16 posts / 0 new
Last post
Malachy Devlin
Malachy Devlin's picture
real life example.

Dear All I hope this hasnt been covered before but after many years in martial arts I am in 2 minds whether to quit or not. (30 yrs traditional M. Arts)

The reason being I believe that there is no point doing martial arts if one can't fight or defend themselves, I just dont know if I could! and its playing on my mind. I see wrestlers, MMA, BJJ guys and generally other "tough guys" with various training backgrounds and it seems they would be able to defend themselves better than I would.

Im traditional, I dont like confrontation and dont do a lot of sparring, I am a reserved person and certainly not agressive.. I do a little sparring but nowhere close to what others could do. I dont enjoy it too much.

So I am very much trusting in the system I have been in from a child, WADO Ryu primarily and some WJJF JuJitsu (Trad JJ).

So my quesiton is, is there anyone here who has a very traditional martial arts background that can vouch (through direct experiece) that all the techniques we learn in traditional schools can in fact "come to us effectivly" in a live encounter when the situation arises. (without being a heavy sparring guy)?

Wastelander
Wastelander's picture

Techniques don't defend people. You could be learning 100% perfectly effective and functional techniques, but if you aren't training them specifically to develop the skills and wherewithall to use them, then they won't help you very much. The actions and reactions you rely on in self defense and fighting come from resistant training, and training from a variety of positions and perspectives, covering a wide array of skills--not just techniques. You don't necessarily need to spar in the way that the majority of karateka spar, but you DO need to train your techniques with resistance, and they need to be approached from a pragmatic perspective.

Quick2Kick
Quick2Kick's picture

When asking will I be able to win a  fight without practicing fighting? No. You mention mma, wrestling, and bjj. All 3 practice live resistance consistently. Without testing your reflexes under stress and pressure you don't really know where you stand. I've heard it compared to teaching programming without ever having turned a computer on. You don't have to take a beating to find out but you do need to simulate the chaos and speed of a fight. You say you don't like sparring, maybe try a different kind of sparring. To some extent you do have to embrace the suck. Every style claims that through technique the smaller person overcomes the advantages of size and strength but how many prove it to the world with openly viewable fights between different sized people? 

Anf
Anf's picture

I too am a skeptic. But my scepticism extends to all the 'tough' systems mentioned as well as traditional. Here's why.

Very simply, none of them actually train fighting.

The MMA guys are tough if course. Put them face to face with one unarmed aggressor and let them know the fight is about to begin, and they'll excel. Will they excel when a random person smashes a beer bottle over them when they're not even expecting hostility? Who knows.

Live resistance has been mentioned. Of course that counts for something. If you don't do live resistance does that mean you can't fight? Absolutely not. Let's look at the live resistance argument.

'live' sparring is still sparring. Sparring is not fighting. If I have to fight for real (hopefully never will, last had to at least 20 years ago when I was a young man), my concern will be that the person I am facing might have friends that want to jump in. They might also have a weapon of some sorts. They may be a complete psycho. They may kick my gonads or headbutt me or bite or strike at my throat or any number of other things I don't need to worry about in sparring. I'm fact if you spar a lot, and I've seen this happen, some folks become so natural within the sparring rules that they fall apart the instant someone violates a rule. You see this happen sometimes when nervous beginners spar for the first time against higher grades. The beginner either doesn't know the rules or panics and forgets them, they resort to instinctive fighting, and their experienced opponent is sometimes briefly shocked, enough that a streetwise assailant could take advantage of if it wasn't friendly, or sometimes they go to the instructor afterwards and tell tales on the cheeky beginner.

Aside from the pros and cons of live sparring, I'm going to go against another myth. I ask folks to think about this carefully. Where is the logic in this common statement : untrained people can't fight, or you can't fight without training?

If this was true then martial arts for self defence would be easy. We could go to a single one hour class, and suddenly we can defend ourselves as long as the assailant has never trained. It is simply not true. I'm sure there are many violent offenders in jail for assault and GBH that have never trained in their lives. But just like the assailant might not have trained and can still fight, so the martial artist might already be able to fight, quite independently of his or her martial arts experience. That person may integrate any martial arts training into their natural instinctive abilities, in which case they have all the fighting ability they've always had plus some more.

