Ok so if someone who isn't in your weight categorie comes up and starts on you are you going to go sorry thats not allowed. The premise that UFC started with was great. Like everything that goes on and on it becomes a watered down version of what it was and people are now training to win under the rules that they have set, not to beat any opponent in any situation These guys are serious athletes with serious skills I love watching them, in a bar they may be out of the fight before they ever got chance to get in it and use the skills tho. God so many questions that keep going around in circles.....you win!!!!!!!!!!! enter and make it 2, my head hurts!!!!!!!!
These guys are serious athletes with serious skills I love watching them, in a bar they may be out of the fight before they ever got chance to get in it and use the skills tho. The same could be said about any martial art. Less likely with a professional fighter or those who train like one. Not a person who trains to look pretty. Kuk sool has many impressive techiques but too much time spent on unrealistic ones. this leaves the practitioner with false ideas of what works in the ring and on the street. This is best demonstrated in competition where light sparring allows room for error. This in itself is emphisied by the poor quality of judging that takes place which in turn leads to incidents where whole schools make it their tactic to use waterworks to win medals. The rules of excessive contact are often at the core. anyway thanks for the chat silent one........... :woo:
5-1? Interesting statistic. I've seen a lot of footage, and worked as a bouncer for several years. While I agree that the mass attack is an area of self-defense that must be dealt with, I have yet to come across any reliable statistic as to what the odds will be. Yet so much time is spent on these skills, and they aren't trained in an alive manner. Because I haven't seen it happen, as well as the general attitude toward training I've read in this thread. If it does happen in your school, you're doing the right thing, and please, by all means, post some videos. I'd love to have footage of Guksul done right. You just made a mistake. I am not advocating mere full contact. Those boxers you mentioned prove my point. You must test all of your skills in an open venue. Those boxers failed to train and deal with the element they ended in, the ground. It sounds like you've put yourself to the test in several harsh situations, but again, you're missing my point. Would recommend to your students that they go and hang out in riots or fight bars to test their skills? Someone here has already said that the best way to test your skills is to go to a pub and start fights. Aside from the fact that if you start a fight in my pub one night, you're not getting past the doorman the next time you want to get it...it would be very irresponsible, not to mention immoral, to tell your students to do this. Which is where alive training comes in. It provides you a resistive environment that is as close to reality as you can get to test your skills, while still maintaining enough safety that your students can get up and go to work the next day. Too bad, I was hoping we could get a poker game going. I agree with you here. There is a difference between ring training and self-defense training. However, these are factors that can easily be taken into account in your curriculum. Alive training still provides the best means of learning and testing your skills.
Why are you calling me a...what is that? I was using an example of an often portrayed Guksul technique that is not a realistic technique at all. You said submission holds are not effective in street defense. I'd like to hear your justifications for saying so. If you can, avoid using the excuses of multiple opponents and the fact that the ground is hard, possibly covered in glass, or may be made up of lava. I don't suppose you could tell me what it is that I'm saying is so wrong? Your following argument is a fallacy called the strawman, but I'm willing to entertain it to correct some false information. A rear naked choke (RNC) works by temporarily blocking the carotid arteries, stopping the flow of blood to the brain. It does not involve stopping the flow of air, though this may happen as well. Stopping the blood flow to the brain results in unconsciousness in around five or less seconds. It is an extremely effective self-defense technique that I would highly recommend you or anyone else learn. Geoff Thompson has some great pointers on how to get an entry to it in a street situation. Most people do struggle, but this can be dealt with, and, as I said, the choke is so quick, that often times you're just beginning to struggle as you pass out. Who said we went to the ground? Sub-holds and chokes (especially) can be just as effective standing. There are also methods of taking someone to the ground where you do not go down entirely, and are able to easily disengage to deal with the situation. That, or I've used your body as a shield to keep your mates back as I've choked you out, then tossed you at one of them while I dealt with the other. Scenarios are fun, but can end up any way we like. You said it's not effective in a street fight, without having any real justification for it. Nothing, save a gun (and even then), is the be all and end all in a mass attack. Nothing. No martial art will make you into that badass that can deal with a mass attack. At best in can help you, but you had better be very luck and a very good strategist. You just put words in my mouth. I never said that sub-holds or any other technique would be the be all and end all in a multiple attacker situation. What I did say is that sub-holds do work in a street situation. Secondly, why are you only assuming that grappling is going to be used? If you're going to train for MMA or for the street, striking and grappling must both be trained. Assuming that I'm going to go to the ground just because I know how is fallacious as well. Anyone, even a