v style matches are best suited for testing objective claims or determining relative values of styles. Unless the entire art proclaims itself the greatest, all that would be proven would be the relative values of the styles (and that only if several students of comparable experience had ended up matching).

Here's another one...you storm your local neighbouring dojo, the sensei refuses to fight...does that mean his art is useless and he has no faith in his own abilities or he has some brains & wisdom about him?
It means he refused to fight. Reading more into it would require more details and be up to the individual, who now has more information about the dojo than they did before - which is the point. Obviously less information gained than via actual repeated matches, though.
Learning and teaching "self-defence" is more about more than fighting, it is also about the ability NOT to fight!!! Yeah, which is why I explicitly stated in my reply to Thomas that all storming proves is combat ability. The "ability NOT to fight!!!" is not easily testable anyway.

You need to take your macho MMA gloves off a while and learn a little humility and respect and understanding that the world does not revolve around your "superior" art that has to rely on set rules and set one-on-one challenge matches.
You're like a caricature of a reply... 1) I don't do MMA (yet) 2) I didn't state that my art is superior 3) BJJ does not rely on set rules or set one-on-one challenge matches. One-on-one matches are selected due to their ability to effectively showcase combat ability of the participants. What else would you suggest? 3v3 brawls?

Here's where I'm coming from: Hypothesis: Dojo has (poor) combat ability. Test: create matches with students of other dojos to gather more information. Create new hypothesis with new data. That's all this is. Projecting issues of ego and imaginary roid-rage into it is entirely artificial.

Sgt_Major

17-Apr-2007, 01:15 PM

He calls me a nutrider, and unreasonable, etc., and *I* am asked to tone it down? Yeah, sure...

umm, yeah - you are. Now by a mod. Tone down your attitude towards people who are as entitled to opinion as you. And 1 more 'gay' comment and I'll get involved more.

Atharel

17-Apr-2007, 01:22 PM

As a person primarily with grappling experience but a fair amount of striking too, I would say the multiple opponents is harder for the grappler than the striker.
I'll refrain from questioning your claim, but did you notice that this is not a reply to what you quoted, but rather a reply to some imaginary statement I didn't make?

To elaborate: TKDer ability to defend multiple attackers tested by multiple stormers attacking. You: but BJJ'ers would have it even harder! Um. Ok?

Why would they care if you respect them or not?Publicity and marketing. If they don't care that it's known around town that they repeatedly refuse to "prove it", nothing more will necessarily happen - mission accomplished.

There are always those that believe that someone else is doing the wrong thing. The fact the he teaches a Korean art and not BJJ would be enough for some.
Ok? If there is nothing to be proven by a storming other than "nyah nyah BJJ wins again!!" there is obviously no point and it falls from the "spirit of inquiry" I'm endorsing here. If the Korean art place was claiming to be the best art or capable of stopping groundfighters every time with their secrets from the poomsae, though, there would be something to gain.

I think that pretty much fits all of the dojo stormers.You are entitled to your opinions however unfounded.

Would you go and deface a car lot that you felt was selling junk cars? If you believed that some other type of business was lying to it's customers, would you do anything even remotely like what you saying is acceptable in this case? I rather doubt it.
Yes, I would do something like dojo storming, not deface -edit. In the case of a shady car lot, I would support a similar inquiry, perhaps taking local mechanics to the lot and asking to randomly inspect cars in the interest of writing a piece in the paper. That is a nice parallel, thank you for bringing it to mind. Similar investigations can be and should be conducted in other fields.

Maybe I'm just an idealist that loves him some scientific method and thinks people have a right to know what they're paying for, but sheesh.. I wasn't expecting this many blanket statements and grotesquely inaccurate generalizations and characterizations.

1bad65

17-Apr-2007, 02:32 PM

Actually this dojo-storming is all fine and well (or not) but surely if it was as prevalent as some are making out... there'd be some footage of it. Anyone have any?

I mean seriously...

This is a clip of a TKD BB going to a Gracie academy and asking to fight. He wanted to see if BJJ was a good style for his wife. I'll admit both parties seem to be cool, more of a test actually, but it is someone going to another gym and asking for a fight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDmwyIh4ryQ

Garibaldi

17-Apr-2007, 02:59 PM

This is a clip of a TKD BB going to a Gracie academy and asking to fight. He wanted to see if BJJ was a good style for his wife. I'll admit both parties seem to be cool, more of a test actually, but it is someone going to another gym and asking for a fight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDmwyIh4ryQ
The point you have missed is that the Gracies issued a challenge to anyone and it was for the other club to approach the Gracies. Most challenges that were initiated happened in Gracie dojos and were the result of another instructor coming to them...its a different scenario.

Garibaldi

17-Apr-2007, 03:19 PM

What right does anyone have to question other peoples' claims? The right of skepticism..
But that doesn't give you the right to bully somone you know you can beat given a ruleset that suits your art to simply massage your ego

That's not skepticism, that's assault.

As I stated before, style v style matches are best suited for testing objective claims or determining relative values of styles. Unless the entire art proclaims itself the greatest, all that would be proven would be the relative values of the styles (and that only if several students of comparable experience had ended up matching).
No, it doesn't prove anything about the value of any art simply that someone with grappling training will beat someone without. We all know that already, so why bother?

It means he refused to fight. Reading more into it would require more details and be up to the individual, who now has more information about the dojo than they did before - which is the point. Obviously less information gained than via actual repeated matches, though.
Yeah, which is why I explicitly stated in my reply to Thomas that all storming proves is combat ability. The "ability NOT to fight!!!" is not easily testable anyway.
If anyone came and challenged me at my dojo I too would refuse to fight. That tells you nothing about me, my club, my ability and you have no more information than you had before. Why would i refuse? Because I'm scared...because I have no faith in my abilities...because I would want to use me "D34dly techniques" and hurt you...because I have more sense than meeting a challenge head on...perhaps I rent the space and wouldn;t want to jeapardise the continued position of the dojo...perhaps I'd wait til you were leaving and sucker punch you...how would you know which one it was? On what would you base your decision?

And the ability NOT to fight is something that may people do test and do use all the time. Have you ever been threatened or been attacked or worked the doors. If you didn't use this ability you'd be scrapping all the time. So as I said, you may need to learn some humility and undertanding about what martial arts (including BJJ) are all about.

BJJ does not rely on set rules or set one-on-one challenge matches. One-on-one matches are selected due to their ability to effectively showcase combat ability of the participants.
yes it does, the whole premise of success of the Gracies and the evolution of BJJ was down to one-on-one challenges with set rules.

Here's where I'm coming from: Hypothesis: Dojo has (poor) combat ability. Test: create matches with students of other dojos to gather more information. Create new hypothesis with new data. That's all this is. Projecting issues of ego and imaginary roid-rage into it is entirely artificial.
But if that's all your arguement is based on, why not just ring them up and ask them if they'd be willing to allow you to train with them, or invite them to yours? No confrontation or "dojo storming" machoism and you learn just as much about their combat ability and maybe they'll learn something from you? Heaven forbid you may pick up something from them. And all without having to slap around their instructor in a challenge match!!!

Thomas

17-Apr-2007, 03:37 PM

If I, as a dojo stormer (again, not something I'd actually do, far too lazy ;)) were there to test this hypothetical TKD dojang's self-defense capabilities, wouldn't it be multiple BJJ guys jumping on one TKDer, not the other way around?
Good point - I guess that just shows the basic flawed notion of a "dojo storm" and where an arranged meeting with preset rules and measurable expectations would be better.

Combat, in this context, is fighting until knockout, pass-out, or submission due to acknowledgment of insurmountable advantage or threat. Please don't bring "the deadly" into this, I know you're more reasonable than that. The rest of this segment is a bit.. unquantifiable. How do you test situational awareness? How do you test.. well, all this vague stuff that isn't combat? It is on the other hand quite simple and straightforward to test single unarmed combat skills. And that is all this test would cover, of course. I know of several self-defense instructors that teach mostly crap fighting skills but have still saved lives through teaching good self-protection habits.

I'll have to disagree with your definition of "combat". In my opinion, what you are checking is how someone can fight unarmed within a certain context of rules (for safety or whatever). Opening up rulesets and sparring to allow more and more options can help replicate a more "realistic" approach but it isn't "real combat". But, that's more to do with definitions (probably differences in our philosophies).

I don't believe you teach the sort of school that is likely to be stormed, so this is all rather built in the clouds, so to speak... but the whole idea of storming is a statement of belief that there isn't much worth learning at a school, and an attempt to prove things one way or the other.

Wouldn't you be suspicious of a TKD school that never entered competition, refused to do any interschool lessons or sparring, yet claimed to be the best around? Would you really mind if some Karate place put them solidly in their place?
Actually we have a group in the area. They are a very "closed" school and don't allow cross training, do very little sparring, and are very "controlling" of their students. I have worked with some, have had some of their students switch over to us and have a decent idea of what they do. Their basics are very good but I am not impressed with their application in general. Rather than challenge them or try to run them out of business, we focus on offering high quality training and attracting like-minded people through word of mouth.

1bad65

17-Apr-2007, 03:39 PM

The point you have missed is that the Gracies issued a challenge to anyone and it was for the other club to approach the Gracies. Most challenges that were initiated happened in Gracie dojos and were the result of another instructor coming to them...its a different scenario.

Huh? The vid I linked to was a guy coming into a Gracie Academy.

Sgt_Major

17-Apr-2007, 03:50 PM

thats what he means... the gracies extended that invitation to anyone....

the gracies didnt go around challenging people.

Thomas

17-Apr-2007, 03:50 PM

I find more convincing the US Army statistics taken from field reports in Afghanistan and Iraq: 100% of H2H combat incidents involved grappling, 0% involved striking only.

I would be interested in seeing a link for this as well, more for personal interest.

My instructor (Robert Gray) and our GM (GM Pellegrini) have been working with military units like the 10 Mountain Div (INF.) on combatives. The main reason has been that the troops on the line were having trouble using some of the BJJ grappling techniques while fully equipped and weighted down. They found grappling less effective in those cases than a more rounded curriculum.

I'm not going to argue one way or another but I'd love to see the source for information if you have a link or title, please.

Thirdly, well, I'm just not as nice as Thomas. I'm not going to sit at my keyboard and recite my kwoon's entire training program so I can make nice with some dude with an internet attitude. I don't want or care for you thoughts on what I do and when I do it. He chose to suck up to you; I'm choosing not to.
If you don't mind, leave me out of your little spat.

As for "sucking up", I prefer to use a forum to share ideas and learn, all the while trying to maintain a respectful attitude towards all (a bit of tolerance goes a long way).

You and I haven't engaged in a coversation in quite a long time. On my part I tend to avoid it because I found your attitude towards me disrespectful, rude, and insulting. So, if you don't mind, leave me out of your conversations and knock off the little snipes towards me.

Oh, and have a nice day. :)

Davey Bones

17-Apr-2007, 04:05 PM

As for "sucking up", I prefer to use a forum to share ideas and learn, all the while trying to maintain a respectful attitude towards all (a bit of tolerance goes a long way).

While I agree with the idea of sharing, please, explain why I should dump my entire training curriculum onto an internet forum to appease some guy who quite plainly advocates the idea that if instructors refuse to participate in his childish little games they are "cowards", "scared", or "hiding something", all of which were his words?

It seems to me the only purpose it serves is to satisfy his ego, and I want to do that why? It's painfully obvious that very little will satisfy certain folks. Personally, I think several of these guys aren't worth the dialogue. They can stay the hell out of my kwoon, and I'm certainly not inclined to do anything except tell them off if they think they can tell me and mine how to train.

You and I haven't engaged in a coversation in quite a long time. On my part I tend to avoid it because I found your attitude towards me disrespectful, rude, and insulting. So, if you don't mind, leave me out of your conversations and knock off the little snipes towards me.

I'll post whatever I like, Thomas. If you don't like it, click the "ignore" button. Anything else I have to say would violate the ToS by bringing up the sitch in question, so I'll leave it at that.

Thomas

17-Apr-2007, 04:12 PM

While I agree with the idea of sharing, please, explain why I should dump my entire training curriculum onto an internet forum to appease some guy who quite plainly advocates the idea that if instructors refuse to participate in his childish little games they are "cowards", "scared", or "hiding something", all of which were his words?

It seems to me the only purpose it serves is to satisfy his ego, and I want to do that why? It's painfully obvious that very little will satisfy certain folks. Personally, I think several of these guys aren't worth the dialogue. They can stay the hell out of my kwoon, and I'm certainly not inclined to do anything except tell them off if they think they can tell me and mine how to train.

I'll post whatever I like, Thomas. If you don't like it, click the "ignore" button. Anything else I have to say would violate the ToS by bringing up the sitch in question, so I'll leave it at that.

Thanks for sharing.

1bad65

17-Apr-2007, 04:15 PM

Garibaldi

17-Apr-2007, 04:23 PM

I don't know if it was common, but there is footage of the Gracies storming a Judo dojo floating around. The vid quality is not too good, but there is alot of audio to hear. Rickson and the Judo instructor were arguing about groundwork. The Judo guy said being on the ground to end a fight was not effective, and Rickson obviously believed the opposite.
Even if there is, what does it prove...it was probably over a decade old and times have moved on...