Is it possible that your 30 of training have been a waste of time from a self defense perspective?

Unless you have made yourself weaker by training, perhaps through arthritis or tendonitis from chronic over training or bad training, or brain injury from too much live sparring, then no. Even if there's no actual fighting in your 30 years, you've still been developing key values like fitness and strength and flexibility and balance. All of which count for something. If a random thug was to suddenly push you backwards, would you fall over or would you sink, lock out your back foot and raise your hands, or would you fall on your butt? If you do fall, do you say ooh, aghh ouch or do you get back up quickly?

Perhaps the question is not a simple yes or no. Perhaps the question might be, could your time have been more effective for self defense than it has been? Probably yes. And I say this with no knowledge of you as an individual or the school or your instructor, because I believe that there is always a better way to train. I don't mean that in an arrogant way. I mean that an instructor will do his best, but he doesn't necessarily know the best ways, and in any case he has to find a way that works for the whole class. Outside of class we as individuals constantly evolve, and our goals and practices must evolve too. Add to that the fact that sports science is moving in leaps and bounds and we see that what we thought was right a few years ago is probably not the best way today. Does it mean it was a waste I'd time though? I don't believe so.

To answer the direct question, can I vouch for the effectiveness of traditional techniques. Yes. I have used things I've learned in a very real and very dangerous self defence situation. My situation was dire. First I panicked. I think everyone would. That didn't work. I found the composure to apply a technique we'd drilled relentlessly. It worked. It enabled me to set up the most effective self defense technique anyone can use. The martial arts technique gave me the opportunity to leg it. That's the only time I can recall using a martial arts technique effectively in self defence. But yes it worked. And it worked well. My attacker was much bigger and stronger than me and had all the advantages, including the advantage of knowing what the plan was. He knew that he was going to harm me. I didn't know I was in any danger until I was already in a bad position.

Other times, usually when trying to peacefully diffuse a fight among others, I've used principles from traditional arts, even if not specifically the techniques. Without going as far as formal stances, having slightly bent knees and good position can make the difference between restraining someone or being pushed around, and a sense of distance and timing counts for a great deal when trying to restrain and manoeuvre someone.

Malachy Devlin
Malachy Devlin's picture

Anf wrote:
Io answer the direct question, can I vouch for the effectiveness of traditional techniques. Yes. I have used things I've learned in a very real and very dangerous self defence situation. My situation was dire. First I panicked. I think everyone would. That didn't work. I found the composure to apply a technique we'd drilled relentlessly. It worked. It enabled me to set up the most effective self defense technique anyone can use. The martial arts technique gave me the opportunity to leg it. That's the only time I can recall using a martial arts technique effectively in self defence. But yes it worked. And it worked well. My attacker was much bigger and stronger than me and had all the advantages, including the advantage of knowing what the plan was. He knew that he was going to harm me. I didn't know I was in any danger until I was already in a bad position.

 

Curious as to what technique in particular you employed?

Neil Babbage
Neil Babbage's picture

Well it happened to me once, 30 years ago when confronted by a gang of three (although only one was trying to hit me). The one technique I used was a kick to the groin followed by running away from the other two. Worked a treat. I suspect my attacker had the same problem as discussed above about sparring "rules". In his world of semi-consensual strat fighting (I knew him vaguely) you didn't kick someone in the balls (or gouge the eyes, pull the hair or anything else "unmanly"). How much martial arts training did I need? Virtually none except the knowledge that there are no rules when faced with a dangerous threat. 

deltabluesman
deltabluesman's picture

I agree with what Quick2Kick & Wastelander said above, but I do want to make a further suggestion.  It sounds like you are approaching this in a kind of all-or-nothing way.  I would take a different approach.  I would start with a narrow set of realistic goals related to self-protection.  With self-protection, we're almost always talking about probabilities and percentages.  "What is the likelihood that this dangerous/harmful thing is going to happen?  If it does happen, what are my odds of surviving it?"  And so on.  

