Discussion on what makes a good seld defense cirriculum

[jubaji]

RBSD is hardly only dirty tricks. The foundation is the method, and the method doesn't exclude physical prowess or ability.

Ok then, would you say having more physical prowess or ability is better than having less. What is the ideal proportion of physical prowess or ability to 'dirty whatever' in your opinion?

[jubaji]

And the whole of grappling is hardly ground grappling. .

Um, yeah, I think just maybe I'm a bit more familiar with that concept than you are.

[jubaji]

Its also apparent that you haven't seen the differences between going to the ground and being taken there. .

How and why is that "apparent?"

[kingoftheforest]

I think it was Jim Grover who said that "(sport fighting) you do with somebody, combatives you do to somebody." That being said, I think that somebody with a good base in something like muay thai and jiujitsu using combatives principles is probably going to be a much more formidable opponent than just some shlub using the same principles in a fight. Not only do they have the RBSD type stuff, but they have a more than functional knowledge of other things to draw from and better foundation to launch things out of.

More is better.

I'm not trying to start an arguement...I'm honestly just trying to see if you think that knowing how to throw a punch or a kick effectively or get into superior positions via grappling to employ meaner tactics to their full potential or deploy a weapon is a wash??? Much less the conditioning...I mean...you already put up the article on why "sparring" is good for RBSD, right? (haven't read it yet, sorry...I will.)

Personally I agree Garland. The more tools you have the knowledge of those tools, the better your chances. Learning "how to fight" has got to be part of learning how to defend yourself.

You have to know when and where to employ certain concepts and ideas. Knowing your body and how to move it is an essential tool.

But at the same time you can't teach your body certain aspects, like taking a guard or expecting your opponent to submit. There are parts of both the traditional and RBSD concepts of martial arts that compliment each other.
There are also parts that have to be taken out or added depending on weather you're doing tournament fighting or RBSD martial arts.

Practicing the "politeness" of the TMA's can possibly cause a habitual weakness in a SD situation. Is that a guarantee, not necessarily, but it's something I personally choose not to train.

[Uke]

"After such encounters, I would invariably be disappointed with what I was forced to resort to in order to prevail - not always, but still I doggedly stuck with sparring as being the answer to fighting, and made sure I did more of it to better 'prepare' myself for the next incident - even though it was not what I really needed, just what I thought I did - and I was wrong.

For those that did want to 'duel', and for the others that hung back looking for that perfect opportunity to land a shot, it all panned out as per training, but these instances were firmly in the minority - maybe for not for everyone out there, but it seemed that most of the people I came up against - once it went combative - just wanted to batter me and tried their very best to do so from the off. Occasionally there would be the obvious martial artist, and to be brutally honest these were the easiest to deal with, and still are.

Sparring makes you tough, better conditioned, improves timing and the ability to hit moving targets - this is undeniable, but the entire tactical model is wrong, unless the other person is like-minded and wants to trade shots in the same format. Sometimes they do, but mostly they don't in my experience - they want you out of the picture as soon as possible and generally try to achieve this by completely 'get stuck in' asymmetrical means, and as such having a symmetrical plan falls down at the base level." - Mick Coup

[Sagacious Lu]

The reason I bring up "street smarts" is because that's what you're talking about when you say "awareness" and "mind set". I'm extremely skeptical that you can teach someone how to carry themselves or to use the appropriate amount of force for a given situation. I don't need someone to teach me how to handle myself in my own neighborhood and the fact that I enjoy sports doesn't mean I'm not aware of what I can expect if get in trouble with the white-t crew up the street. When I hear the RBSD diatribes on "mind set" and "awareness" I'm hearing people state the obvious and acting like it's a revelation. It seems to be the big thing that distinguishes RBSD from competitive styles and IMHO it takes valuable training time away from more important things. I probably take it a little too personally but the idea that my training is lacking because it doesn't include these things bothers me. I don't need to be taught how to walk to the grocery store and back; I do it all the time. This is something that I've always had questions about when it comes to the Self Defense ideology that I've seen.

[jubaji]

At the risk of repeating myself again: Excellent post.

[Sagacious Lu]

Thanks, it's good to be back on the board.

[Tom Yum]

I don't need to be taught how to walk to the grocery store and back.

Sure you do...

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=KOXa8mkPpeY

It doesn't get any more urban than this.

[Sagacious Lu]

Sure you do...

YouTube - Saturday Night Fever : "Stayin' Alive" (Bee Gees)

It doesn't get any more urban than this.