I don't know about you but I don't live in 1980s Rio, so I don't see the need to be slapping around some defenceless misguided mcdojo martial arts instructor to prove what everyone here knows already. Grappling training beats non-grappling training. No more no less. It doesn't prove the ineffectiveness of any art, just that they can't fight on the ground. Plenty TMA instructors I know can't fight on the floor and they recognise that limitation. It doesn't mean that they should suddenly stop promoting their art or club and stop training or that they should allow some dojo stormer to "teach them their limitations" does it?

(Sgt Major...re your post below...sorry edited my original one so not sure which bit was my "last sentence")

Sgt_Major

17-Apr-2007, 04:24 PM

LOL

I was with you until you're last sentence.

Yohan

17-Apr-2007, 04:42 PM

I think that BS schools selling belts or bogus "self defense" are irritating and that we as members of a relatively small community should work to publicize the good and the bad among our local schools. But this can be done without acting like a dick. And that's what it really comes down to for me.

Peis, you are alright. Just thought I'd let you know.

1bad65

17-Apr-2007, 04:54 PM

I just posted a link to vid someone had asked about. I'm not a BJJ nutrider who thinks everyone else sucks.
Concerning storming/challenges, I think they are ok in two conditions: 1)a school that claims to be like an 'ultimate' art for self-defense 2)a school where the owner/head instructor has embellished his MA resume, especially lying about his BJJ rank or experience.

Davey Bones

17-Apr-2007, 05:43 PM

Thanks for sharing.

Thanks for answering.

Timmy Boy

17-Apr-2007, 06:03 PM

I'm not saying I agree with dojo storming per se because although I see its value in terms of exposing phonies it's disruptive to classes and people can train how they want. However, no offence Garibaldi but I don't agree with most of the arguments you used.

But that doesn't give you the right to bully somone you know you can beat given a ruleset that suits your art to simply massage your ego

That's not skepticism, that's assault.

OK, two things. Firstly, such a ruleset would only be unfairly suitable for a BJJ guy if it disallowed striking or standup fighting in general; dojo storming goes on under NHB or MMA rules AFAIK. Secondly, dojo storming is not forcing a fight upon someone, it's a challenge that can be declined.

No, it doesn't prove anything about the value of any art simply that someone with grappling training will beat someone without. We all know that already, so why bother?

You know it, I know it, but most people don't.

If anyone came and challenged me at my dojo I too would refuse to fight. That tells you nothing about me, my club, my ability and you have no more information than you had before. Why would i refuse? Because I'm scared...because I have no faith in my abilities...because I would want to use me "D34dly techniques" and hurt you...because I have more sense than meeting a challenge head on...perhaps I rent the space and wouldn;t want to jeapardise the continued position of the dojo...perhaps I'd wait til you were leaving and sucker punch you...how would you know which one it was? On what would you base your decision?

And the ability NOT to fight is something that may people do test and do use all the time. Have you ever been threatened or been attacked or worked the doors. If you didn't use this ability you'd be scrapping all the time. So as I said, you may need to learn some humility and undertanding about what martial arts (including BJJ) are all about.

This bit I agree with. There are many reasons for not fighting besides simply being afraid.

yes it does, the whole premise of success of the Gracies and the evolution of BJJ was down to one-on-one challenges with set rules.

Yes but what rules were they?

But if that's all your arguement is based on, why not just ring them up and ask them if they'd be willing to allow you to train with them, or invite them to yours? No confrontation or "dojo storming" machoism and you learn just as much about their combat ability and maybe they'll learn something from you? Heaven forbid you may pick up something from them. And all without having to slap around their instructor in a challenge match!!!

Because this defeats the point of dojo storming which is to expose fraudsters. If you invite them to train with you they'll probably decline. If you go along to train with them you won't be able to expose them because you'll have to train using their crappy methods (assuming that the club in question really is bullshido, of course).

feijao_cbla

17-Apr-2007, 07:56 PM

:rolleyes:
First of all I need to reply to the actual thread…….
Dojo storming is extremely disrespectful, and a minor act of war :woo: .
Not that I wouldn’t dojo storm but, given the right circumstance it might be neccascary. But let’s call it what it is. It’s walking into some ones home and trying to disrespect them and you’d better have a good reason.
It’s common place in Capoeira and it can be a very ugly thing, sometimes. Because Capoeira is such an artistic fighting style you don’t have to slap someone in the head to show you are better than they are. Other martial arts might not have that quality, BJJ does. You can make some one tap out without slapping them. The slapping is a result of immature machismo that is not becoming of an actual martial artist.

As far a BJJ and a previous comment made earlier there is no way that 100% of battles are decided on the ground. I’d have to go back to what my Ju-jitsu shodon said. “I don’t want to spend more than 10 seconds on the ground, and even that is too long. You never know who the person is with.”

I do know a few BJJ techniques that I’ve learned from Limao in Brazil but, even still I don’t want to be locked up on the floor in a street fight while my opponents friends kick me in my head. :confused:

We all need to be balanced fighters, true martial artist, not macho, “My style is better than yours”, a holes. :Angel:

-peace

Feijao

Agutrot-

17-Apr-2007, 08:28 PM

Would you go and deface a car lot that you felt was selling junk cars? If you believed that some other type of business was lying to it's customers, would you do anything even remotely like what you saying is acceptable in this case? I rather doubt it.

Bad metaphor. Fighting is the only way to prove one style of fighting is better then another. A more apt metaphor would be a car lot is selling bad cars and saying that they are really good cars to people who know nothing about cars in the first place. You then would show the people who are thinking about purchusing one of the bad cars a good one so they can see the difference for themselves.

Atharel

17-Apr-2007, 09:10 PM

But... Timmy beat me to it.

But if that's all your arguement is based on, why not just ring them up and ask them if they'd be willing to allow you to train with them, or invite them to yours? No confrontation or "dojo storming" machoism and you learn just as much about their combat ability and maybe they'll learn something from you? Heaven forbid you may pick up something from them. And all without having to slap around their instructor in a challenge match!!!
The point is to provide information to the public, not me. If I wanted to learn as much as I could from this master, Bruce Lee style, obviously just taking classes would work. But storming isn't about that.

edit:
No, it doesn't prove anything about the value of any art simply that someone with grappling training will beat someone without. We all know that already, so why bother?
I can't express how flawed I hold this claim to be. We know that grapplers generally win. We know that deadly kung fu'ers that don't spar are generally full of it, just as we know that there are ones that genuinely teach good skills - I'd even bet that most of us on this thread could tell the difference reliably. I'd bet much more money than Johnny Common, raised on Jet Li and the Karate Kid, couldn't. Johnny Common can understand "win" or "loss" in challenge matches, though. That's what this is about. Public interest. Historically that's what Dojo Arashi has more or less always been about.

Good point - I guess that just shows the basic flawed notion of a "dojo storm" and where an arranged meeting with preset rules and measurable expectations would be better.Would be better for advancing one's own skills, probably.

I'll have to disagree with your definition of "combat". In my opinion, what you are checking is how someone can fight unarmed within a certain context of rules (for safety or whatever). Opening up rulesets and sparring to allow more and more options can help replicate a more "realistic" approach but it isn't "real combat". But, that's more to do with definitions (probably differences in our philosophies).Do you have an alternative suggestion for the definition of combat? I can't think of one that is more general while retaining the essential meaning (requirements for an ideal definition).

Actually we have a group in the area. They are a very "closed" school and don't allow cross training, do very little sparring, and are very "controlling" of their students. I have worked with some, have had some of their students switch over to us and have a decent idea of what they do. Their basics are very good but I am not impressed with their application in general. Rather than challenge them or try to run them out of business, we focus on offering high quality training and attracting like-minded people through word of mouth.
If you are succeeding in your alternative method that is excellent. Imagine, though, how many people will refuse to believe word-of-mouth about how much they're missing at that school and waste many years of their life learning substandard material, all because they don't know any better? A series of challenge matches showcasing the gaps in the school's merits would immediately remedy any delusions of primacy.

Scarlet Mist

17-Apr-2007, 09:28 PM

How likely are escrimadors to test their unarmed combat skills in any situation? I'm sure they'd laugh at the very idea. As that is what dojo storming generally testing, there's little point. And I doubt that Kendoka are known for making claims for being the greatest art out there, being the best for self-defense, etc... they aren't stormed because there's no reason/provocation and no point.

Give a man a baton/stick, a knife, or a katana, and he's got all the self-defense he needs in the form of a scary deterrent - be he Grandmaster of Doce Pares or rank newbie. The question is how good they are without said weapons, and most weapons places will not even entertain such challenges.

Yes, they laugh at the idea. Ha ha ha.

I don't think you give Doce Pares enough credit. You can easily take a stick off someone while taking minimum damage. Most people wouldn't mess with a knife or sword empty handed, be it in the hands of grandmaster or newbie. But a stick or baton you can definitely mess with.

TKDjoe

17-Apr-2007, 09:46 PM

flashlock,
Your instructor has filled you full of bull, he defeated ALL comers, broke their arms and all the students followed him to train under the UNDEFEATED MASTER of BJJ. Hilarious :rolleyes:

Atharel

17-Apr-2007, 09:48 PM

fanatical

17-Apr-2007, 09:51 PM

No his instructor tapped a few non-grapplers and mildly injured an obstinate instructor who decided to badmouth and challenge a guy who was just training in his dojo.

I suggest you take your issues somewhere else TKDjoe, there are enough of them in this thread allready.

Scarlet Mist

17-Apr-2007, 09:52 PM

If I were fighting an unarmed Doce Pares guy and I had a stick, I'd throw it far away and do a takedown ;) I definitely respect the Doce Pares, I was more pointing out that stickfighting wouldn't be an accurate test of the self defense skills of the FMA'ers unless they actually carry sticks around a lot.

The girl who organized the FMA club a couple years back (ah, that magical freshman year) carried around a telescoping baton in her purse. She was 4' 11" and weighed 95 pounds, but that wouldn't matter if she pulled that thing out. My instructor told me once he and his buddy got into some stuff and he had to pull a knife out and work somebody over. So yes, some do carry sticks and pocket knives. Cats have also been worked over with umbrellas.

TKDjoe

17-Apr-2007, 10:55 PM

fanatical,
Oh Please not another tough guy, Let's whoop everbody and show them how tough we are!! I'll keep my issues where I please. :rolleyes:

fanatical

17-Apr-2007, 11:01 PM

Well then you've conceded any reason why anyone should take you seriously. I mean if all you're doing is venting some sort of anger toward BJJ, your subjective view of the truth will be rather askew.

Most likely, none of your opinions will be at all affected by what anyone says and you're less likely to bring anything new or interesting to the table. I'm not trying to be arrogant or anything. It's just that this is the vibe you're giving off.

TKDjoe

18-Apr-2007, 12:51 AM

I'm sorry you see it that way, oh and by the way I train BJJ.

Lily

18-Apr-2007, 01:06 AM

We actually had 2 MMA guys visit our dojo a few weeks ago and they were welcomed to watch a class, which they did (they declined to join us on the mats). They actually scoffed at us :D before we started the training but after sitting through it one of the guys has started cross training with us weekly :)

We've had MT, BJJ, TKD guys come in (some joined, some didn't) and I think the big factor that adjusts any 'attitude' they may walk in with is that sensei and our instructors are welcoming and don't get defensive about our training. If someone claims to have trained somewhere else and wants to get on the mats, we do some basic things like make sure they can take a fall, get them into some light sparring etc. Then they're welcome to roll and spar with anyone though there's no room for 'challenges' on the mats as we're training and its not about just one person who walks in and makes demands.

So in effect, 'dojo storming' can be seen as a test of your own training and how you respond.

NewLearner

18-Apr-2007, 01:21 AM

I'll refrain from questioning your claim, but did you notice that this is not a reply to what you quoted, but rather a reply to some imaginary statement I didn't make?

To elaborate: TKDer ability to defend multiple attackers tested by multiple stormers attacking. You: but BJJ'ers would have it even harder! Um. Ok?

I really don't care if you question the fact that I have done grappling.

But could you elaborate on exactly how a bjj person, or any grappler, would have an easier time with multiple opponents. In striking, you can go back and forth between targets far faster than you can in grappling. I can line up opponents and try to keep it, as much as possible, a one on one. But I haven't learned how to do that with grappling. When I do a takedown and have someone in a hold on the ground, I am usually pretty tied up myself.

Publicity and marketing. If they don't care that it's known around town that they repeatedly refuse to "prove it", nothing more will necessarily happen - mission accomplished.

Once again, why would they care? I don't suspect that most of the general public will care. I doubt their students will particularly care that you came crashing into their school to show off. I don't think it will show the stormers in a particularly favorable light to most people.

Ok? If there is nothing to be proven by a storming other than "nyah nyah BJJ wins again!!" there is obviously no point and it falls from the "spirit of inquiry" I'm endorsing here. If the Korean art place was claiming to be the best art or capable of stopping groundfighters every time with their secrets from the poomsae, though, there would be something to gain.

You pointed out that there are those that are jerks that will crash other schools. I agreed with that and said that there always some that are that way. By your "Ok?" it seems you are disagreeing.

You are entitled to your opinions however unfounded.

My opinions may be unfounded but I tend to think they have more basis in reality than to think that storming someone's school is an admirable thing to do.

