tallgeese

Yes, but they had much more style...

beagstkd, out of curiosity, what counters are you all using for the bear hug and choke. today- 1 mile run back/bis

No, sorry. I was actually responding to Kuma. I hadn't seen that you got a post in there between. Sorry.

today- BJJ nite: Drilled takedowns. Double leg, head drag to double leg, and arm drag to double leg. Ran live drill based on partners energy and attempting one of the above. Round robin drils in 3 groups. 6, 1.5 min rounds offense from guard/pass guard. Free roll for 40 min. 30 percent to focus on technical sets.

I still have to disagree. The setting doesn't matter. If you've come to hand to hand in a military setting, of course you're in a deadly force situation. There's every liklyhood that it could go that way on the street as well. Frequency doesn't define the potential final outcome. That's defined all by itself.

If all those above statements come together under a unified umbrella that is different enough from other systems to be noticed. Why not?

today- chest/tris/forearms/abs circuit of: 1/4 mile run with 3 min work on BOB 10 min cool down on Boomer. Open guard variant and sweep rep. Gi sweep drill. Ended all with positional work in side control focusing on crushing.

I get where you're coming from. And I do think that going too far in the discussion is probably pointless. I just don't see a distinction between having to kill a guy on a battlefield when forced to be unarmed and doing the same if confronted with a deadly force threat in the street. The ends are the same. Just me though.

Just because you think people are out to get you doesn't mean that they're not . Seriously though, I don't think weapons carry is all that paranoid. I think that if one wants, they should carry the highest level of weapon that they are legally authorized and trained to carry. Done responsibly, this should be comforting to everyone around them, not a source of worry. It's rare to find me outside the house without a gun. You'll never find me outside the house, with my kids to look after, without one. But that's just me, I'm not paranoid, just prepared. You have to think as any weapons that you might carry to deploy as an augment to all your other skills, not a replacement for them. Which is kind of the mentality I see a lot. They are there to deal with situations where using merely unarmed skills is a tactical and dangerous mistake. Cops are notorious for the concept of talking about shooting every problem that comes up rather than choose to train more time in their unarmed skills. The thing is, we wrestle and fight WAY more people than we shoot. There are times that vs. a knife, it may make more practical sense to control it rather than try and clear leather and shoot the bad guy, say extreme close quarters. However, the response you'll always hear to the argument for practicing it is "I'll shoot him". Unarmed skills are a set of tools, so are weapons skills. One augments the other not replace it. Carry of a concealed weapon, be it knife or firearm, merely increase your response capacity to a broader range of situations.

Again, just speaking from my experience, and one that doesn't include jo training I should add. I don't feel this to be accurate in some regards. For instance, all the jo work I've seen from karate and kobudo students revolves around striking and some throw work by destabilizing the legs. Correct me if I'm wrong. Most of the hanbo I've seen is shorter striking used to augment joint manipulation. Throws are done, but many times revolve around the upper extremities or neck and head. It just seem like a different set of tools that go with the handbo than the jo. Granted, there are so many sects of weapons work out there chances are that I haven't seen all there is to see when it comes to the jo. So take it with a grain of salt. When push comes to shove during live training, I usually either a)beat the knife out of the attackers hand with the stick, or b) trap his stick via a cover and overhook and beat his legs with mine till he stops fighting. So much of this is probably moot for me.

I have to respectfully disagree with Mr. Lowery on this one a bit and I too like his work by and large. No doubt that ma's were originally developed largely for use on the battlefield. However, warfare is but one aspect of human on human conflict. I'd say the definition needs to expand to include any art that endeavors to achieve the goal of the destruction or domination of another human being in a fight. This must originally be geared toward real encounters, but might have sport applications that revolve around safer training practices. Part of this is the change in warfare to the higher scales of technology. You could argue that today, ma's revolve around combat shooting at a base level all the way up to deployment of ICBMs. These would be the types of different "arts" seen in development for warfare alone these days. However, I think that if you open the interpretation of the name up to include any sort of combat you really capture what the idea is behind the ma's. In this regard, may modern construct ma's might have more in common with the idea that many traditional arts given more current training methods. Seeing how several modern arts were developed with efficient hand to hand combat in mind without the loss of information in the older arts and out dated teaching and training methods. Just my thoughts, I don't have the pedigree of Lowery to back it up but it makes more intrinsic sense to me.

If you're going to carry a weapon, you'd better be able to safely get at it and bring it to play and keep hold of it. It's key. For handguns, you need to be able to clear space to present as well as control that firearm until YOU are ready to bring it out. This can be VERY system specific depending on your movements. The principles for a guy on the ground using BJJ are different for that same guy up top pounding his way out of a clinch. It takes reps, just like anything else. Additionally, you need to get a feel for when to break contact or simply make room for presentation vs. closing the gap to control with hands on. This can be a tricky line that depends on circumstances. Again, it requires drilling and "live" reps to get a feel for. Things are pretty much the same with a knife, concern-wise. However, the movements will be different. But you had still better be able to position yourself under stress to retrieve that weapon from wherever you typically carry it. I feel that retention to disarming is critical too. If you bring a weapon to a fight, you'd best be able to keep a hold of it. If you take a weapon from an attacker, you should assume he will try to get it back. Again, we see the importance of retention. It's often under appreciated, but important none the less.

