Im with you on this one, I have been there, done that many many many times and at the end of the day when I look back I have been more hurt in my kwoon during my "good" days than in any outside fight I have been in(except for fights against other schools but thats another story); even the ones that involved weapons. If your training is realistic, to the point and non dilluted a fight is a fight, end of story.
Sorry guys you still haven’t sold me the idea. If the techniques don’t work why practice them? I can only talk from my experience with Shorinji Kempo over the last 14 years, but I’m not seeing what you are describing. Drunk yobo’s wanting to fight are the same now as they were centuries ago, gangs attacking now are the same as they were centuries ago. Do you really think they would poke there heads up and say, hello, there are 4 of us about to attack you, are you ready? There is a fair point regarding the changes in weapons, this is why Kaiso never taught the use of the staff to anyone other than one kenshi who only had one arm; however hand to hand fighting is no different know to what it was then. People are no more ruthless and no more unpredictable now as they were then. Just because you learn an art in a dojo does not make it less effective. What makes the difference is the way it is taught. You should not be practicing with compliant partners all the time; however it is important to have some cooperation early on when you are first learning and experimenting with techniques. You can’t get any more of a life and death situations than on the battlefield, how does the military prepare for this? They use simulation and drills, the same as all the emergency services. Simulations and drills help prepare the body to deal with pressure situations, and unexpected events. Now if you are thinking I’m saying I can happily and safely engage in any confrontation out in the “real world” you would be mistaken, this would be foolish, just like it would be foolish to think this way many centuries ago. What I do believe is that I’m just as prepared if not better prepared than someone that has done some “street fighting style”. How will a “street fighting style” prepare me better? I have confidence that my art is effective through personnel experience, and historical evidence. Kaiso and his students managed to liberate their town from blackmarketeers following the social decay post WWII. There were a number of confrontations before they succeeded. This is one of the reasons Shorinji Kempo is so highly regarded in Japan.
What I recommend developing for use in a street fight is a range just outside of kicking range. I refer to it as "run away range ." Which, btw, is what I would use if at all possible, although I'm not too concerned about it, 'cause I'm a pretty mellow person and can usually be found either at home, at my gym, or at the public library. Not a lot of call for street fighting at any of those places.
Have you seen Bruce Lee? WOW he can beat up any one!!!! A Street fight is no big deal for Bruce Lee cuz he can kick them and use his super fighting skill. LOL any ways what I am trying to say is that maybe its not smart thinking you are awesome because the street fighter might be better than you. It’s not the movies where its all fake, this is real guns, knifes etc.... I think the best way might be to stay out of trouble. If you really need to fight thou use your best movement on the fighter use your elbows or knees and fists or even kick if it’s powerful. Don't go out looking for trouble but don't live in fear.
Bruce lee was undefeatable in his street fighting days.No one could touch him..and if they did he'd be fueled with anger. Ive been in a lot of street fights and school fights.At first I enjoyed it since I always won but after awhile you start to feel bad for beating up sumone just to use them as a lab rat for your testing of skills.Plus the cops told my parents if i get into anymore street fights my ass is gonna be sent to juvi..
Bruce Lee may never have lost on the street. But it doesn't make him unbeatable. I don't think he ever fought an Ali or Gracie.
If you guys are studying a form of budo, then you will be studying ways to stop conflict, as this is what budo means, this does not always mean a physical conflict. What you have described is a perfectly acceptable means of self-defence. I make no claims that I am unbeatable, or for that matter difficult to beat. Just that I don’t believe that a street fighting style would make me any better, and from what I’ve seen I doubt that they could match the skills I can learn through my chosen art. What the early masters designed was the best method of dealing with real fights; it was not a guarantee of wining, just that it would give you your best chance if you had no other option. Were they unbeatable? Probably not, but then no one is. It is true to say that in some arts techniques have changed, or become watered down. This may reduce there effectiveness, but even in these arts a perceptive student can still benefit greatly by spending some time seriously examining the principles of the techniques, and learning to understand its history and evolution. To say that in real fights you need to deal with unexpected attacks, random attacks, windmill punching, multiple attackers, weapons, nasty bastards, and some folk you would rather not invite home to diner is true, they do. What magic does a street fighting style have to conquer this that a traditional martial art doesn’t? Real fights are not fun, that’s why everyone thinks it is a good idea to avoid them. Martial Arts were not designed as a sport, this is a relatively new phenomenon. They were designed for self defence when you had no other option against being attacked by people that either didn’t like you very much, or wanted something you had. Is this any different from today?