Yes, I would do something like dojo storming, not deface -edit. In the case of a shady car lot, I would support a similar inquiry, perhaps taking local mechanics to the lot and asking to randomly inspect cars in the interest of writing a piece in the paper. That is a nice parallel, thank you for bringing it to mind. Similar investigations can be and should be conducted in other fields.

Maybe I'm just an idealist that loves him some scientific method and thinks people have a right to know what they're paying for, but sheesh.. I wasn't expecting this many blanket statements and grotesquely inaccurate generalizations and characterizations.

I think there is a huge difference between taking a mechanic that you are paying (which I doubt you are going to challenge them and get them to do it for free) to inspect a car and showing up at a dojo and calling them a coward in front of their students if they don't fight you.

I think you may well be an idealist. But scientific method has nothing to do with your views.

Atharel

18-Apr-2007, 02:16 AM

I really don't care if you question the fact that I have done grappling.
You have completely missed the point again. I was referring to your claim about multiple attackers. Read what I'm saying, not what you imagine some meathead would say in my place :rolleyes:

But could you elaborate on exactly how a bjj person, or any grappler, would have an easier time with multiple opponents. In striking, you can go back and forth between targets far faster than you can in grappling. I can line up opponents and try to keep it, as much as possible, a one on one. But I haven't learned how to do that with grappling. When I do a takedown and have someone in a hold on the ground, I am usually pretty tied up myself.You are going to an entirely different topic here, which I think is caused by your responses all being to a false preconception as to what I am espousing. I at no point was saying that grappling was better at dealing with multiple attackers. Read what I said. Read it again. Read what's actually there, not what you imagine some stereotypical nutrider would write. I was writing only about testing the dojo's claims as to dealing with multiple attackers. Objectively, not proving [insert other art here] better.

Once again, why would they care? I don't suspect that most of the general public will care. I doubt their students will particularly care that you came crashing into their school to show off.That's fine. They have the choice to refuse. And whoever's interested in that school has more information than before when they're looking into it. Win.

You pointed out that there are those that are jerks that will crash other schools. I agreed with that and said that there always some that are that way. By your "Ok?" it seems you are disagreeing.Nope, not disagreeing. There are jerks in every walk of life. I can't use Mao as a reason to hate all the Chinese.

My opinions may be unfounded but I tend to think they have more basis in reality than to think that storming someone's school is an admirable thing to do. Again, you're welcome to that opinion.

I think there is a huge difference between taking a mechanic that you are paying (which I doubt you are going to challenge them and get them to do it for free) to inspect a car and showing up at a dojo and calling them a coward in front of their students if they don't fight you.Where did I say anything about calling someone a coward? You really, really, really need to cut this strawman crap out.

I think you may well be an idealist. But scientific method has nothing to do with your views.I have already demonstrated exactly how dojo arashi can be easily seen as an extension of the scientific method. You have done nothing to the contrary but say "nuh-uh!"

NewLearner

18-Apr-2007, 03:28 AM

You have completely missed the point again. I was referring to your claim about multiple attackers. Read what I'm saying, not what you imagine some meathead would say in my place :rolleyes:

I did read what you are saying. You quoted the sentence that referred to my background. But in all fairness, the background was to highlight my contention that multiple opponents are more difficult for a grappler than a striker. If you say that is what you are questioning, that's fine. I can see that as a legitimate point, but we probably could have both been more clear.

You are going to an entirely different topic here, which I think is caused by your responses all being to a false preconception as to what I am espousing. I at no point was saying that grappling was better at dealing with multiple attackers. Read what I said. Read it again. Read what's actually there, not what you imagine some stereotypical nutrider would write. I was writing only about testing the dojo's claims as to dealing with multiple attackers. Objectively, not proving [insert other art here] better.

While you may not be saying directly that bjj is better equipped at dealing with multiple attackers, I believe it is implied if you state that you must test the striking against multiple attackers. If the purpose is to prove that something is a fraud, why set a higher standard than the "real deal"? I can't come up with a legitimate reason unless one wants to see the so called fraud to fail. So I am left with the implication that you believe it is better or you believe that a test should be rigged in order for the so called fraud to fail.

That's fine. They have the choice to refuse. And whoever's interested in that school has more information than before when they're looking into it. Win.

I am not sure what you mean by win. Win at what? That you have made them look bad? That maybe you have shied some people from the school? To be perfectly honest, I think most of the general public would look less favorably on the people storming another school than a school that refused to participate.

Nope, not disagreeing. There are jerks in every walk of life. I can't use Mao as a reason to hate all the Chinese.

Again, you're welcome to that opinion.

Not important.

Where did I say anything about calling someone a coward? You really, really, really need to cut this strawman crap out.

For someone so focused on everyone reading exactly what you said, you aren't doing a very good job of it. I didn't say you called anyone a coward. Flashloc was the one who said anyone that refuses a challenge is just plain scared.

But perhaps you could explain how you see such a storm happening and the conversation that you see taking place? I really don't see a group of people showing up in the middle of a class and challenging the instructor/students to
fight right now being respectfull in any way. I also don't see the group taking an answer of no and not making negative comments on the way out. My imagination leads me to think some of those comments would that they are scared to fight. But then again, I would never do such a thing so maybe you can give me an idea of such a storming would have some modicum of civility and respect?

I have already demonstrated exactly how dojo arashi can be easily seen as an extension of the scientific method. You have done nothing to the contrary but say "nuh-uh!"

Your scientific method:
Here's where I'm coming from: Hypothesis: Dojo has (poor) combat ability. Test: create matches with students of other dojos to gather more information. Create new hypothesis with new data. That's all this is. Projecting issues of ego and imaginary roid-rage into it is entirely artificial.

This has nothing to do with storming into a competing dojo. Testing your abilities against students of other schools is fine. The methodology is not. The methodology of storming in and demanding someone accept a challenge is full of ego.

Atharel

18-Apr-2007, 04:01 AM

While you may not be saying directly that bjj is better equipped at dealing with multiple attackers, I believe it is implied if you state that you must test the striking against multiple attackers. If the purpose is to prove that something is a fraud, why set a higher standard than the "real deal"? I can't come up with a legitimate reason unless one wants to see the so called fraud to fail. So I am left with the implication that you believe it is better or you believe that a test should be rigged in order for the so called fraud to fail.Nope. Refer to my "objective testing". If they claim to be capable of dealing with multiple attackers, testing that is a natural reply. Recall that the entire discussion of multiple attackers was begun by Thomas. Stop projecting imagined agendas.

I am not sure what you mean by win. Win at what? That you have made them look bad? That maybe you have shied some people from the school? To be perfectly honest, I think most of the general public would look less favorably on the people storming another school than a school that refused to participate. Win at the objective: obtaining more information for the public. Where do you get this crap about making people look bad and made-up agendas? Stop responding to imaginary people who aren't here.

For someone so focused on everyone reading exactly what you said, you aren't doing a very good job of it. I didn't say you called anyone a coward. Flashloc was the one who said anyone that refuses a challenge is just plain scared.
Yes, he did. Not me. Yet you were replying to a quote of mine.

But perhaps you could explain how you see such a storm happening and the conversation that you see taking place? I really don't see a group of people showing up in the middle of a class and challenging the instructor/students to
fight right now being respectfull in any way.
(group of outsiders show up 15 minutes before class starts)"Hi. We're here to check out your school. We'd love it if you'd be willing to have some sparring matches after your class under rules allowing realistic showcasing of your students' skills so we can spread the word - you know, inform the public. If you'd like, we can come back at another time so you can think about who you'd like to represent your school."
"Sure, I'd love to have a chance to show how good my students are. How's ____ sound?"

Not that hard. Civility is fairly easy for most people, I hear.

I also don't see the group taking an answer of no and not making negative comments on the way out. My imagination leads me to think some of those comments would that they are scared to fight.If you felt utterly compelled to storm a school because of whatever reason, how would you go about it? I assume you'd be respectful and civil. No reason that others can't do the same thing.

Your scientific method:

This has nothing to do with storming into a competing dojo. Testing your abilities against students of other schools is fine. The methodology is not. The methodology of storming in and demanding someone accept a challenge is full of ego.Because you say so? I don't see any other reasoning...

NewLearner

18-Apr-2007, 04:32 AM

Nope. Refer to my "objective testing". If they claim to be capable of dealing with multiple attackers, testing that is a natural reply. Recall that the entire discussion of multiple attackers was begun by Thomas. Stop projecting imagined agendas.

Yes Thomas mentioned multiple attackers in response to self defense. You continued with it and suggested it should be multiple stormers against the ones being tested.

Win at the objective: obtaining more information for the public. Where do you get this crap about making people look bad and made-up agendas? Stop responding to imaginary people who aren't here.

And all the stormers are purely about being altruistic and making sure no one wastes time in a school they don't think is good enough. Sorry, I don't buy that.

Yes, he did. Not me. Yet you were replying to a quote of mine.

Once again, I didn't say you said that. But I don't doubt that in the majority of cases something along those lines would be said. If you think that wouldn't happen, I think you are deluded.

(group of outsiders show up 15 minutes before class starts)"Hi. We're here to check out your school. We'd love it if you'd be willing to have some sparring matches after your class under rules allowing realistic showcasing of your students' skills so we can spread the word - you know, inform the public. If you'd like, we can come back at another time so you can think about who you'd like to represent your school."
"Sure, I'd love to have a chance to show how good my students are. How's ____ sound?"

Not that hard. Civility is fairly easy for most people, I hear.

If you felt utterly compelled to storm a school because of whatever reason, how would you go about it? I assume you'd be respectful and civil. No reason that others can't do the same thing.

Have you ever seen such a discussion happen in that way by a group of stormers? While you make it look civil, showing up at the class wanting to test other people still strikes me at very unprofessional, at best. Perhaps it is an unfair stereotype, but I really don't see a group showing up like being anywhere near that civil or respectful. Perhaps all of us that are against it just misunderstand what the supporters are doing. But somehow, I doubt it.

Because you say so? I don't see any other reasoning...

I don't see that you or anyone else has posted an intelligent reason for storming into a different school and trying to test others. Yet you keep pretending that you have. I see no substantial value coming out of it. Realistically, how much do you think forums like bullshido and map have impacted Ashida Kim's business even though they do the public the favor of denoucing him? Minisicule at best. Storming a school and challenging it to fight, is going to have minisicule results in terms of eliminating mcdojos. If there is no real value that comes out of it, why do it? I am left with the only thing that makes sense being that it is to make others look bad and feed ego.

Atharel

18-Apr-2007, 04:52 AM

Yes Thomas mentioned multiple attackers in response to self defense. You continued with it and suggested it should be multiple stormers against the ones being tested.I was more pointing out which way it should go in the context. I certainly didn't mean to give anyone a chance to go for a "OMG GROUND BAD FOR MULTIPLE" derail.

And all the stormers are purely about being altruistic and making sure no one wastes time in a school they don't think is good enough. Sorry, I don't buy that. You can not buy it all you want. Obviously there may be personal agendas but that 1)is not necessarily true 2)does not invalidate the practice.

Once again, I didn't say you said that. But I don't doubt that in the majority of cases something along those lines would be said. If you think that wouldn't happen, I think you are deluded.You think that. Okay. It is not a necessary part of dojo storming, and does not invalidate the practice.

Have you ever seen such a discussion happen in that way by a group of stormers? While you make it look civil, showing up at the class wanting to test other people still strikes me at very unprofessional, at best.Unprofessional? When your profession is teaching fighting, what is wrong with a asking for a demonstration? If this were any other profession you wouldn't have a problem, but when it comes to Martial Arts, we have to adhere to artificial facades of respect? Every other profession is subject to scrutiny. This is merely a natural extension of the desire for proof that is part and parcel of society. Pity me, I'm just a sad, lonely product of our terrible modern society that asks for proof when presented with a claim. Perhaps it is an unfair stereotype, but I really don't see a group showing up like being anywhere near that civil or respectful. Perhaps all of us that are against it just misunderstand what the supporters are doing. But somehow, I doubt it.Ok. Feel free to be skeptical. But recognize that that's all you're doing.

I don't see that you or anyone else has posted an intelligent reason for storming into a different school and trying to test others. :confused: You can't be serious.
Again, put simply: desire for proof.
I see no substantial value coming out of it.I suppose we should never have questioned those tobacco companies and just taken them at their word that smoking isn't addictive.. really. Can't you see the benefits of a more informed populace? Realistically, how much do you think forums like bullshido and map have impacted Ashida Kim's business even though they do the public the favor of denoucing him? Heavily. The entire current generation of youth favor wikipedia as a reference. Wikipedia handily documents Bullshido's exposing of Ashida Kim as a fraud for all to see. Thanks to Bullshido, Kim's potential # of recruits in this generation was cut into shreds. And that's just one example. Storming a school and challenging it to fight, is going to have minisicule results in terms of eliminating mcdojos.I disagree (assuming you meant bullshido, not mcdojos). If there is no real value that comes out of it, why do it? I am left with the only thing that makes sense being that it is to make others look bad and feed ego.The problem here is that you've arbitrarily discounted my position based on your whimsy and unfounded opinions, not arguments. "Well, you can't be right because I don't like what you're saying, so let's look at the alternatives" is not a valid debate technique.