I am not an expert on self-protection and I don't teach it, so I won't pretend otherwise.  But I will suggest a book:  "Three Second Fighter" by Geoff Thompson.  It's only $3 used on Amazon.  Immensely helpful book.  Chapter four, in particular, has solutions for this question.  (Sometimes I forget just how much I learned from it.  I'll come up with some insight that I think is original, only to realize that Geoff Thompson already said it 1,000 times better back in 1997.)

Book recommendation aside, here is a suggestion:  reject all-or-nothing thinking and hold yourself to a reasonable standard.  As a first step, set aside the fact that you've been training for 30 years.  That is a remarkable achievement that is worthy of respect on its own (and I am not devaluing it in the least).  But you don't want it to get in your way.  You don't want to set unrealistic goals just because you think that you should be able to do X, Y, or Z because you've been training for so long.   Instead, think of goals more as a spectrum:

Easy Goal:  I should be able to overwhelm an untrained, unathletic version of myself in anything martial arts related (that I care about).  

***

Harder Goal:  if confronted with a single unarmed assailant, I should have a reasonable chance of landing a solid preemptive blow and then creating space.

***

Harder Goal:  if confronted with a single unarmed assailant, I should have a reasonable chance of landing a solid preemptive blow.  And I am going to hit him so hard that if that blow connects, he is likely to be stunned.

***

Much Harder Goal:  if confronted with multiple unarmed attackers, there's a good chance that I will be able to fight ferociously enough to stun 2 or 3 of them and escape totally unharmed.

***

Unrealistic Goal:  if confronted with a single unarmed assailant, there's a 90% chance that I will be able to predict his attack, time it, execute a proper formal martial arts block, control his limb, and apply a traditional jiu-jitsu style armbar.

***

Extremely Unrealistic/veering into movie territory:  if confronted by a guy with his knife and his 3 buddies, I'll have a good chance of knocking them all out and walking away unharmed.  (Example video clip for humor, bad language warning:  https://youtu.be/q73_kg531lU)

Those are just examples.  We could argue about the specifics, but that's beside the point.  In my opinion/experience, there are some traditional martial arts schools that fixate on unrealistic examples of self-protection and then attach those expectations to their black belts.  All kinds of problems emerge because of this.  (Too many problems to discuss thoroughly in one post.)  

Instead, we should strive to set reasonable goals/expectations and use those as a measure for achievement.  Because I'm not an expert, I won't try to provide a definitive list of "self-protection goals/benchmarks."  Geoff Thompson's book is an excellent starting point, and of course this forum and website is a treasure trove of information. 

Malachy Devlin
Malachy Devlin's picture

deltabluesman

thats just an excellent answer! 

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Malachy Devlin wrote:
So my question is, is there anyone here who has a very traditional martial arts background that can vouch (through direct experience) that all the techniques we learn in traditional schools can in fact "come to us effectively" in a live encounter when the situation arises. (without being a heavy sparring guy)?

I do not believe that “techniques can come to us effectively” without specific training to ensure that is likely to be the case.

Heavy contact sparring is not a must, and if it is “fighting” focused it is not specific enough. We do, however, need to include specific self-defence drills; and aliveness is a vital component of such drills. Such training should be structured and progress through manageable stages. We should not throw people in at the “deep end” such that the live drills are an unpleasant and confidence sapping experience (possibly even traumatic).

It is a simple enough task to create live drills that are safe, enjoyable and productive. Without such live practise, it is unrealistic to expect the ability to apply techniques in live situations to be developed.  As others have said, it’s not just “what” is trained, but “how” things are trained too.

I know of many traditional martial artists who have acted successfully in violent situations, but that’s an irrelevant fact. What matters is how you are training. The fact their training worked for them does not mean your training will work for you. You may be training in radically different ways. Many years ago, I wrote an article called “Karate’s Three Biggest Mistakes”. The third mistake is potentially one you are seeking to make by asking the above question:

https://iainabernethy.co.uk/article/karates-three-biggest-mistakes

Your training to this point will have given you many extremely useful and important attributes (good technique, body awareness, fitness, timing, etc), if practical self-defence is your aim, you now need to contextualise that training. You also need to study awareness, escape, de-escalation, criminal behaviour, pre-emption, personal security, law, etc. You also need to practise what you know within self-defence focused drills, so you develop the right “habits” and the abilities.