Gracie will tell you that going to the ground is a last resort in a fight, but you may end up there, so you better know how to deal with it. A quickly applied sub-hold (which you then break) is one of the best ways to disengage. I actually do not compete MMA. I work door and personal security. I train, essentially, "for the street". None of this changes the fact that submission holds are a valuable skill to have. I can be pretty witty sometimes. My mommy thinks I'm special. I do. I just can't remember it all at once. You made a statement that you didn't have time to learn sub-holds that aren't street effective. This implies you are qualifying techniques based on a need for self-defense skills. This is where I disagreed with you, given that the vast majority of sub-holds are street effective, while there are large portions of the Guksul curriculum that either are A) low-percentage, or B) not trained in a manner that makes them effective. And why are you resorting to personal attacks? I call everyone friend, even those I disagree with. MMA self-defense training has fewer rules than any other venue, and those that do exist are there for the trainee's safety. If you can't walk the next day, your training has already failed you. This makes it the perfect method to train and test self-defense skills, especially given that you can add opponents for mass attack scenarios or training weapons. That's the whole point. Are you sure? The free T-Shirt is awesome.
What and who did you train with? No, it's just that several of your arguments and statements don't quite gel with the idea that you've trained extensively in MMA, that's all. I'm only going by what you've written. Pretty much how I feel, my friend.
Except that A) traditional martial arts were always about fighting, and B) Guksul is not a traditional Korean martial art. Alive, resistive training does not equal training for the ring.
I took issue when you said that submission holds which have been trained in an alive resistive environment are not street effective. That's it.
Wow I am so beaten sign me up for a t-shirt :bang: * runs away in fear of ever meeting anyone quite as great as the madmonk!!! *
no it doesn't! :bang: i have never thought that intricate little joint/wrist locks will work on the street. i always say that on the street you have to get back to basics but then, i don't put myself in the sort of situations where i may have to. sure if you work as a doorman/security officer then kuk sool alone won't help but most people don't and wouldn't think that! and if you do work in those industries then you should recieve specific training to help combat any situations that may arise, i know i did!
Ok @ is at, and yeah you're right it was uncalled for. Sorry, bad morning, no excuse and thats a genuine appology for name calling!! I know all about strawman thankyou. RNC yep know all about that, and GT's methods of getting it on. I had a really good teacher, but 100% sure I'll get it on everytime perfect and not end up with my straw man scenario hmmm no I'm not. Must have been nice to have trained them in Coventry in th early 90's with Geoff himself like you obviously did to be 100% sure. Scenarios are fun you're right I can make one up where every single kuk sool technique will send the man flying into orbit. Does that make you believe it works?? no! ( nor me ) So therefore why should I believe I was a human sheild The theory is sound tho. Submission by definition means to stop someone by them giving in, "submitting" therefore I stand by my statement. Although these techniques have the capability of breaking they are trained to be put on in a controlled manner so no one gets hurt?????? or does everyone at you class leave with broken joints???? Tell me what might happen with muscle memory then????? I never said any art was going to save you from mass attack luck is your best friend here i agree. Putting words into each others mouths is what we seem to be doing a lot of then. True the sub holds are great escapes but only if drilled as such. Most people are drilling them as sub-holds. That kinda answers partly why they aren't street effective how long do you wanna hold someone really???? By the way I never meant that I didn't have time to learn them because I was so busy learning my own bad ass 100% effective street self defence without them. I said that i was spending more time in my class time making my arty stuff look more arty. Thats weapons and forms its something that is totally irrelevant to self defence. I still train these submission holds, they are invaluable. However, my whole argument was that the original post was suggesting if we all trained for UFC we would all be greater "bad ass" fighters. I disagree we would all be great ring fighters. Would you agree that in order to compete at a level in a mma ring you would have to learn so many counters etc that your mind set may become a grappling one and you end up spending too much time on the floor ( like you said a bad place to be ). I know people that do. Replace DO ( this suggests 100% effectiveness 100% of the time ) work with CAN work and again I would agree. I am assuming you would use grappling seems fair, you were assuming I would use a wrist lock Striking is in my arsenal too. By the way the mummy thinks I'm special bit made me laugh ( out loud ) witty I do agree with I think that ok I coulda addressed the first point better actually what was that????? going back and looking. oh by the way just read your post on the other forum your mate wolf got me to join on the things to train most for self defence. Remeber that one??? Not too many submission holds in that list there buddy. You want me to list it on here??? a majority of it is ground and pound just to remind you. Damn!!! and as of the 21st of July you said you weren't actually very good on the floor, so i guess that means you weren't at Coventry in the 90's then I thought you knew Geoff personally you dropped his name so casually into the conversation. to be cont......... no doubt.