Lily

18-Apr-2007, 06:49 AM

Atharel - I like you :cool:

Ghost Frog

18-Apr-2007, 07:05 AM

We've had MT, BJJ, TKD guys come in (some joined, some didn't) and I think the big factor that adjusts any 'attitude' they may walk in with is that sensei and our instructors are welcoming and don't get defensive about our training.
My TJJ club was very similar to this. I think its the right way to go.

Having said that, how many people do you get turning up claiming to have done MT, kickboxing, BJJ, MMA, but don't seem to have any skill in those areas and obviously mean "I did one class in MT, kickboxing, etc".

Most people who are training regularly in those arts find a club in that art and train there. There are enough challenges in most BJJ clubs to keep people happy for years.

Lily

18-Apr-2007, 07:08 AM

Having said that, how many people do you get turning up claiming to have done MT, kickboxing, BJJ, MMA, but don't seem to have any skill in those areas and obviously mean "I did one class in MT, kickboxing, etc".

Hahahahah, that's so true. We had one guy join and say he'd done Judo for 8 years. He was about 21. He fell over trying to do a front kick and was soooooooo uncoordinated its not funny, we didn't say a single thing, trained him up. He's joined the dojo and will be grading soon :D

Garibaldi

18-Apr-2007, 07:42 AM

Having said that, how many people do you get turning up claiming to have done MT, kickboxing, BJJ, MMA, but don't seem to have any skill in those areas and obviously mean "I did one class in MT, kickboxing, etc".

Had to laugh at that too...

We get so many people claiming to have done MT, Boxing, Judo, MMA and as you said, they generally mean their mum's took them to a class when they were 12.

prowla

18-Apr-2007, 07:48 AM

"Dojo storming" is idiocy.I agree.
Somebody would get hurt, probably the lesser experienced people in the dojo being "stormed".

Garibaldi

18-Apr-2007, 07:57 AM

I'm not saying I agree with dojo storming per se because although I see its value in terms of exposing phonies it's disruptive to classes and people can train how they want. However, no offence Garibaldi but I don't agree with most of the arguments you used.

None taken. I actually find this an interesting "discussion"

OK, two things. Firstly, such a ruleset would only be unfairly suitable for a BJJ guy if it disallowed striking or standup fighting in general; dojo storming goes on under NHB or MMA rules AFAIK. Secondly, dojo storming is not forcing a fight upon someone, it's a challenge that can be declined.

But its generally a challenge done against people with little or no ground experience...hardly fair now is it?

You know it, I know it, but most people don't.

And the person undertaking the challenge knows it too, so what are they doing other than feeding their own ego?

And what gives anyone the god given right to walk into someone else's club and challenge them? What does it really prove? Will the instructor suddenly change the way he teaches or will it convince his students that the challenger has all the answers? Even if he does know something and is not "bullshido", he could get beaten...does that prove anything about his training or his methods?

Because this defeats the point of dojo storming which is to expose fraudsters. If you invite them to train with you they'll probably decline. If you go along to train with them you won't be able to expose them because you'll have to train using their crappy methods (assuming that the club in question really is bullshido, of course).
But who says they are fraudsters? And how do you "expose" them by fighting them in their dojo...that's hardly "public" is it? And if you beat them...so, what? er, sorry but I don't follow how this then solves all the issues.

People lie and cheat all the time, why waste your time exposing them at all? Is it really that important? Surely the time is better spent improving yourself rather than trying to teach someone else a lesson.

Garibaldi

18-Apr-2007, 08:13 AM

The point is to provide information to the public, not me. If I wanted to learn as much as I could from this master, Bruce Lee style, obviously just taking classes would work. But storming isn't about that.

But a dojo storming isn't public. They don't prove anything to anyone, especially the blinkered students of the instructor you are trying to ridicule. They won't suddenly "see the light" and train with you. they'll just think you are an immature idiot and a thug.

If you are succeeding in your alternative method that is excellent. Imagine, though, how many people will refuse to believe word-of-mouth about how much they're missing at that school and waste many years of their life learning substandard material, all because they don't know any better? A series of challenge matches showcasing the gaps in the school's merits would immediately remedy any delusions of primacy.
And yet most of the dojo storming stories are only "word of mouth" too and they are no more believable. The original story in this thread was a macho instructor making up BS about how tough he was. To me that is just more bullshido.

So what if no one believes it. Who made us moral guardians of the martial arts? The time is far better spent training yourself and proving your own ability than disproving someone else's

Violence towards another club won't solve the problem of poorly taught martial arts. Do you think the Gracie Challenge has stamped out all mcdojos and bullshido in Brazil? - It'll never happen.

Atharel

18-Apr-2007, 08:44 AM

But a dojo storming isn't public.The results would be, and plenty of witnesses. They don't prove anything to anyone, especially the blinkered students of the instructor you are trying to ridicule. They won't suddenly "see the light" and train with you. they'll just think you are an immature idiot and a thug.Trying to ridicule? What? Where did I say anything like this? Why can't you reply to my argument instead of what you wish it was?

And yet most of the dojo storming stories are only "word of mouth" too and they are no more believable. The original story in this thread was a macho instructor making up BS about how tough he was. To me that is just more bullshido.Exactly why they should be done by many people instead of just one. More witnesses. More objectivity.
So what if no one believes it. Who made us moral guardians of the martial arts? The time is far better spent training yourself and proving your own ability than disproving someone else'sWho else? Do you want a Bureau of Martial Arts Quality Assurance? As for the rest.. well, if your only goal is increasing your own skill, yes. If you have some sort of urge to improve the arts you love, maybe you'll have additional priorities.

Violence towards another club won't solve the problem of poorly taught martial arts. Do you think the Gracie Challenge has stamped out all mcdojos and bullshido in Brazil? - It'll never happen.Your characterization of critical inquiry as violence is indicative of a misconception of the issue. This is no more necessarily violent than a few rounds of rigorous sparring. If you find that "violent"... well, duh. This is martial arts.
And I bet the Gracie Challenge has put a dent into BS martial arts in Brazil, and the Brazilian public has a higher quality level of martial arts as a result of that constant criticism.

As to your reply towards Timmy.. I can't speak for him, but let me reiterate that a standup art losing a few matches to BJJers proves nothing other than that standup arts have a disadvantage against grapplers. If the dojo was honest, they'd have covered this issue already with their students - no harm done, that's just how fighting works and doesn't make their art rubbish or useless. What the challenge matches would really be useful for would be testing specific claims of the style: particularly appropriate would again be claims of infallible defense against takedowns and similar tales, or on a more realistic note perhaps claims of moderate groundfighting ability. Assuming the testers are BJJ'ers. Boxers, kick boxers, FC karateka (or BJJ stormers also trained in those arts) would be great for testing claims of supreme striking skill, and so on - if they can outstrike the challengers than they obviously are doing things right.

That is all just to illustrate the specifics.

I must add that I am genuinely horrified at this People lie and cheat all the time, why waste your time exposing them at all? Is it really that important?
I feel this attitude is extremely unhealthy.

Atharel

18-Apr-2007, 08:47 AM

Atharel - I like you :cool:
:o I try.

NewLearner

18-Apr-2007, 11:47 AM

I was more pointing out which way it should go in the context. I certainly didn't mean to give anyone a chance to go for a "OMG GROUND BAD FOR MULTIPLE" derail.

If you are claiming something is bad for self defense, you have to include all of self defense in the discussion. Well, you do, if you want to have a legitimate discussion. The focus of those supporting the storming seems to be that they should be tested on single unarmed combat. But that isn't self defense. Thomas pointed that out. But feel free to ignore everyone's points because you don't like them.

You can not buy it all you want. Obviously there may be personal agendas but that 1)is not necessarily true 2)does not invalidate the practice.

When are there not personal agendas? People rarely go out of their way to do something that doesn't benefit them. If the purpose as you said before was to educate the public, then having another purpose that is purely selfish kind of detracts from that.

You think that. Okay. It is not a necessary part of dojo storming, and does not invalidate the practice.

Natural skeptic I guess. It comes from having lots of experience. You say it is not a necessary part of dojo storming. I tend to think it is a very common part of it. I also think it does invalidate the practice. To be honest, I can't see it as being valid at all.

Unprofessional? When your profession is teaching fighting, what is wrong with a asking for a demonstration? If this were any other profession you wouldn't have a problem, but when it comes to Martial Arts, we have to adhere to artificial facades of respect? Every other profession is subject to scrutiny. This is merely a natural extension of the desire for proof that is part and parcel of society. Pity me, I'm just a sad, lonely product of our terrible modern society that asks for proof when presented with a claim. Ok. Feel free to be skeptical. But recognize that that's all you're doing.

You really know me that well? Especially since I gave an example for another industry. Let me be clear. I would have a problem with it in any industry. I don't have a problem with providing information about people that do a bad job. I have a problem with the methodology being used.

:confused: You can't be serious.
Again, put simply: desire for proof.

Sorry, what proof are you seeking? Set up a confrontation in your favor and if you win, the other guys are discredited? If you weren't pretty sure that you would win, you wouldn't go over there. You take a group of select students to storm it so that stack the decks. I don't see it as proving anything that wasn't already a foregone conclusion. So proving is nothing to do with this.

I suppose we should never have questioned those tobacco companies and just taken them at their word that smoking isn't addictive.. really. Can't you see the benefits of a more informed populace? Heavily. The entire current generation of youth favor wikipedia as a reference. Wikipedia handily documents Bullshido's exposing of Ashida Kim as a fraud for all to see. Thanks to Bullshido, Kim's potential # of recruits in this generation was cut into shreds. And that's just one example. I disagree (assuming you meant bullshido, not mcdojos).

I can see the benefits of a more informed population. What I don't see the benefits of are the methodology of storming. Put up a website. Have the so called good schools in your area put together articles for local papers on how to select a school. Give people reasons why you think your training method is good or better. That has value. Storming appears to be juvenile at best.

The problem here is that you've arbitrarily discounted my position based on your whimsy and unfounded opinions, not arguments. "Well, you can't be right because I don't like what you're saying, so let's look at the alternatives" is not a valid debate technique.

That is pretty much spot on what you are doing. You don't like the fact that the older people say it isn't appropriate and poke holes so you ignore their points.

Johnno

18-Apr-2007, 11:59 AM

NewLearner

18-Apr-2007, 12:05 PM

The results would be, and plenty of witnesses.
How will the results be public? Page one of the newspaper? Local tv station? It will be common knowledge to the groups invovled and to those they talk to. That's it.

Trying to ridicule? What? Where did I say anything like this? Why can't you reply to my argument instead of what you wish it was?

Why do you think that everyone is replying to different arguments? Perhaps they are going to the logical next step? Ridicule is the next step. You talk about being objective, but reality is that in any competition like this, ridicule is going to be part of it.

Exactly why they should be done by many people instead of just one. More witnesses. More objectivity.

I don't think it has anything to do with objectivity. It is about strength in numbers.

Who else? Do you want a Bureau of Martial Arts Quality Assurance? As for the rest.. well, if your only goal is increasing your own skill, yes. If you have some sort of urge to improve the arts you love, maybe you'll have additional priorities.
I think such a bureau would be better than storming. Perhaps that is why there are national organizations for standards? Do you really think that storming is out of love for martial arts?

Your characterization of critical inquiry as violence is indicative of a misconception of the issue. This is no more necessarily violent than a few rounds of rigorous sparring. If you find that "violent"... well, duh. This is martial arts.
And I bet the Gracie Challenge has put a dent into BS martial arts in Brazil, and the Brazilian public has a higher quality level of martial arts as a result of that constant criticism.
Most places have a higher standard than the US. Your point is?

As to your reply towards Timmy.. I can't speak for him, but let me reiterate that a standup art losing a few matches to BJJers proves nothing other than that standup arts have a disadvantage against grapplers. If the dojo was honest, they'd have covered this issue already with their students - no harm done, that's just how fighting works and doesn't make their art rubbish or useless. What the challenge matches would really be useful for would be testing specific claims of the style: particularly appropriate would again be claims of infallible defense against takedowns and similar tales, or on a more realistic note perhaps claims of moderate groundfighting ability. Assuming the testers are BJJ'ers. Boxers, kick boxers, FC karateka (or BJJ stormers also trained in those arts) would be great for testing claims of supreme striking skill, and so on - if they can outstrike the challengers than they obviously are doing things right.
Since a standup school is pretty much going to lose to a pure striking art that proves nothing. What schools say they are infallible? The only one I am currently aware of is bjj. The founder, in his book, says that the art is perfect. If you apply his techniques, the only way you can lose is by you making a mistake. Yet we all know there is no perfect art. So going in and beating the other school proves what?

Garibaldi

18-Apr-2007, 12:12 PM

The results would be, and plenty of witnesses.
And this would prove what exactly?...

Trying to ridicule? What? Where did I say anything like this? Why can't you reply to my argument instead of what you wish it was?

I'm not sure where this came from...keep your arguement consistent and I may have a chance of responding so you can understand.

Do you understand what Dojo Storming is? Its intended to show the inadequacies of the other club and generally involves a fight (with agreed restrictions) and subsequent ridicule towards the "bullshido" they practice? Otherwise why would you want witnesses as you have stated above?

You seem to now be retracting into some sort of polite "excuse me shall we spar" scenario...which is what I've said is the better thing to be doing all along? Can you see the difference? Fight/Sparring or Invite/Storming...which is it?