Your prior training will be a very valuable asset, but it needs to be contextualised and put within a self-defence context. Most martial artists – of all kinds; modern and traditional – fail to do this, but they are unaware of the failure. At some level, you are aware of the shortcomings / lack of specificity of your training to date. That’s a very positive thing if you address it in the right way.

If you will permit me to be frank, seeking “it will be all right on the night” examples is not the way to go. That is seeking “evidence” that permits you to deny the problem you have identified. If, instead, you seek to address the problem, you will grow in confidence and ability and you will realise the potential value of your training to date. It will also permit you to enjoy all the other benefits martial arts have to offer without the need to tie everything back to self-protection.

This book will be a good place to kick off what would be an exiting new chapter of your training:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Pavement-Arena-Adapting-Combat-Martial/dp/1840241845

It’s basic and simple, but it does a great job of defining what needs to be done to ensure functionality without throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

All the best,

Iain

Les Bubka
Les Bubka's picture

I'll answer very short, yes in one case the most unexpected, morote uchi uke as take down and few arm bars after. All in intoxicated state at the bbq , my belief is except you fight how you train you use what you like. I always liked morote uchi uke and in stress it surfaces along with shoulder throw to the knees. Now I'm not training for self defence, I just enjoy the art.

Kind regards

Les

Malachy Devlin
Malachy Devlin's picture

Well this has been very informative.

When all is said and done it seems that the "Technical Kick to the Cojones" is hard to beat smiley Thanks to you all for your excellent answers, and to Iain also, I actually do feel somewate more at ease now.

I may have been taking the lazy way out of just "winging it" but after reading over the 3 mistakes of Karate I do feel I am pretty open to those suggestions and just need to make adaptions to my training.

I think part of my laziness stems from the fact that in order to achieve good sparring, training, drilling etc. I am going to have to enlist in another disciplne or school as it isn't going to happen at my existing one, or I may have to enlist in a 2nd class while maintaining my main class for "theory and practice / technical stuff etc" - I suppose this isnt a big deal and the hardest part of this will be convincing the Mrs to let me out of the house another night -:)

thanks all.

Anf
Anf's picture

Malachy Devlin wrote:
I am going to have to enlist in another disciplne or school as it isn't going to happen at my existing one, or I may have to enlist in a 2nd class while maintaining my main class for "theory and practice / technical stuff etc" -

This is a good idea. I find it hard to stay focused on any one style for too long. I tend to get frustrated with the apparent shortcomings. But what I find as my experience grows is that it's rarely a shortcoming in the style, or even the way it is taught. I think they all have value. But I think it's hard to find the full picture from a single source. My experience is that while different styles are superficially different, they all teach the same principles, but in different applications. And something that might seem ridiculous when taken in isolation suddenly makes a whole lot more sense when viewed from the different perspective of a different style.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Malachy Devlin wrote:
I suppose this isn’t a big deal and the hardest part of this will be convincing the Mrs to let me out of the house another night -:)

We always have to balance life with training. 42% of marriages end in divorce whereas the risk of being involved in violent crime is around 2% … your priority is therefore keeping your wife happy :-)

If you’ve not got loads of free time, then use the time you do have efficiently. You can make plenty of progress that way. The majority of self-protection is not physical. Educate yourself on criminal behaviour, personal security, awareness, etc. Read as much as you can. Here are two books to get started with:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Streetwise-Complete-Personal-Security-Defence/dp/1873475527/

Streetwise is my favourite self-protection book, because it is a purely focused on self-protection (not “martial arts in jeans”) and looks at home security, mobile security, law, criminal behaviour, etc. It has relatively little in it on the physical side of things (one chapter on pre-emption, and one dispelling martial myths).

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Meditations-Violence-Comparison-Martial-Training/dp/1594391181/

Rory Miller is an excellent communicator. All his books are good, but I’d start with this one because it differentiates and defines the stark difference the between martial arts and self-protection.

When it comes to the physical, then pre-emption is always the best option. You can work that on a bag at home if need be. Same with the explosive “shock an awe” striking associated with facilitating escape. If going to a regular class is out, then get to self-defence focused seminars and events when you can.

