Which is better for effective self defense?

Most of the JJJ schools here are the too deadly to spar type so everything they'd seen before was set up punch to react to rather than a real punch.

 

may I ask if they can properly respond to a wild swing or a haymaker. if they can, well, AT LEAST they can (most of the fights I've been in/seen/ watched in videos either starts or degenerates into those).

if still they cannot...

 

I would have thought that would of depended on the individual student. There were a couple of quite handy lads attended the club but knowing their history they were like that before they started. Natural skill meets training.

 

Oh, I don't know. You may have willingly climbed into the ring. But then the guy starts dropping bombs on you, and you promptly start wishing you could will yourself back out again. But that's not an option. So you have to get yourself under control and figure it out.

Besides, you may not be a willing participant in a real situation. But you are a willing participant in any self-defense class. So how does someone go about recreating the mindset? How do you teach someone to cope with the reality when the training environment is markedly different? And if such is possible, why is it impossible to learn the same skills from another training environment that's markedly different (i.e., the ring)?

Weren't we talking about boxing...

 

lot of people only get in there the once. A few leave after witnessing a show. It's not for everyone that's for sure

 

I've said it before, and I'll say it again.

Training in "sport arts" for self defense is like putting a circle peg in a square hole. You may not fill in all the gaps, but you're going to cover a heck of a lot of it. And it's better to get a peg in the hole that you know at least fits. You don't want to be the guy who has the peg that can't fit at all yet never tries to put it in until the chips are down.

 

Big pegs, not fitting in holes... my mind is tooooo dirty.

 

Any good self defense instructor will tell you to keep your feet under you at all costs.
Box the ears, rake the eyes, bite, yank an ear off, stick your key in their ear canal, do whatever it takes to disable your attacker and get away. Self defense is a totally different beast than sport martial arts.

 

Seriously? Still? We spend so much time answering all this nonsense and then it all pops back up?

Face palm

 

Jesus agrees with you.


I don't though, cus I'm the Devil's advocate. Sports systems are so full of rules that they're uselss on the street. There's no rounds and referees on the street. There's only escalation of violence and zombies. You can't choke out a zombie and grappling one only puts you at risk of getting bitten. So in closing, no matter what Jesus says Sport combatives can't beat zombies and is therefore utterly useless in the real world. :bang:

 

To do this, you have to first be able to touch your opponent. Boxers can and constantly do touch people repeatedly while preventing people from touching them. They have stripped it down to the essence of touching. They don't waste time learning anything else. Therefore, running from your description, boxing is the ultimate.

Except that's ridiculous. Every military with a recorded history where unarmed conflict was a regular occurence has based their combatives primarily on grappling of one sort or another.

 

Dirty techniques that seldom work encouraged by people that won't sweat

 

wow. this thread is still going on? i thought we decided ages ago that any Martial art where they practice techniques on resisting opponents will be a good preparation for the street.

also. getting out of a self defence situation alive and well is a battle of probabilities.
having training in a martial art gives one a higher PROBABILITY to be successful than a person who doesn't, BUT it doesn't guarantee anything.

as far as the sport vs self defence mindset goes, I have my doubts that a self defence martial artist will have as easy a time with UFC or K1 fighter as they claim.
These people are ATHLETES, they train throughout the day throughout their lives and fight in full blown matches regularly. though the self defence person will definitely have the tools to win, they cannot hope to match the level of physical and technical training professional sports MAers go through. my opinion.

How ever, if we find a self defence person who HAS the same level of physical and technical training things could go very differently. but we don't have any examples of that, and until we do i think i'll stay with my above opinion.

HOW EVER. put a self defence MAer and a regular guy doing sport MA together. i don't know what'll happen. could go both ways... heck i'd bet my money on the self defence person i think.

 

Exactly... facepalm

perhaps one should start doing seminars where they show how inefective techniques without sweat are hmmm? that may help...

also... double post..... =(

 

If people don't want to put the hours of hard work in and rely on so-called 'dirty moves' that sound horrific but realistically have little chance of working when in a violent confrontation then they're looking for an easy option and aren't going to listen.

 

Thats fighting not defending a violent attack. Read Sgt Rory Millar's Meditations On Violence, you'll get the difference.

 

No, it isn't. Playing the angles and preventing someone from laying hands on you begins way before someone has initiated an attack. The principles for lanes of visibility and fire transfer pretty directly from the battlefield to the ring to unwilling altercations.
Instead of just parroting that the real thing is "different", how about we discuss what the actual differences are, and why this leaves sport artists unprepared.
Trust me, I've been over them many many times and the argument always hinges on the assumption that sport fighters only know to square up and punch the dude in front of them until he lays down, which is patently false.

 

Amen to that. While I maintain there are more similarities than differences, there are still non-sporting issues that its useful to address if the focus is self protection. Ironically these probably never gets properly address by most of the 'teh deadly' brigade anyway.

 

http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/AreMASD.htm