Quote:
People lie and cheat all the time, why waste your time exposing them at all? Is it really that important?

I feel this attitude is extremely unhealthy.
Why? I find it unhealthy to spend your life worrying about everyone else and trying to make some form of moral martial crusade. I may moan about the way other people practise or train and insist on my students testing themsleves, but I'm not going to waste my time & energy correcting people that have absolutely nothing to do with me. They can waste their own time.

Garibaldi

18-Apr-2007, 12:18 PM

If you find that "violent"... well, duh. This is martial arts.

Just noticed this bit. If you think learning the martial arts gives you license to be deliberately and selectively violent towards any other person (and don't think I'm include the defence of self/property/family/friends into this) then you really do need to rethink "how" and "what" you are actually being taught.

Timmy Boy

18-Apr-2007, 12:34 PM

But its generally a challenge done against people with little or no ground experience...hardly fair now is it?

It's not to prove merely that BJJ is superior for groundwork but that it's a superior fighting system in general.

And the person undertaking the challenge knows it too, so what are they doing other than feeding their own ego?

Exposing the instructor if he's fraudulent.

And what gives anyone the god given right to walk into someone else's club and challenge them? What does it really prove? Will the instructor suddenly change the way he teaches or will it convince his students that the challenger has all the answers? Even if he does know something and is not "bullshido", he could get beaten...does that prove anything about his training or his methods?

The instructor in question is welcome to refuse the challenge, and these challenges are aimed at suspect instructors who don't train live etc. I wouldn't expect a muay thai club, for example, to be subject to dojo storming, though this may be different if the guy was criticising BJJ.

But who says they are fraudsters? And how do you "expose" them by fighting them in their dojo...that's hardly "public" is it? And if you beat them...so, what? er, sorry but I don't follow how this then solves all the issues.

You expose them to their students and word spreads.

People lie and cheat all the time, why waste your time exposing them at all? Is it really that important? Surely the time is better spent improving yourself rather than trying to teach someone else a lesson.

Not everyone is as tolerant of lying and cheating as you are, and there's nothing wrong with exposing such dishonesty to the students in question. The students are the real beneficiaries of dojo storming, it's not just about chest beating. However...

EDIT: ...again I should re-emphasise that I don't agree with dojo storming either as it's disruptive to classes and people can train how they want. I just didn't agree with the arguments you used against it.

Garibaldi

18-Apr-2007, 12:48 PM

Exposing the instructor if he's fraudulent.

You can do that without "storming"

The instructor in question is welcome to refuse the challenge, and these challenges are aimed at suspect instructors who don't train live etc.
But just because they don't train live that isn't any reason to go challenging them. I've had plenty of discussions on this website with clubs that don't spar or compete about the validity of live training but that doesn't give me the right to challenge them to a fight to prove what I already know.

Plus even those that do train live may refuse the challenge. Does this make them anyless able or that you have any higher moral standing for making the challenge?

Not everyone is as tolerant of lying and cheating as you are, and there's nothing wrong with exposing such dishonesty to the students in question. The students are the real beneficiaries of dojo storming, it's not just about chest beating.
Its nothing to do with tolerance. I just won't waste my time trying to change something in a manner that doesn't actually prove anything in the first place. I will try & invite them to train (and have done with many clubs in my area). So do, some don't. If they want to believe can't spar without using the deadly techniques they practise that's up to them

And no, the students don't benefit from any of it. It doesnt suddenly make a whole bunch of students "see the light" and change dojo. They'll do that only from continued exposure to a credible and genuinely better taught art. Respect, education and enlightenment are the last things to come out of dojo storming

it's not just about chest beating.
I'm afraid it is. The first post that started all this off is nothing more than san instructor beating his chest about what he did and how great he was.

karate princess

18-Apr-2007, 01:58 PM

'Dojo storming' just sounds like a way for some muppets to boost their fragile egos. What does it prove?

They should pick the roughest boozers in town and try 'pub storming'. Then see how many of them come out un-glassed. ;)

Dittoed. I just think it's down right disrespectful. I mean, sure, arrange to meet up for a challenge but don't just storm a dojo uninvited, that's just rude.

1bad65

18-Apr-2007, 02:25 PM

Cathain

18-Apr-2007, 02:29 PM

Is this thread for real?
Packs of BJJ egomaniacs roam the streets looking for TMA classes to gatecrash, dish out challenges and anyone who doesn't start rolling around the ground with them is denounced as a coward?

And then the excuse is that you are not all on some ego trip to prove BJJ is the pinnacle of martial arts evolution whilst everything else is crap, but you just want to out bad instructors?
That doesn't even make sense. How does that out bad instructors?
If you beat someone who doesn't train BJJ using BJJ, then that doesn't make them bad at what they teach, does it? It would be completely illogical to make such a claim.
You might be able to infer that they lost because they couldn't counter your BJJ moves, and I think despite your protestations that's really what you want to prove. It's the whole "My style is better than your style" thing - denials not withstanding. But then again, as others have said promoting cross-training is the way forward. My own Kung Fu kwoon does grappling and allows others styles to be taught by people who also take them. It certainly helps in making us more rounded fighters. But at the end of the day, we focus on what we train in. If I wanted to do BJJ, then I would join a MMA gym. A bunch of knuckldraggers bursting through the door, intent on "proving" the "crapness" of my style is only going to make me decide not to check out BJJ in the future, as I really have no desire to train with people suffering from such a dysfunctional attitude.

Now, that said - me and my NRA buddies were thinking of going down to some local MMA gyms and offering their coaches to step up.
It's not that we want to prove how inadequate BJJ is in the face of a fully loaded AR-18 assault rifle, we just want to oust bad instructors......

Cathain

18-Apr-2007, 02:31 PM

Its not about ego gratification and chest beating. Like Timmy said, if a fraudulent instructor is exposed, the students benefit. Tell me that Dillman and any of his minions teaching that no-touch KO bs don't deserve to be stormed in front of the very people they are taking $$$$ from. The students have a right to know if any instructor is filling them with bs and a false sense of security.

Wouldn't this be best done by someone training in the same style as the fraud is claiming to teach? Are you going to expose a fraudlent Tai Chi teacher by wrestling him to the floor and then choking him unconscious?
If you want to expose phoney BJJ teachers then be my guest, of course.

fanatical

18-Apr-2007, 02:42 PM

I'm sorry you see it that way, oh and by the way I train BJJ.

Ah. Then I understand much better where you're coming from.

1bad65

18-Apr-2007, 03:18 PM

Wouldn't this be best done by someone training in the same style as the fraud is claiming to teach? Are you going to expose a fraudlent Tai Chi teacher by wrestling him to the floor and then choking him unconscious?
If you want to expose phoney BJJ teachers then be my guest, of course.

Are you this stupid? Please tell me you are joking. So you are saying the best way to 'out' a fraud is by PAYING him to 'teach' you? And you do not have to be a BJJ guy to out a fraud. Who ever said you had to be?

Atharel

18-Apr-2007, 03:35 PM

If you are claiming something is bad for self defense, you have to include all of self defense in the discussion. Well, you do, if you want to have a legitimate discussion. The focus of those supporting the storming seems to be that they should be tested on single unarmed combat. But that isn't self defense. Thomas pointed that out. But feel free to ignore everyone's points because you don't like them. Yet another strawman in your personal army. I, the entire time, was talking about combat ability, not overall self-defense, as combat ability is easily testable and all that other stuff isn't. And if the dojo wanted to prove its self-defense capabilities in multiple attacker scenario, it would be on of the "home team" being attacked by a few people, not the other way around, which makes absolutely no sense (unless you're coming from the unsupported angle of me really being all about proving my art's the bestest!!! and urs all suxx!! lolz!)

When are there not personal agendas? People rarely go out of their way to do something that doesn't benefit them. If the purpose as you said before was to educate the public, then having another purpose that is purely selfish kind of detracts from that.It wouldn't remove the benefit to the public.

Natural skeptic I guess. It comes from having lots of experience. You say it is not a necessary part of dojo storming. I tend to think it is a very common part of it. I also think it does invalidate the practice. To be honest, I can't see it as being valid at all.Care to elaborate? I'm not trying to be mean or anything but "I don't think so" isn't any kind of argument.

You really know me that well? Especially since I gave an example for another industry. Let me be clear. I would have a problem with it in any industry. I don't have a problem with providing information about people that do a bad job. I have a problem with the methodology being used.You have a problem with what you imagine the methodology to be, not what I've presented. You steadfastly refuse to address my actual argument and only respond to an argument that isn't there (but you insist that's what I really mean, despite all evidence to the contrary). Again, you can't insist on what I really mean and then argue against that. This is one of the greatest logical fallacies.

Sorry, what proof are you seeking? Set up a confrontation in your favor and if you win, the other guys are discredited? If you weren't pretty sure that you would win, you wouldn't go over there. You take a group of select students to storm it so that stack the decks.In my favor :confused: Discredited? Only if they were claiming to be unbeatable... As for the rest, where did I say or imply any of that? Again, you're arguing against what you wish I was saying.

I can see the benefits of a more informed population. What I don't see the benefits of are the methodology of storming. Put up a website. Have the so called good schools in your area put together articles for local papers on how to select a school. Give people reasons why you think your training method is good or better. That has value. Storming appears to be juvenile at best.Those are all great ideas that have independent value from the dojo storming concept.

That is pretty much spot on what you are doing. You don't like the fact that the older people say it isn't appropriate and poke holes so you ignore their points.Older people? I don't care if you're 16 or 60. Your argument is all that matters, and that's what I am finding unsatisfactory. If you pay attention, I'm not ignoring points, I'm debunking them one by one.

Davey Bones

18-Apr-2007, 03:39 PM

Are you this stupid? Please tell me you are joking. So you are saying the best way to 'out' a fraud is by PAYING him to 'teach' you? And you do not have to be a BJJ guy to out a fraud. Who ever said you had to be?

You mean aside from the fact that the folks supporting this utterly asinine concept would be MMAers? I can't possibly figure out where we would get this idea :rolleyes:

The reality is that, as Cathain, myself, and other have noted, this is just a lot of chest thumping. Hell, it's a lot of chest-thumping over nothing. Why are we continuing to encourage this so-called discussion? I came to the conclusion this morning that I don't need some internet warrior to validate my training. This whole concpet is just plain silly.

Ghost Frog

18-Apr-2007, 03:47 PM

Atharel

18-Apr-2007, 03:50 PM

How will the results be public? Page one of the newspaper? Local tv station?Youtube would be more likely.

Why do you think that everyone is replying to different arguments?Speculating, I'd guess because imaginary arguments are easier to beat. Perhaps they are going to the logical next step? Ridicule is the next step. You talk about being objective, but reality is that in any competition like this, ridicule is going to be part of it.Maybe to you. You are seeming to operate under the assumption that it would be BJJ stormers (not necessarily so) and that they would utterly embarrass the dojo (not necessarily so) and that they're jackasses instead of concerned martial artists (not necessarily so). That's a lot of assumptions.

I don't think it has anything to do with objectivity. It is about strength in numbers.More people = more people to spar with. A wider range of experience. Remember, I'm not advocating a 80s ninja movie Challenge of the Master!!, but a series of matches between the home school and the visitors with a range of experience levels involved so that the abilities of the school as a whole are showcased. This takes several people. And it's easier to intimidate and laugh out one or two people, yes.

I think such a bureau would be better than storming. Perhaps that is why there are national organizations for standards? Do you really think that storming is out of love for martial arts?And here's the trick: how would this crazy never-going-to-happen bureau monitor quality? I'd bet it would involve visiting inspectors doing sparring with the dojo's students. But forget about this "what-if" - yes, storming can be out of love for martial arts, and/or the public interest. I know I wouldn't want any of my female friends taking Made-up-ryu Karate for self defense.

Most places have a higher standard than the US. Your point is?Don't dodge the point. Open challenge ==> better standard. Notice that I didn't say "than the US", I meant than they otherwise would have.

Since a standup school is pretty much going to lose to a pure striking art that proves nothing. What schools say they are infallible?Plenty of individual schools, and several arts (take a look in the Kung Fu forum, those poor guys have to deal with a lot of crap...) The only one I am currently aware of is bjj. The founder, in his book, says that the art is perfect. If you apply his techniques, the only way you can lose is by you making a mistake.Yeah, isn't Helio just cute as a button when he talks like that? :p Helio isn't BJJ. The people actually teaching it today are BJJ. And they tell me and countless other students that if I really want to know how to fight I need to study other arts too. Yet we all know there is no perfect art. So going in and beating the other school proves what? If there are no claims being tested (greatest art, impossible to take down, our punches are better than boxers'), then beating the school proves nothing, as I've said 4 or so times.

Thomas

18-Apr-2007, 03:58 PM

Do you have an alternative suggestion for the definition of combat? I can't think of one that is more general while retaining the essential meaning (requirements for an ideal definition).
Like I said before, probably different philosophies. I see "combat" as that which the armed forces do - real "fighting" with death involved and all that.

What this thread is talking about I would call "sparring" or "competition" or similar. Just a slightly different outlook. I just call "sparing wuith various rules" the same thing as "combat".