it seems mr monk (or should i call you mad?) that we have differing view points, but end up with similar results. there is not allways just 1 correct path to take to get the best results, "aliveness training" (crap name) is a vital part of putting your skills into a practical fighting style and uterlising the knowledge gained from the WHOLE of the martial art you study, in our case that includes stand up striking, ground fighting and awerness, locks and applicable times to apply them, pressure point strikes and how to combine them with other attacks and converting traditonal weapons techniques into a usable skill for the modern world, the amount you do will vary on the likleyhood of you getting into a dangerous situation, which for the average student is pretty slim. i do agree with a lot of what you have said, but not always about the methods you say must be used to attain them. and by the way silentmonk called you tw(i)t (replace the i with an a), a north of england swear word (which i find proberbly the least offencive swear word in existance) relating to a girls private parts. who said forums weren't educational.
wow, how did I miss such a heated debate! glad you guys sorted it out before I had to go MOD ON YOU!!
because my primary goal in training ksw is not street defence, it's probably not even second or third on the list. just because i/we learn and practice them doesn't mean i have to think they are practical on the street. why do we then learn sword/staff/short swords/fan/archery? when are you going to use those??
Well Dave In that casewhat your saying is that Kuk Sool is for demonstration only and not for self defence or martial arts purposes. I beleive that a great deal of KSW is effective and have used it. Depending on what pubs your in you may have use for these weapons. (Yes I am the kind of guy who goes to thes places, who wants to live in fear?) The way I developed was through heavier training wih other artists at first then in other arts. It is the principles behind KSW training and the attitude that goes with it. How can you call yourself the best or a warrior unless you are prepared for fighting. This does not mean to go looking for one but what it does mean is that point sparring is silly unless it is continuos and with some level of realistic contact. Would you swim on dry land?
No worries. True, but in the end, nothing is 100% sure. You just have to make sure you're training the things that are high percentage rather than low percentage. You're putting words in my mouth again. You shouldn't...anymore than I should believe you'd be able to escape my "RNC of Doom"!!! So...because we don't break our training partner's bones, you're dismissing joint breaking techniques on the whole? How much BJJ experience do you have? That's fine, good, valid, and you have my support on that. Just don't you...or any other practioner of "arty" stuff turn around and say the arty stuff is valid self-defense. And I would take that ring fighter over 95% of the people out there on the street. None of this negates the fact that you must learn grappling and groundfighting. Glad to hear. Your T-Shirt is on the way. "RNC, key lock, & other basic locks"...if all you're training for is self-defense, all you need is basics and then developing attributes. I'm lucky if I can remember anything from the 90s. I don't think I need to have had my hands on Angelina Jolie to tell you that she's got incredible...assets... Geoff Thompson does have books and videos...
Some people call me a Space Cowboy, some call me a Gangster of Love... Some people call me Maurice... Sounds about right... Which ones would those be? Yeah, we have the same term over here on this side of the pond...I knew what he was saying, I just wanted to see if he'd own up to saying it without the @...