Climbing is a big one of mine, although it's been sidelined a bit due to kids recently. Still, I manage about one big trip per year or two and ice outing locally and a couple of local rock runs through the year. Motorcycles, particularly mine, a '99 HD Sporty that I spend time wrenching all over on. Hopefully, one of these days I move on from a bike to a project car. Then there's the nerd in me that still enjoys tabletop role playing games. You may start laughing now. Again, I don't have a ton of time to throw at it these days. Lastly, and my wife's favorite, I've really gotten into cooking the last year or so. Go figure.

There's much more to a system or style than the movements that make up it's tactical responses. It's the principles behind the art that are the real back bone of it. Almost as important are the training methodologies used by the art. It's these second to factors that make JKD fairly unique. Most all the movements we all use have been done for years somewhere. When someone "fins" or "creates" a technique it's almost always been done somewhere in some variation all ready. Human physiology has been the same for quite some time, and we've been killing each other that long as well. So saying that someone's movements are also used by another art isn't really indicative of a "style". Most of the time it's a fact of anatomy. For instance, Okinawan joint locking systems look very similar to Chin-na and other Chinese grappling arts. Why? There's only so many ways to turn a human wrist to break it. The bigger issue is how a systems principles (fighting strategies, not philosophical stuff) operate and bring it all together. What are they trying to accomplish, how are they using those tools to that end. That's what can set a system apart. Additionally, you have to look at training methods. Some non-combative schools use material that can be utilized very comparatively. However, they aren't optimizing what they have due to over burdened traditional mindsets or clunky drill mechanics or a lack of centralized goals for training drills. All this should build to one's goal. If that's fighting or sd, often times there a schools missing the boat. Not because of movements, but because they are missing some of what I'm talking about above or a mindset. This is the second area that can really set an art apart. How are they drilling and applying those principles and movements that we've just been talking about. Those two factors are really what set JKD apart from other systems. It's lack of "system" or "traditional" training is built around the idea of using what is working and testing it. This includes importing movements from outside the initial set of skills brought to the table by the practitioner. Just my thoughts on what goes into a system and what sets them apart. Good question.

Glad you found a place you like. This will greatly aid you in a quicker, more reliable progression. Good luck!

I agree. Having a deescalation ability is key to staying in the right on stuff like this. I also think that often people worry too much about planning what to do from the bad guys movements and how to counter them. Defiantly just worry about your plan. More importantly than focusing on what you're going to do is focusing on complete domination or control of the situation. Specific tactics aren't important. Accomplishing the task is. Let what you've drilled happen, don't stagnant it with thought of action. Just act. Continue to act until the threat is gone.

today- Drilled 1/2 butterfly position. Worked to triangle, sweep, and transition to X-guard. Drilled w/ strike coverage as well and clearing distance to be able to deploy a firearm. Free roll for 40 min. Worked from negative positions on start.

I've got a 3 credit hour self defense course on the transcripts. Another 3 hours of rifle/pistol if it counts.

today- BJJ nite: Worked variant of the half butterfly guard. Drilled slipping away then stepping back up into a feint and sweep with a change of direction. Then we added a counter off a post by the partner. Finished with a more advanced sweep using the gi as an aid. 40 min free roll.

Ditto. In fact, during my time learning stick, again from an Okinawan based system, we did NO kata for it. This was entirely application drilling that led into spontaneous responses.

Yeah, the support leg foot has to be down in order to really drive into a kick. I agree, the heel will lift a bit to pivot, but even this should be minimal. Then it roots to make impact.

Knife, all the way. I'd question the judgment of someone wanting to carry a set of 'chucks under their coat. Not to mention, I know how to use a knife if he goes down. That's important. It the same reason I don't like it when my buddies start using some bizarre holster system or handgun with European or other odd controls. It doesn't lend itself to to me using it if they go down. On a side note, I like to have a feel for where the guys I hang with carry their stuff. Again, it's in case they can't use it any more and I need to.

Congrats!

I've always had exposure to the hanbo, or as we call it-a club, as part of the core Okinawan set of skill the system I study grew out of. This was such a typical instrument to be used in the circles I "grew up" in that I've always been surprised that it's not taught more. Here's the thing, stick work from that part of the Pacific Rim tends to look different than what's depicted in the video segments linked above. Okinawan stick is often focused around joint manipulation and application of leverage. Additionally, all my training, prior to cross-training (dabbling might be a better word for the time I spent doing it) in escrima based arts, was based around a single stick model. Again, this is the trend I've seen with Okinawan origin stick work. I'm not saying that the above vids are misrepresented, I'm just saying that's not my experience in how that particular flavor of stick work is done. There's plenty of systems out there I'm unfamiliar with that may historically do things differently. It's always possible as well that the above referenced school imported the movements from elsewhere (my sound's not up and running right now, maybe it was covered). Again, I'm okay with that provided that credit is given where it's due. But, yes, to the original question, hanbo is covered in Okinawan systems. My experience is that it just looks different than above.

I'm not much of a gi guy for a lot of my training, BJJ excepted. But I do prefer a heavier weave when I do have one one, even in stand up arts. But again, it's just preference. I do think that much of it comes down to durability.