If you are succeeding in your alternative method that is excellent. Imagine, though, how many people will refuse to believe word-of-mouth about how much they're missing at that school and waste many years of their life learning substandard material, all because they don't know any better? A series of challenge matches showcasing the gaps in the school's merits would immediately remedy any delusions of primacy.
I see your point, but we really aren't concerned with gaining lots of students or making lots of money or building a bigger school. Word of mouth and walk-ins provide us with as many students as we can handle.

As for students who miss out on good training, that's neither here nor there for me. As a school we are open to anyone who wants to train, we do some public events (open houses), we share our ideas and knowledge openly (and even online through me!). A good student, in my opinion, tends to look around and try out various schools, meaning they'll probably end up checking us out at some point. Those who dont look outside the one school they are at probably won't like our school anyway, so I don't mind if they show up or not!

Atharel

18-Apr-2007, 04:03 PM

And this would prove what exactly?...Prove whatever happened did happen.

I'm not sure where this came from...keep your arguement consistent and I may have a chance of responding so you can understand.I've been saying the same things the entire time. The entire time. You've only just now deigned to respond to what I'm actually saying, though, and now accuse me of switching positions. Ludicrous.

Do you understand what Dojo Storming is? Its intended to show the inadequacies of the other club and generally involves a fight (with agreed restrictions) and subsequent ridicule towards the "bullshido" they practice? Otherwise why would you want witnesses as you have stated above?That's one angle of approaching it, I suppose, but not the entire.

You seem to now be retracting into some sort of polite "excuse me shall we spar" scenario...No. Read what I've actually been posting (not the slobbering roid-rage babble you've mentally overlaid upon it). I've been espousing civil interaction the entire time. The only people talking about kicking down doors are those that are entirely against the practice.

Why? I find it unhealthy to spend your life worrying about everyone else and trying to make some form of moral martial crusade. I may moan about the way other people practise or train and insist on my students testing themsleves, but I'm not going to waste my time & energy correcting people that have absolutely nothing to do with me. They can waste their own time.What are those folks at snopes thinking, debunking myths when they could be making money?
Just noticed this bit. If you think learning the martial arts gives you license to be deliberately and selectively violent towards any other person (and don't think I'm include the defence of self/property/family/friends into this)Read what I actually said, not the roid-rage imaginary overlay. Do you deny that sparring can be considered violent? Do you believe, as you seem to state, that sparring is morally wrong, and the only violence ever condonable is self-defense? YES I believe I have a license to be violent towards a sparring partner, and I hope he feels the same way!

Garibaldi

18-Apr-2007, 04:26 PM

Read what I actually said, not the roid-rage imaginary overlay. Do you deny that sparring can be considered violent? Do you believe, as you seem to state, that sparring is morally wrong, and the only violence ever condonable is self-defense? YES I believe I have a license to be violent towards a sparring partner, and I hope he feels the same way!
Yes I deny sparring is violent

vi·o·lence /ˈvaɪələns/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[vahy-uh-luhns]
rough or injurious physical force, action, or treatment:
an unjust or unwarranted exertion of force or power, as against rights or laws

or from miriam websters...
"1 : marked by extreme force or sudden intense activity <a violent attack>
2 a : notably furious or vehement <a violent denunciation> b : EXTREME, INTENSE <violent pain> <violent colors>
3 : caused by force : not natural <a violent death>
4 a : emotionally agitated to the point of loss of self-control <became violent after an insult> b : prone to commit acts of violence <violent prison inmates>
"

Read a dictionary and use words that you understand.

The important bits are "extreme" and "unwarranted" "unjust" "loss of self-control" everything sparring or an act towards someone else should never be.

Sparring can be aggressive but never violent.

Atharel

18-Apr-2007, 04:31 PM

Play semantics and feel self-righteous then, but "rough or injurious physical force, action, or treatment" sounds like sparring to me.
I was using a similar definition when my previous statements were made.

Garibaldi

18-Apr-2007, 04:35 PM

Play semantics and feel self-righteous then
Thanks, I think I will

So you want to apply "injurious" force to your sparring partners? (strange how you never highlighted that bit of the definition)

Atharel

18-Apr-2007, 04:37 PM

"OR injurious". OR is not AND.

Sgt_Major

18-Apr-2007, 05:04 PM

"OR injurious". OR is not AND.

shooting yourself in the foot mate .... you said:

injurious physical force seemed like sparring .... which is what garibaldi is asking you, do you apply injurious physical force to your sparring partners, ie try to injure them?

1bad65

18-Apr-2007, 05:22 PM

You mean aside from the fact that the folks supporting this utterly asinine concept would be MMAers? I can't possibly figure out where we would get this idea :rolleyes:

The reality is that, as Cathain, myself, and other have noted, this is just a lot of chest thumping. Hell, it's a lot of chest-thumping over nothing. Why are we continuing to encourage this so-called discussion? I came to the conclusion this morning that I don't need some internet warrior to validate my training. This whole concpet is just plain silly.

Jeez, now there are two of them. Actually the first one said it was "BJJ" guys and you now say all are "MMA" guys. You do know there is a difference? Glad you think people defrauding hard-working people of $$$ and filling them with a false confidence is 'nothing'. I do not share that belief.

If you have ever seen the FoxNews clip of them going into the 'Human Stun Gun's' dojo you will notice they are not a bunch of BJJ/MMA guys. It's a small female reporter who asks him to demonstrate his bs. Also James Randi, who also attemps to debunk bs, has tested MA guys. I'm pretty sure he is not a BJJ/MMA chest-thumper.

And tell me you did not refer to me as an 'internet warrior'...........

Atharel

18-Apr-2007, 07:25 PM

shooting yourself in the foot mate .... you said:

injurious physical force seemed like sparring .... which is what garibaldi is asking you, do you apply injurious physical force to your sparring partners, ie try to injure them?

How is that shooting myself in the foot? I was showing how the definition applied to my usage of "violent", namely "rough physical force". The "or" shows this to be equally valid in usage with "injurious physical force". By emphasizing the "or" in the context of my previous statements, I emphasize that I was using the "rough" interpretation of "violent", not "injurious". If that doesn't clear it up, please elaborate.

Davey Bones

18-Apr-2007, 07:31 PM

Jeez, now there are two of them. Actually the first one said it was "BJJ" guys and you now say all are "MMA" guys. You do know there is a difference? Glad you think people defrauding hard-working people of $$$ and filling them with a false confidence is 'nothing'. I do not share that belief.

I read profiles. Most of the "storming" folks are practitioners of MMA or BJJ. Make of that what you will.

EDIT: The OP, Agutrot, MT and BJJ. Anthael, BJJ (mostly). You don't list your style. Flashlock is a BJJer as I recall. Timmy does MMA (although he's on both sides, IIRC). All public knowledge and in the person's profile.

But please, if I've missed 10 people who support your idea who do not particiapte in BJJ or MMA, list their names and styles. I believe I am correct, and this is just a thinly-veiled style-versus-style trash thread.

If you have ever seen the FoxNews clip of them going into the 'Human Stun Gun's' dojo you will notice they are not a bunch of BJJ/MMA guys. It's a small female reporter who asks him to demonstrate his bs. Also James Randi, who also attemps to debunk bs, has tested MA guys. I'm pretty sure he is not a BJJ/MMA chest-thumper.

I've seen it and criticized it multiple times. That stuff is a fraud. I'm not denying that. But there seems to me to be a lot of difference between the bad Fox News reports and your average MA studio. It's easy to comment on the worst of the worst, it's not so clear when it comes to the not-so-obvious schools. And when it's not clear, I don't believe you have the self-ordained right to go and storm the studios.

And tell me you did not refer to me as an 'internet warrior'...........

I did. Your point would be what?

Atharel

18-Apr-2007, 07:51 PM

speaking for myself here, not 1bad65:I read profiles. Most of the "storming" folks are practitioners of MMA or BJJ. Make of that what you will.A critical mentality? *shrug* Absence of artificial notions of "respect"? I don't want to take this far (in this thread) but that's my reading of it.
EDIT: The OP, Agutrot, MT and BJJ. Anthael, BJJ (mostly). You don't list your style. Flashlock is a BJJer as I recall. All public knowledge and in the person's profile. Atharel, please. Anthael means something else - not sure exactly what haha. My "mostly" includes more than you'd guess, including some exposure to Shuai Chiao recently (yay no-gi Judo-like throws?) - but all I'm actively training in at the moment is BJJ. And flashlock is... Well. I hope that his opinions mature as his training continues. He's hardly representative of the BJJ community (only trained for a couple of weeks, obviously in a nutrider phase), as you can tell from his claims in the General forum that BJJ is all you need to win MMA fights, which goes directly against what the BJJ community itself teaches.

I've seen it and criticized it multiple times. That stuff is a fraud. I'm not denying that. But there seems to me to be a lot of difference between the bad Fox News reports and your average MA studio. It's easy to comment on the worst of the worst, it's not so clear when it comes to the not-so-obvious schools. And when it's not clear, I don't believe you have the self-ordained right to go and storm the studios.But when it is clear? And what's the dividing line? You seem to be agreeing that it is appropriate at times, even if it takes a Dillman - that's really all I'm getting at here: establishing that the practice can be appropriate.

Davey Bones

18-Apr-2007, 08:08 PM

speaking for myself here, not 1bad65:A critical mentality? *shrug* Absence of artificial notions of "respect"? I don't want to take this far (in this thread) but that's my reading of it.

Just making an observation. :) Hell, I would never be a member of a school which didn't allow me to question. Perhaps my issue is with the attitude...

Atharel, please. Anthael means something else - not sure exactly what haha.

Sorry 'bout that...

My "mostly" includes more than you'd guess, including some exposure to Shuai Chiao recently (yay no-gi Judo-like throws?) - but all I'm actively training in at the moment is BJJ. And flashlock is... Well. I hope that his opinions mature as his training continues. He's hardly representative of the BJJ community (only trained for a couple of weeks, obviously in a nutrider phase), as you can tell from his claims in the General forum that BJJ is all you need to win MMA fights, which goes directly against what the BJJ community itself teaches.

I actually hated to mention you, lol. You've been one of the more respectful folks advocating storming. Even if I don't agree with you. ;)

And I am intimately familiar with Shuai Jiao, it's part of my kwoon's curriculum.

But when it is clear? And what's the dividing line? You seem to be agreeing that it is appropriate at times, even if it takes a Dillman - that's really all I'm getting at here: establishing that the practice can be appropriate.

I agree that there are folks who should be exposed as frauds. My problem with most of this discussion would be: How do you determine what constitutes a "fraud"? How do you determine who is teaching good stuff and bad stuff, which will then determine whether or not you elect to go storming? I just don't see how you can make a determination aside from the obvious "no hit" freaks and their ilk. Personally, I'd rather you contact the better business bureau; but the fact remains that a lot of this discussion hinges on subjective, personal opinions which are obviously not subscribed to by all.

Atharel

18-Apr-2007, 08:26 PM

Just making an observation. :) Hell, I would never be a member of a school which didn't allow me to question. Perhaps my issue is with the attitude...An overtly disrespectful attitude is something I would not advocate either.

Sorry 'bout that...No problem, heh. There's a decent chance that you'd know what "Athar" means considering your own user name. *quickly hides traces of geekdom*

I actually hated to mention you, lol. You've been one of the more respectful folks advocating storming. Even if I don't agree with you. ;)

And I am intimately familiar with Shuai Jiao, it's part of my kwoon's curriculum.I try to remain calm and reasonable in most pursuits. If I turn out to be right, no reason to be a dick about it, and I was wrong, makes the humble pie a mite easier to swallow ;) And I mentioned Shuai Ch/Jiao because I seemed to remember reading you talking about it - you know, show that I don't hate CMA or whatever haha. Actually even way back when I was doing Judo we'd often have Shuai'ers come over and train with us; I believe they probably helped me long afterward to transition to no-gi BJJ more easily with their cursed sleeveless jackets.

I agree that there are folks who should be exposed as frauds. My problem with most of this discussion would be: How do you determine what constitutes a "fraud"? How do you determine who is teaching good stuff and bad stuff, which will then determine whether or not you elect to go storming? I just don't see how you can make a determination aside from the obvious "no hit" freaks and their ilk. Personally, I'd rather you contact the better business bureau; but the fact remains that a lot of this discussion hinges on subjective, personal opinions which are obviously not subscribed to by all.Good questions. I guess I differ primarily from you in thinking that a storm doesn't have to be a hugely offensive deal even if the school is legitimate. I mean, that way they've proven they know their stuff, everyone wins. If I randomly stormed a TKD place and they kicked my face in during standup sparring (because my kickboxing sucks and this is very likely) I'd say good for them, they teach effective, if stylized, standup fighting (and what's wrong with stylizing fighting? Genki Sudo, for example). It shouldn't be a win/lose thing IMO, where the losers are forced to commit seppuku from the dishonor of "losing".

And all the BBB really does with MA schools is things like autopay system abuse, sadly.

1bad65

18-Apr-2007, 08:42 PM

I've seen it and criticized it multiple times. That stuff is a fraud. I'm not denying that. But there seems to me to be a lot of difference between the bad Fox News reports and your average MA studio. It's easy to comment on the worst of the worst, it's not so clear when it comes to the not-so-obvious schools. And when it's not clear, I don't believe you have the self-ordained right to go and storm the studios

Are you critical of the fraud instructor or of Foxnews or both? I'm confused.