Be sure to consider the other numerous benefits of martial arts practise too. We can enjoy the health benefits, the satisfaction of learning a skill, enjoying time with good people, artistic expression, exploring martial culture, sport, etc. Self-protection is an important element for many people, me included, but I don’t think it should obscure the other benefits of martial practise. I did that for a long time. Self-protection was all that mattered. When I opened myself back up to the other elements, my martial arts became much more enjoyable as a whole. These days I am committed to not being a “one dimensional martial artist”. Self-protection remains important and I’m keen to ensure it is done right, but it’s no longer the only thing of importance.

All the best,

Iain

Malachy Devlin
Malachy Devlin's picture

Excellent advice Iain. Those percentages certainly put things in perspective. Balance is the magic word. Thanks to all for this, its good to have views and different angles on things. 

PASmith
PASmith's picture

I see wrestlers, MMA, BJJ guys and generally other "tough guys" with various training backgrounds and it seems they would be able to defend themselves better than I would.

The difference between self defence and combat sports/martial arts is that those guys get to test what they do regularly. Their end goal is one that can actually be done so they have direct feedback that what they are doing is working. They can spar and compete under the ruleset they are aiming for so they are confident in what they can do because it is tangible.

The same is not quite true for someone aiming towards self defence. While obviously we can test things in training, live practice, resistance, scenarios, pressure testing etc our ultimate goal (saving ourselves from harm in a real violent situation) is not one we can or should be trying to test for real. There will always be a gap between "real" and "realistic". In fact if you are getting in enough physical altercations with strangers to know you can handle yourself in a real fight or situation you are actually bad at self defence! :)

I've not had a fight in decades and my last few real potentially violent situations were diffused, avoided or otherwise resolved without getting physical (or no more physical than a fence, some pre-emptive pushing and some choice anglo-saxon on my part!). I've no idea how many other potential situations I've avoided by being switched on, aware or carrying myself confidently. I dare say I've walked past a mugger or two who took a look and decided there were better victims available and I had no idea I was even being sized up. As such I've no idea really if I can defend myself for real. I'd like to think I can but also appreciate there is a gap between training and reality and I may fail and that's just the way it is.

It's a dichotomy. I'd like the ability to defend myself without having to get into situations that would show whether I can or not. We're all (unless we work the doors, LEO, etc) training for an exam we hope will never come and are (if we take self defence seriously) actively avoiding taking it!

There's also the chance that the MMA/BJJ guys you are talking about are carrying false or misplaced confidence. Sure they can tap people out and win on the mats or in the cage. There IS an honest and tangible confidence that comes from that process. But equally they could be clueless about real violence, set-ups, security, pre-emption, deceptive dialogue, weapons, group tactics, etc etc. They just haven't come up against the nastier elements of society that would give them a crash course in all that.

Peter O'Toole
Peter O'Toole's picture

Your question is very thought provoking and is one that all serious martial artists should be asking themselves in one form or another. In addition to the very comprehensive answers you've already received, I would add that, in order to successfully defend yourself you don't need to be a martial artist and in fact you can learn the basics of self defence in a very short time. If you are a martial artist, then you can still learn those basics and your challenge will be taking what you already know and adapting it to suit real world situations. Iain has already mentioned the importance of learning awareness, escape, de-escalation, criminal behaviour, pre-emption, personal security and UK law as, without these all you know is a set of techniques. in addition I would suggest that you need to develop the right mindset, because without the right attitude you can know and be able to perform all the techniques in the world, but you can fail when it comes to their execution under pressure.

Developing the right mindset is not easy and requires discipline, which I presume you already have in abundance if you have practiced karate for 30 years. So you can start by working on the things you don't like doing and make yourself do them, no hesitation, no excuses, just get them done. From the mundane to the more challenging, develop the attitude that you will decide and then act. For you personally, I would respectfully suggest that this must include sparring (not necessarily for competition or with heavy contact, but with a reasonable element of difficulty). This is not just because it may help to hone your skills and to develop your confidence in a physical confrontation, but because it is a hurdle for you, something you do not like to do. If you work continually on overcoming such challenges then you will be developing the right mindset for self-defence. Good luck! :-)