I've got a book called The Secrets of Street Fighting and its author says the following: ''It is the learning of the secret art of fighting in the street, winning at all costs and under any circumstances. One of the biggest criticisms of martial arts in America is that it does not work in the street, and I am sure that you have all heard of a supposed Black Belt who got the hell beat out of him by some football player or streetwise hoodlum. I am also sure that you have probably seen many a young student of karate doing his stuff, and you have thought: I could kill him if I wanted to! ... What you must first understand is that American Karate is not Japanese Karate ... In Japan, only the best athletes are allowed to train in a true karate school. In America, on the other hand, the best athlestes play football. In Japan, they train 6 hours a day, 7 days a week, for up to 5 years before they are given the rank of BB. In America, you can get a BB at most schools for training 2 to 3 years, 3 times a week, 2 hours a day ... So when the street fight does happen in America, the street fighter usually wins. The simple reason for this result is that he has been trained in the art of dirty fighting and has no Christian or social morals to constrain him from killing or crippling you. Also, he usually has the great advantage of starting the fight. ''
What are you talkin bout? i meant he never lost a fight when he use to fight in the streets as a teenager...
Some interesting points have been made. Ultimately the best place to learn "street defence" is either the street or prison. As for the notoriety of the "street fight", basically I view it as any conflict which occurs outside the safety of training. As Colin suggested, it doesn't matter what style you use as long as you practice with resistive partners, this will sort out what is effective and what isn't. RBSD systems mearly cut out what is generally believed to be ineffectual and concentrate on whats left. There is one advantage from some systems that many "traditional" systems don't do. The actual combat side of defence is usually described as 10% of overall protection. Some systems teach you how to fight a mugger (whether a chinese bandit or a LA Junkie), few show how to detect these people and their strategies before the fight commences. It is because many of the martial arts have become watered down and don't teach defence correctly that the birth of RBSD systems was brought to the public. It appears everything is in circles. No doubt in a few years time we'll all be whinging that the "art" has gone from martial arts and its too reality based. Everyone should look at what their system has to offer, many systems will not cover all four ranges of combat. Many dojos won't teach the techniques in what has been described as "alive" conditions. I fell victim to the all of these. Imagine my surprise when my first attacker didn't attack me with Oi-Zuki and then wait for me to hit him back!! That said if a student has reached a reasonable level and spars regularly, then they should get at least a split second better reaction time than someone who has trained in nothing. Thats about it. Unless the sparring is full contact, landing an effective strike will probably be more luck than judgement. If your system of fighting doesn't cover all 4 ranges (kicking, stand up, clinch and ground), doesn't use resistive opponents training in an "alive" manner and teaches students the psychology of conflicts, then you're chances of survival in a real scenario are virtually nil.
Judderman, Good post, most of what you are saying I would agree with; however I’m not convinced that the best place to learn how to fight is in prison or on the streets. There can be no doubt that they are a good place to sort the effective from the ineffective, but I don’t believe they offer much in the way of development. You are either naturally good and survive, or not so good and either die or become less confident and scared when things look bad. Structured development works, that’s why sports people break what they do down and identify and train in specific areas; it’s what the military and police forces do too. They don’t send their students into real situations without a great deal of training. The pressure of realistic conflict is needed, but so is sparing in less pressurised environments because this is where people will experiment or practice techniques that they may find difficult, not just revert to base instinct and fight flight responses. Martial Arts are a reflection of our society. They will adapt to meet the needs of society at the time. Today, despite what the newspapers say most of us live in safe environments when compared to many years ago. This has led some arts to change focus on what they teach to meet the changing needs of society. For evidence of this you only need to watch some of the American Martial Arts competitions. They no longer use real weapons, but a poor representation of one that doesn’t weigh the same and is bright and shiny. This means that they can do all sorts of flashy stuff that they couldn’t do with the real weapon. This has happened because entertainment has become more important than self defence. This trend is not apparent in Japan because they value the spirituality and character development sides higher. Even when these changes occur, if the art still retains the core teachings and principles of technique they can be turned into effective forms of self defence by someone with the depth of understanding of the art; they just need to change the training strategies to match the new focus.