You don't list your style.

I work out an MMA gym. Boxing, MT, and BJJ. We are a Renzo affiliate, I was awarded my blue belt by Rolles Gracie.

I did. Your point would be what?

As I have competed in BJJ, hosted and took part in a Bullshido Throwdown, and I spar regularly with active fighters, I'm offended at that. If your ever in Austin, feel free to stop by and say it to my face.

Agutrot-

18-Apr-2007, 10:07 PM

Now, that said - me and my NRA buddies were thinking of going down to some local MMA gyms and offering their coaches to step up.
It's not that we want to prove how inadequate BJJ is in the face of a fully loaded AR-18 assault rifle, we just want to oust bad instructors......

It's posts like this that make me question the theory of evolution. Is there a lesson in TMAs where they teach you to make senseless metaphors? BJJ is an unarmed style of self defense. So are the MAs we're talking about.

A better metaphor would be your NRA buddies picking a fight with some marines. The purpose of storming is that you're both using the same medium.

To the people who say "well they don't train in grappling so that doesn't count": I train in a MA where all I do is kick with my left foot. I don't train using hands or my right leg, but that doesn't mean I'm not great at what I do. It would be unfair competition for someone who strikes with multiple parts of their body to fight against me because I don't train like that, and it wouldn't prove that their style is better anyway.

Doublejab

18-Apr-2007, 11:30 PM

My teacher and many self defence experts (including Thompson) consider the most important self defence skills to be: use of the fence (keeping a threat at a distance), talking down or verablly intimidating a possible aggresser when this is possible, and to be capable of striking efffectively with your hands (the ability to knockout an opponent, ideally with one strike). Knowledge of grappling alone is not a substitute for these skills.

However, to say you can definitely protect yourself in a 'real' (and thus unpredictable situation) without any knowledge of grappling is foolish and simply untrue. Of the more street effective grappling options BJJ, shoot wrestling and Judo are some of the most effective.

Davey Bones

19-Apr-2007, 12:03 AM

Are you critical of the fraud instructor or of Foxnews or both? I'm confused.

That instructor. He's a disgrace. He smacked an innocent woman trying to report a story to make her feel something. He's lucky she didn't rip his nuts off like I would have.

I work out an MMA gym. Boxing, MT, and BJJ. We are a Renzo affiliate, I was awarded my blue belt by Rolles Gracie.

Well, congrats on receiving your belt from a Gracie :)

As I have competed in BJJ, hosted and took part in a Bullshido Throwdown, and I spar regularly with active fighters, I'm offended at that. If your ever in Austin, feel free to stop by and say it to my face.

Oh, wait, you refer to those of us who don't believe in your position "cowards" and "afraid" with "something to hide" and you're offended because I called you an "internet warrior"?

1bad65

19-Apr-2007, 01:29 AM

I agree with the 1st point. Not only he is a disgrace, he is in horrible shape for a MA instructor.

On the 3rd one, I don't recall using those words. If I did, show me where I did as I really don't recall that. I do not believe in storming/challenges for the sake of a style-vs-style test. The early UFCs are proof enough for me. I have said before that I can think of 2 reasons where it is ok in my eyes: 1)a school/instructor claims to teach self-defense that is the best, the ultimate, etc 2)a school where the owner/head instructor has embellished his resume, especially if he lies about his rank or experience in BJJ.

Davey Bones

19-Apr-2007, 01:40 AM

Here, mark your friggin calendars...

I confused you with flintlock. My bad. HE's the one who said "coward", "afraid", etc.

1bad65

19-Apr-2007, 01:43 AM

It's cool.

flashlock

19-Apr-2007, 02:10 AM

I've never dojo stormed, I will never dojo storm, but I do know people who have dojo stormed.

My BJJ coach--who I don't know very well, but seems like a good bloke--dojo stormed mainly to promote his club. He was a new guy in town, and teaching BJJ is his job. If dojo storming worked for him to promote his club and get money, I say more power to him. He no longer does it because he no longer needs to.

He has mentioned that sometimes a Kung Fu guy or somebody will start bragging, one of our club members hears it and wants to go challenge the school. He lets them go with one of the blue belts, but I haven't seen it.

It seems to me like a little bit of silly macho fun. I shouldn't have taken it so seriously in my previous posts--it doesn't mean you're afraid necessarily if you don't accept--I was wrong on that point (mostly). And calling the police, that's just as over-reactionary as my previous stance. Laugh it off, join in, make friends... or at least have an interesting story whether you win or not. No big deal.

RandomTriangle

19-Apr-2007, 06:46 AM

Garibaldi

19-Apr-2007, 07:42 AM

A better metaphor would be your NRA buddies picking a fight with some marines. The purpose of storming is that you're both using the same medium.

That is so blatantly not the case, as most storming is undertaken by people able to fight on the ground against clubs that are unable to fight on the ground

Garibaldi

19-Apr-2007, 07:48 AM

My BJJ coach--who I don't know very well, but seems like a good bloke--dojo stormed mainly to promote his club. He was a new guy in town, and teaching BJJ is his job. If dojo storming worked for him to promote his club and get money, I say more power to him.
So, not to disprove any bullshido then? Just to feed his ego because he can't advertise and attract students another way then, and then to give him a story to brag about. I bet he didn't storm any of the local clubs that had a chance of beating him!?

It seems to me like a little bit of silly macho fun. I shouldn't have taken it so seriously in my previous posts--
I'm glad you used the word "macho"...but "fun"!?!? To whom? The club that are stormed and challenged probably wouldn't see it that way.

Garibaldi

19-Apr-2007, 07:53 AM

Dojo storming CAN be performed WITH respect...

That means something (slightly) different to each school (being stormed).

i see nothing wrong with HEALTHY competition.

Let me put it this way. While it is NOT the same thing... i've "dojo stormed" other BJJ schools. I’ve showed up to roll during at open matt. When i go i try my hardest to tap EVERYONE, though it's obviously done with respect.
Does no-one understand what "storming" actually IS?

What you are talking about is being invited...you've gone along and joined in a class!! You even said you'd gone along to an "OPEN" mat!!! You've gone along and ROLLED. That isn't storming.

I'm starting to think that this argument is actually over the fact that most of the advocators of dojo storming actually have no idea what dojo storming involves.

Absolutely nothing wrong with going along to an open mat and undertaking some healthy competition to see if you can tap the other clubs.

But what I want to clarify is the issue of "real" dojo storming and whether it achieves anything. We've all seen the Dillman clips and all power to the people making him look like a total moron...BUT, and it's a BIG BUT. What did it achieve? Those that believed he was an idiot beforehand now act smug that they've got proof it didn't work...those that DO believe in his ability and system weren't convinced by it anyway and will continue to learn and train with him. Those that didn't care either way may smile or laugh, but still don't care.

The other clips of "real" dojo storming are generally fighters beating up on misguided fools. I'm sure we've all seen the clip of the poor old guy getting kicked in the face. Do you think that proves anything?

NewLearner

19-Apr-2007, 11:43 AM

NewLearner

19-Apr-2007, 11:45 AM

So, not to disprove any bullshido then? Just to feed his ego because he can't advertise and attract students another way then, and then to give him a story to brag about. I bet he didn't storm any of the local clubs that had a chance of beating him!?

I'm glad you used the word "macho"...but "fun"!?!? To whom? The club that are stormed and challenged probably wouldn't see it that way.
Spot on!

Linguo

19-Apr-2007, 12:19 PM

Does no-one understand what "storming" actually IS?

But what I want to clarify is the issue of "real" dojo storming and whether it achieves anything. We've all seen the Dillman clips and all power to the people making him look like a total moron...BUT, and it's a BIG BUT. What did it achieve? Those that believed he was an idiot beforehand now act smug that they've got proof it didn't work...those that DO believe in his ability and system weren't convinced by it anyway and will continue to learn and train with him. Those that didn't care either way may smile or laugh, but still don't care.

The other clips of "real" dojo storming are generally fighters beating up on misguided fools. I'm sure we've all seen the clip of the poor old guy getting kicked in the face. Do you think that proves anything?

While I'm presonally not a fan of dojo storming, I can see how exposing a fraud is more for the benefit of potential students.Take the Dillman example. With proof that Dillman's no-touch knockouts are fake, people will now have something to show individuals curious about the legitimacy of Dillman's techniques. Additionally, while some people will continue to have blinders on their eyes when confronted with the truth, SOME people may realize that what they are being taught is ineffective and leave the school for greener pastures. I don't have much of a problem exposing schools that make claims but fail to back them up.

Garibaldi

19-Apr-2007, 12:58 PM

I don't have much of a problem exposing schools that make claims but fail to back them up.
I would hope noone has a problem with that. But not by dojo storming and certainly not by using violence.

But even with the disproving of Dillmans no touch knockouts, does that mean that nothing he teaches about the applications & theory of pressure points has no validity? Does that mean we have the right to say noone can learn anything from him?

And if someone is challenged to fight to prove what they teach works, and they lose. Does that prove that what they teach is useless in all circumstances? It just doesn't follow any logic.

Linguo

19-Apr-2007, 01:18 PM

But even with the disproving of Dillmans no touch knockouts, does that mean that nothing he teaches about the applications & theory of pressure points has no validity? Does that mean we have the right to say noone can learn anything from him?

Dojo-storming is just a tool. I don't advocate it, but I can see where it may be useful. Maybe an instructor will claim some false rank in BJJ or something and a legitimate BJJ school may wish to challenge that.

People will do what they want to do. After the storming of a dojo, some will stay and others may not. No one is saying a person has no right to learn anything from a particular teacher. Go ahead. Learn if you want to. It's not like a dojo storm is an invasion complete with occupation. No one is taking over the school. It's just a challenge to the school. Frankly, if what the school teaches isn't applicable, despite claiming otherwise, the students and teacher should probably reasses the material.

In the case of Dillman, if pressure points were my interest and it failed to work as often as it did, I would probably look elsewhere for a more honest perspective on pressure points.

Atharel

19-Apr-2007, 01:50 PM

Does no-one understand what "storming" actually IS?

What you are talking about is being invited...you've gone along and joined in a class!! You even said you'd gone along to an "OPEN" mat!!! You've gone along and ROLLED. That isn't storming.

I'm starting to think that this argument is actually over the fact that most of the advocators of dojo storming actually have no idea what dojo storming involves.Or you're insisting that all rectangles must be squares. Just because it's civil doesn't mean the stormed dojo isn't being scrutinized, and if they do terribly it will still speak poorly of them.

1bad65

19-Apr-2007, 02:27 PM

The other clips of "real" dojo storming are generally fighters beating up on misguided fools. I'm sure we've all seen the clip of the poor old guy getting kicked in the face. Do you think that proves anything?

You do realize that the 'poor old guy' you refer to fought in a challenge match don't you? There was even some money bet between the two parties involved. And to me and anyone else with half a brain, it proves he was full of fluffy bunnies and that the students who believed in his powers were not too bright.

Garibaldi

19-Apr-2007, 04:58 PM

Or you're insisting that all rectangles must be squares. Just because it's civil doesn't mean the stormed dojo isn't being scrutinized, and if they do terribly it will still speak poorly of them.
Eh? Once again, I think you need to clarify what definitions of words you are using. This issue that RandomTriangle brought up and that I was referring to is NOT storming.

I think some of you guys want to act all tough and claim you stormed a dojo when all that really happened is that you went along to another club, politely asked if you could join in and then tapped someone, so from then on feed your own ego by claiming you went in and challenged them and then spend the rest of your lives bragging that you were better than their students.

Garibaldi

19-Apr-2007, 05:03 PM

You do realize that the 'poor old guy' you refer to fought in a challenge match don't you? There was even some money bet between the two parties involved. And to me and anyone else with half a brain, it proves he was full of fluffy bunnies and that the students who believed in his powers were not too bright.
Challenge match or not what I saw was someone with some fighting experience kicking an old guy in the face. He was aiming to prove the old boy couldn't keep him away with his Qi. He could have done that and proved the same thing very easily without breaking his nose.

Atharel

19-Apr-2007, 05:13 PM

Eh? Once again, I think you need to clarify what definitions of words you are using. This issue that RandomTriangle brought up and that I was referring to is NOT storming.I've already presented a working, broad, and accurate (imo) definition of Dojo storming. If you have some question about it that requires further clarification please let me know, but I don't see where it's vague.

Storming a dojo is just going in numbers and requesting a series of challenge matches. This is what differentiates it from a challenge match - it is designed not to showcase the skill of one fighter, but the entire school.

As for the rest of your post... I bet you came into a thread, joined in the discussion, couldn't refute any of the points, then went home and made up some story you told anyone who asked for 6 months about how those darn empricists are probably morally inferior to you so it's all okay in the end.

What place does such absurdly unfounded speculation and ad hominem crap have in rational discussion? I freely admit that my previous paragraph is complete trash utterly irrelevant to debate and rational discussion, and feel dirty for including it in a discussion that's largely been so clean.

1bad65

19-Apr-2007, 05:15 PM

If you think that the younger guy was too rough, then you know absolutely nothing about real fighting. He actually laid off before the fight was officially stopped.