LOLOL... Yeah, you've got a point, I should start wearing butterfly collars

[Uke]

The reason I bring up "street smarts" is because that's what you're talking about when you say "awareness" and "mind set". I'm extremely skeptical that you can teach someone how to carry themselves or to use the appropriate amount of force for a given situation. I don't need someone to teach me how to handle myself in my own neighborhood and the fact that I enjoy sports doesn't mean I'm not aware of what I can expect if get in trouble with the white-t crew up the street. When I hear the RBSD diatribes on "mind set" and "awareness" I'm hearing people state the obvious and acting like it's a revelation. It seems to be the big thing that distinguishes RBSD from competitive styles and IMHO it takes valuable training time away from more important things. I probably take it a little too personally but the idea that my training is lacking because it doesn't include these things bothers me. I don't need to be taught how to walk to the grocery store and back; I do it all the time. This is something that I've always had questions about when it comes to the Self Defense ideology that I've seen.

Contrary to what many people think, the extent of most people's street smarts ends with avoidance. Avoidance is the number one tactic practiced by decent residents in bad neighborhoods.

I believe I wrote that on page one. In that post, I go on to say that "street smarts" are just the product of experience. It's not some secret handbook that only RBSD practitioners know. I don't think anyone implied that either.

This is exactly why I stated over and over again that aspects like avoidance and diffusion only go but so far. Awareness IMO boils down to catching on to details that will give you a heads up when something is about to down.

Personally, I don't care what anyone uses to defend themselves. If you think that sparring and emulating ring fighting is sufficient, I say do it till ya love it! I'm not going to tell you what you can't do. Anything is possible. For all I care you can sumo wrestle as a form of self defense.

However, I know that no reputable RBSD is teaching those methods as a way of self defense. I know that men who have been studying and teaching combative methods for decades aren't even thinking about likening RBSD to boxing with feet or fists. Many of these men started out with high rank in other styles, but they moved away from traditional and sportive methods because they came to a point where they realized that pugilism wasn't what they needed to accomplish what they desired. I already pointed that out above. If muay thai, karate, judo, wrestling or boxing was sufficient then they would have just used those methods. They weren't, so they didn't.

Some schools offer some competitive sports in addition to self defense, but none of the reputable schools try to lump them in together or lead their students into believing that one thing is the other.

All the proof one needs can be found at a RBSD school. Most of the people there will be from other systems and they will also have spent time trying to fit their square pegs into the triangle holes. Why would they invest 10 to 20 years practicing something only to switch?

Its not to say that something is better, but just as much as some of you want us to consider that boxing and wrestling are acceptable forms of self defense I ask you to consider why very accomplished sport combat competitors switch over. Its not often that you see happen the other way around.

It should be really be mentioned that all the sportive methods came to be only once the law became "civilized".

Judo - came about once the samurai were forbidden to carry swords
Boxing/wrestling - never wartime or field combatives
modern wushu - performance art
modern karate - watered down sparring art
muay thai - basically kickboxing. Krabi Krabong was the wartime art, not siamese boxing
aikido - watered down version of a brutal jujitsu art

Even way back then people weren't mistaking recreation for combatives. There was always a distinction. In fact, the father of modern combatives got his ass kicked trying to box and wrestle his way out of a confrontation. That's how the development of combatives got started.

Again, I say do what you like, but just because you think what you do is RBSD or even RBSD-esque doesn't make it so. But you can call it whatever you like though.

[jubaji]

I believe I wrote that on page one. In that post, I go on to say that "street smarts" are just the product of experience. It's not some secret handbook that only RBSD practitioners know. I don't think anyone implied that either.

Then why do we spend so much time here arguing over whose experience is legitimate or not?

[jubaji]

All the proof one needs can be found at a RBSD school. Most of the people there will be from other systems and they will also have spent time trying to fit their square pegs into the triangle holes. Why would they invest 10 to 20 years practicing something only to switch?

This is simply illogical. If someone from your school quits and decides to take up boxing, does that then 'prove' the opposite? Do we compare who switches from what to what and when and why? Do we have reliable stats for that?

[jubaji]

Judo - came about once the samurai were forbidden to carry swords
Boxing/wrestling - never wartime or field combatives
modern wushu - performance art
modern karate - watered down sparring art
muay thai - basically kickboxing. Krabi Krabong was the wartime art, not siamese boxing
aikido - watered down version of a brutal jujitsu art

I think we could go through quite a few threads examining some of those assumptions.

[Uke]

I think we could go through quite a few threads examining some of those assumptions.

The above quote isn't "my" opinion. I could spend one post discussing the fact that they aren't assumptions. And I just did.