eh I though the bu was a deriviation of wu meaning martial. and do was art of ie budo means martial art. Whats that got to do with stopping conflict other than to dominate
The kanji used for bu literally means to stop two spears, and the do as you have said is a way or a path. The generally accepted meaning in Japan now is that it is a way of study where the focus is on stopping conflict. Fighting is a necessary skill to develop as the types of people that generally cause trouble do so because it is their strongest weapon, often they don’t have the mental skills or strength of determination to get what they desire, or win their argument any other way. This makes negotiation difficult. Budo is not about beating anyone in a fight, but rather how to end conflict. It is not always necessary to beat the other person, but only to cause them not to want to start, or continue. Physical violence is used when people lack other skills. So to be able to stand confidently and challenge someone acting outside our society’s moral code we need to have the confidence that if they revert to a violent action to win their case, we have at least some preparation that may help us. The real skill lies in not needing it. A fight is similar to a military battle; you should never engage unless forced to do so, unless you are sure your going to win. It stands to reason that you will not always win, no one would. This is why there is a real need to not put yourself in danger un-necessarily; this means you should know what a dangerous situation is and how to recognise one, as Judderman mentioned in his earlier post.
if you are a spineless tosser who wants to be hard and fight on the street i offer the following broad advice.. don't freak out about your style it is what it is...get taught by someone who has actually fought if you want to go were the pain and personnel regret is. develop and practice some kick off technique that is designed as the first move in any fight situation you have decided to become involved in... (fighting is not self defense) the wall off fear freeze to spot fight or flight is your first stop on a road to stupidity so lets look at this problem first.. the adrenniline dump as it has become called cause a massive trembling sensation in your legs .... if you want to stick around and fight for your honour or whatever you need to do something about this.. why? because you are rooted in place... also attempts to move in a co ordinated manner rather than just legging it will be out of balance... you are very likley to just fall over especialy if you try and kick.. even without any contact at all! i suggest some personnel trigger move that earths this sensation so that NO MATTER what the situation is you know the what the first move is rather than being stuck for ideas... this is a compromise but a good one... you move from indecision to the fight a simple first technique is BEND KNEES.. you facing off ****ting yourself... BEND KNESS.... GO GO GO GO. the process of going into some stance/bending knees will go a long way to keeping you on your feet.. which is handy considering your trying to avoid having someone place your head in the gutter and kick you in the temples until blood comes out of your ears... this process occurs ritualistical in many fighting arts like karate where the practioner goes from a ready/neutral stance in a fighting one with some measure of fighting spirit... its the best technique in the whole bloody system IMO. its real meaning is lost in the BS. BEND YOUR KNEES you are now in a fight, congratulations welcome to world of the stupid and an inner journey of self discovery about how much of a utter utter utter ****er you are. if you want the advanced technique go into a suitable fighting stance for the system you supposedly understand how to apply.. how good or bad those techniques are? your going to have to find out by fighting.. personnely stay on your feet and use your knees and elbows from an off outside position while being aware of the relative foot positions of you and your opponent... don't go to ground as most times you are fighting multiple opponents unless you are a bully in which case just pick on people your not scared of (but don't look to feeble that way you can act hard). YMMV note: grapplers need to address the multiple opponent thing but no doubt thats possable... ask a grappler I know so little about it. Boris London
Boris, A fairly emotive post that raises some questions with me. I believe that there is a difference between self defence and fighting, but I’m not sure that it is the difference that you believe. From my perspective I see the biggest difference is in attitude. When carrying out self defence you are reacting against someone that has decided to attack you, not attacking someone. The tools and techniques that are used may not be any different between the two though, although the techniques from budo or bujutsu should be more effective. I have used two Japanese terms instead of the normal western term of martial arts, as it is too broad. In Japan, martial arts used for entertainment and sports have their own individual terms. I believe a traditional form of budo or Bujutsu would address most of your post during basic practice, wether they are done ritually or not is up to the instructor, not the art. As for applying techniques you either can or you can’t. If you haven’t internalised a technique why would you try to use it?
ok it is possable self defense could require some fighting.. the womens self defense thread seems to have examples of this. well perhaps but being attacked forces the decision on you that is the main difference yes I think i have already infered that.. the man not the art etc etc etc....blah blah people do. Boris london
basically when it comes down to it , we have a saying here in Australia that say's it all. It's not the dog in the fight, it's the fight in the dog.
Badger, if all other things were equal I would agree, but this is the problem, conflict is not that simple. Colin, I think you have highlighted the difference between fighting and self-defence well. Fighting is concerned with beating your opponent, self-defence is ending conflict. Where's the difference? In self defence I believe its important to give the attacker a way out, a way of saving face, even at the loss of yours. Here I'm unconcerned with what they deserve, or how insulted I feel or anything else like that. My primary concern is to end the conflict as quickly and with as little effort as possible. This is different to beating someone at all costs.
Judderman, Yes, this is the attitudinal difference between fighting and selfdefence. Once engaged though the mechanics of the conflict will be very similar, although the desired outcome may be different. I would not be looking to kick the crap out of someone while they were unconscious, while my attacker may well be relishing the prospect.