Davey Bones

19-Apr-2007, 05:33 PM

It seems to me like a little bit of silly macho fun. I shouldn't have taken it so seriously in my previous posts--it doesn't mean you're afraid necessarily if you don't accept--I was wrong on that point (mostly). And calling the police, that's just as over-reactionary as my previous stance. Laugh it off, join in, make friends... or at least have an interesting story whether you win or not. No big deal.

See, now if you come to me with THAT attitude, it's a completelye different story ;)

Davey Bones

19-Apr-2007, 05:35 PM

That is so blatantly not the case, as most storming is undertaken by people able to fight on the ground against clubs that are unable to fight on the ground

To play devil's advocate for a moment, though, if someone is claiming to teach realistic self-defense, then it seems to me that the logical conclusion of their training SHOULD include some form of groundwork. It may not be BJJ or Wrestling, but there ought to be something there.

Atharel

19-Apr-2007, 05:44 PM

flashlock

19-Apr-2007, 11:58 PM

See, now if you come to me with THAT attitude, it's a completelye different story ;)

Yeah--and I would if I were to do that... but on the internet we make assumptions (both ways) because we dont' have a real person in front of us, with voice inflections, etc.

Garibaldi

20-Apr-2007, 07:47 AM

I've already presented a working, broad, and accurate (imo) definition of Dojo storming. If you have some question about it that requires further clarification please let me know, but I don't see where it's vague.

I wasn't referring to your definition, but to RandomTriangles post about going to an open mat. It even says that in the post!

This issue that RandomTriangle brought up and that I was referring to is NOT storming.
No clarification needed other than why are you arguing about whether or not this is defined as dojo storming?

Garibaldi

20-Apr-2007, 07:52 AM

mlan

20-Apr-2007, 08:00 AM

To play devil's advocate for a moment, though, if someone is claiming to teach realistic self-defense, then it seems to me that the logical conclusion of their training SHOULD include some form of groundwork. It may not be BJJ or Wrestling, but there ought to be something there.
One would assume this to be the case, but that doesn't often happen, far to often many schools claim to teach effective skills geared towards their environment and do not approach other venues of training, do not make their skill set adaptable, do not train for a realistic fight.

In instances such as that, and they are more common than you would believe, storming such a place can be a good thing as they will find out one way or another that their ideaology is not sound.

I remember years ago going to a TKD school with a dude I trained with, he challenged their head instructor(5th degree), dude did a bunch of pretty flying kicks and what not but the guy I was with just grabbed his leg and slammed him down and after a little bit of work submitted him in front of his class. The flying/jumping kicks were things that instructor said would work on the streets. He and his entire class learned otherwise.
Now, such is not the case all the time, but to some extent most TMA schools fall into this paradigm.

Garibaldi

20-Apr-2007, 08:16 AM

I remember years ago going to a TKD school with a dude I trained with, he challenged their head instructor(5th degree), dude did a bunch of pretty flying kicks and what not but the guy I was with just grabbed his leg and slammed him down and after a little bit of work submitted him in front of his class. The flying/jumping kicks were things that instructor said would work on the streets. He and his entire class learned otherwise.
Now, such is not the case all the time, but to some extent most TMA schools fall into this paradigm.
But that doesn't prove that his techniques wouldn't work against someone that doesn't have takedown or submission skills. The argument being used here simply isn't logical.

All it proves is that someone with groundfighting skills beats someone without (generally)

mlan

20-Apr-2007, 08:23 AM

But that doesn't prove that his techniques wouldn't work against someone that doesn't have takedown or submission skills. The argument being used here simply isn't logical.

All it proves is that someone with groundfighting skills beats someone without (generally)

Two years later it happend again by a dude with sole striking skills.
So in fact by two different skill sets the head instructor got subbed.

And it is a logical argument, the instructor claimed to teach effective fighting skills that would work without fail in real life, against any oponent, my buddy proved that false, how does that appear as illogical?

Garibaldi

20-Apr-2007, 11:59 AM

Two years later it happend again by a dude with sole striking skills.
So in fact by two different skill sets the head instructor got subbed.

And it is a logical argument, the instructor claimed to teach effective fighting skills that would work without fail in real life, against any oponent, my buddy proved that false, how does that appear as illogical?
fair enough...I'll concede that point, but to be fair you didn't say he'd claimed it would work "without fail against any opponent" before, just that he had claimed it would work for self-defence.

Davey Bones

20-Apr-2007, 01:51 PM

Absolutely agree

However, it doesn't automatically and logically follow that because it doesn't the rest of the school's curriculum is bullshido and fraudulent and they deserve to be taught a public lesson or that anyone has any right to be disrespectful to them and storm their dojo

I'm not necessarily saying that, but it does give me cause for concern when I see "self-defense" not entailing any groundwork or doing unrealistic one-steps which involve high kicks and knives :Angel:

Timmy Boy

20-Apr-2007, 02:01 PM

fair enough...I'll concede that point, but to be fair you didn't say he'd claimed it would work "without fail against any opponent" before, just that he had claimed it would work for self-defence.

I think that's a good point. Am I incapable of defence against ANYONE just because I can't beat Fedor Emalienenko?

MacWombat

20-Apr-2007, 02:05 PM

There's a wrong assumption here that simply because a school loses to the dojo stormers, they are bullshido. This is not the case. Even in losing, students should be able to show that they know technique and (hopefully) the stormers would recognize this. Doing well and losing would still be seen as good in the eyes of the stormers. After all, if stormers constantly lost, they'd probably stop storming.

mlan

20-Apr-2007, 02:52 PM

fair enough...I'll concede that point, but to be fair you didn't say he'd claimed it would work "without fail against any opponent" before, just that he had claimed it would work for self-defence.

You're right, my bad, I didn't, that's what happens when you get little sleep :o

Garibaldi

20-Apr-2007, 06:59 PM

I think that's a good point. Am I incapable of defence against ANYONE just because I can't beat Fedor Emalienenko?
Yes!!! See that's exactly what I mean!

Garibaldi

20-Apr-2007, 07:02 PM

mlan

20-Apr-2007, 07:09 PM

Yes that is another point I'll concede.

However, so often stormers only select schools they know they can bitch so they can have something to big themselves up with!

Or they even storm schools they know will be a challenge so they can test themselves and the school out accurately and see where the skills stand.

Kwan Jang

20-Apr-2007, 10:06 PM

Like a sore in your mouth that you just can't leave alone, I find myself back on this thread. First, though this type of behavior was not uncommon decades ago, at least in the USA there was the infamous "dojo wars" of the 1960's and 1970's. In these macho exercises in stupidity, there were people killed and the general public looked at the martial arts community like we were a bunch of idiots (moreso than usual...and this time we gave them a legitimate reason to do so).

If you think you are "educating the public", you are deluding yourself. For the most part, the martial arts in themselves barely registers a blip on the public radar. And even the people who would have an interest in the outcome are going to hear to many "spins" on the story of what happened that it isn't going to matter anyway. Testing your skills and that of your competition team is what competitions are for. I have absolutely NOTHING against organized competitions or friendly training between schools or their students, but I can NEVER see any real justification for it being done in a disrespectful manner.(Even done to people who may not be deserving of a lot of respect, you only degrade yourself in such actions)

No matter how you try to whitewash actions of this kind, this type of behavior only comes from ego and your own lack of confidence and belief in yourself. It's kind of like the kid who gets a camaro and wants to race all the other cars on the street to prove how fast his car is. He feels he is pretty good, but still is insecure enough to feel that he has something to prove. OTOH, the guy who drives a Ferarri or Lambrougini(Spelling?) KNOWS that all he has to do is press his foot on the gas and everyone else on the road is gone. Thus, he can usually cruise around town close to the speed limit (at least most of the time) feeling he has nothing to prove.

Another example that comes to mind is the gym rat who has started to put on a decent amount of size and is really starting to be proud of his 18'' arms and 350 lbs bench press. He will (too) often wear a tank top or "muscle shirt" in weather that doesnt warrant it trying to show off his physique to all that will take notice. While (usually) the guys who's arms are above 20" and benches are above 500 are dressed much more conservatively, at least in subzero weather. And are usually shaking their heads at the previously mentioned gym rat's attire, plus suggesting to him he spends more time on the squat rack before he looks too much like a lightbulb.LOL.

You see this type of thing in all fields, especially the ones where testosterone plays a significant role. Also, even if this type of behavior was common in certain cultures in the past, it is no reason to carry on bad trends.

1bad65

20-Apr-2007, 10:34 PM

If you think you are "educating the public", you are deluding yourself.

No matter how you try to whitewash actions of this kind, this type of behavior only comes from ego and your own lack of confidence and belief in yourself.

So you would say that someone going into a Dillman (or one his minions) school and saying that his no-touch KO stuff is junk and dropping a challenge to prove it serves no good purpose?

Agutrot-

20-Apr-2007, 11:19 PM

If everyone at a school can beat everyone at another that shows superior knowledge taught at the school, not individual skill. If someone my age (17) stormed a dojo and fought a 30 year old with years of experience and won wouldn't you assume it was the style that was superior?

Yohan

20-Apr-2007, 11:43 PM

Timmy Boy

21-Apr-2007, 12:13 AM

Yes!!! See that's exactly what I mean!

I have an eye for these details ;)

Devildog2930

21-Apr-2007, 12:14 AM

Dojo Storming sounds totally pathetic.
Organize a friendly training session with a local club where you can both learn.
Organize a tournament and invite all the local MA schools.
Or if it is truly about self defense and how BJJ is superior to all, come down to one of the pubs in the Welsh Valleys alone and shout on top of your voice " I've come Here to teach al you sheep [] how to fight".
If you make it out of Wales alive then I'll gladly join your school.

Timmy Boy

21-Apr-2007, 12:24 AM

I return to my position of Devil's Advocate :D

If you think you are "educating the public", you are deluding yourself. For the most part, the martial arts in themselves barely registers a blip on the public radar. And even the people who would have an interest in the outcome are going to hear to many "spins" on the story of what happened that it isn't going to matter anyway. Testing your skills and that of your competition team is what competitions are for. I have absolutely NOTHING against organized competitions or friendly training between schools or their students, but I can NEVER see any real justification for it being done in a disrespectful manner.(Even done to people who may not be deserving of a lot of respect, you only degrade yourself in such actions)

Perhaps "educating the public" is an exaggeration for the reason you pointed out but you can at least educate the students. If my instructor sat there telling me that style X was a load of crap and then someone from style X came in and demolished him without breaking a sweat then I'd be looking elsewhere for credible martial arts instruction.

No matter how you try to whitewash actions of this kind, this type of behavior only comes from ego and your own lack of confidence and belief in yourself. It's kind of like the kid who gets a camaro and wants to race all the other cars on the street to prove how fast his car is. He feels he is pretty good, but still is insecure enough to feel that he has something to prove. OTOH, the guy who drives a Ferarri or Lambrougini(Spelling?) KNOWS that all he has to do is press his foot on the gas and everyone else on the road is gone. Thus, he can usually cruise around town close to the speed limit (at least most of the time) feeling he has nothing to prove.

But BJJ is a competition art and (although I don't train in it myself) I believe you have to beat people in actual matches in order to be promoted, so I think any ego issues would have been resolved prior to the point of dojo storming. I think a more reliable sign of insecurity is shooting your mouth off about how good you are only to make excuses why you can't fight. Granted, the stormers are going after people that they're pretty sure they can beat easily, but if they can beat those people easily that's their instructor's fault (and partly their's) and again those people are welcome to decline the challenge.

Timmy Boy

21-Apr-2007, 12:27 AM

Dojo Storming sounds totally pathetic.
Organize a friendly training session with a local club where you can both learn.

To which no-one will come, and besides it's not like the challengees are being forced to accept.

Organize a tournament and invite all the local MA schools.

Yeah that sounds legal.

Or if it is truly about self defense and how BJJ is superior to all, come down to one of the pubs in the Welsh Valleys alone and shout on top of your voice " I've come Here to teach al you sheep how to fight".
If you make it out of Wales alive then I'll gladly join your school.

You could use that excuse for any martial art simply because you know no-one is going to do that, BJJ or not. Plus I don't see how getting wrecked by a mob of drunk welshmen in a pub proves that you don't have good one on one fighting skills.

Again, for the record, I don't do BJJ and I agree that it has its fair share of nutriders. However I really think BJJ practitioners take a lot of unfair stick from people in other arts. Most of my martial arts experience (and that of my friends) is with TMAs and they all have their opinions about the best way to train just like everyone else - of course they do, if you train for self defence you're going to choose the method that you think is most effective and have reasons for thinking as such. I've heard JJJ guys criticise striking arts when the only striking they've ever had to deal with is an enormous, slow, choreographed haymaker, or wing chun guys dismiss karate punches for not being fast enough. The only difference is that, whereas those specific TMA guys in question try to back their points using theory, BJJ has a strong tradition of just throwing down and finding out what actually works, which takes the debate out of friendly hypothesis and into the outskirts of threatening fact. People just don't like having the truth shoved in their face like that so they get defensive and start crying about all the BJJ bullies when really they're just angry that their kung fu fantasy was ruined; to paraphrase Rorian Gracie, a fight is not what you want it to be - it simply is.

I'm not saying people on here are crying but I think we need to remember that belief in the superiority of a style is not limited to BJJ and at least BJJ guys actually try to prove what they're saying.