JusticeZero

They're all from Southeast Asia. Kali is related to Arnis, Phillipino? stick/knife/empty hand art. Bando and Silat are both base terms for the arts from their area, but you can't tighten up on them much, because they're like saying "Karate" or "Gongfu". Silat is the umbrella for Indonesian martial arts, Bando is the Burmese.

As a point, there are arm structures that are best for catching legs in certain target areas; learn to see these being put together and don't throw kicks into them.

Both Gongfu and Karate have a lot of exotic weapons, but they came from different sources internally. Gongfu tends to focus on relaxed power and building skeletal structure inside of the target to an extent much greater than Karate. Karate schools seem to come up onto the ball of the foot, then focus a lot on breathing and kiai and such, where Gongfu schools are more likely to tell you to drive the back heel firmly onto the ground as you do the technique for power. It's not the same power.

The mechanics of Karate are also noticeably different from the mechanics of Gongfu. Makes for different tactics.

As an aside, welcome and feel free to talk about your training. There are arts in your mix that most people don't know much about, and it's always good to hear new things. Even if you think 'I'm just starting what can I say?' if nothing else it is something the teachers can think about when they are trying to figure how to teach better.

<- guy in white shirt is in my lineage, i've played with him before. <- more from the same guy <- high level game. My GM wears the hat. Both were dealing with injuries at the time, I think, but I can't be certain. <- remains my favorite clip; lots of variety and the flow is good.I don't get into arguments of "true". That's more than a little bit like arguing whether Goju-ryu is more "true" than Shotokan. I speak to what i'm trained in.

My limbs are pretty short, i'm not amazingly athletic, and I rarely see a need to use a handstand.. and i'm teaching. It's not so stereotypical as that. As for a synonymous history? The creators were not citizens or feudal farmers, and they had some formal martial skills at the start to work from. So not exactly the same.

Always a frustration. I am still trying to figure out a way to achieve some better measures for equality to deal with this problem. No ideas yet. My GM made everyone train in a T-shirt, but that's still one extra layer of clothes for half of the class to deal with.

You're doing JJ, so the heavy weight will be useful. Weight is not a problem. Heat might be. I can't speak to that specific gi - I train in a T-shirt, tkd pants or jeans, and work boots.

Well, if the "Kim" in the style name refers to Ashida Kim, then it's probably some sort've odd gongfu-jujutsu hybrid made by a guy who tried capitalizing on the "Ninja Craze" with a bunch of books about "ninjutsu", using all Chinese technique names and suchlike.

Not that many, but there's a lot of evidence that statistically, it's difficult to convince a jury to convict a woman of anything violent no matter how airtight the case is. If it even goes to trial; as unreasonably difficult and distressing as it is for a woman to get people to take some of the attacks they are subjected to seriously, they have it much easier than guys trying to convince ANYONE who matters that they were victimized by a woman.

I have no doubts on the subject. Just be careful that she isn't trying to weaponize someone else's chivalry against you.

No apology requested! Society is a mess, and some people can use bits of it to mess with people. Just watch out for variants of the wounded gazelle gambit when a situation develops around other people.

All of what MasterPain says is true. However, I also counter that if the attack is in public, it is very possible that your response is a significant part of the damage she intends to do to you, and indeed might be a key part of the attack. This is because women are considered unable to act effectively by most people, which is insulting to everyone involved but nonetheless true. If you let her hit you, she damages you. If you respond defensively and non-aggressively to the attack to prevent being struck, you are publicly acknowledging your weakness against something which bystanders will not see as a meaningful threat, which damages your social face. You also are not doing anything to stop the attack. If you respond defensively to the attack with a response which contains a countermeasure, then you are being seen to publicly attack a helpless female, and are worthy of contempt. Your social face is damaged, and any men witnessing the act may see the opportunity to greatly enhance their social position by attacking you on behalf of the woman who just took a swing at you. This doesn't mean that the woman isn't in the wrong, it just means that the world is unfair in this regard. Culturally, women - because of the double-edged nature of asymmetrical power - have the privilege to be violent to men at will without consequences in a troublingly large (though thankfully slowly shrinking) number of situations. In short, MP is right, but may under some circumstances turn out to be "dead right". On the bright side, this issue is situational. If there are no men around to enforce the cultural norm, you can feel free to drop your attacker into a control position. Women will most likely be far more even handed about the issue, and LEOs are probably going to be reasonable and fair about the matter (presuming the policies they have to work with do not hamstring them with baked in assumptions).

The best material for that would probably be all the travel stuff. Honestly, the actual training would be anticlimactic compared to the sort've stuff that the hero had to do to find it in the first place.

Only if there were no weight classes - the 135 pound guy has to grapple with the 285 pound guy in this hypothetical MMA match. Obviously this is going to select out the smallest guys, and the big-ish guys are going to focus on getting huge so they can compete with the super-heavyweights.Well, in gymnastics, smaller is better. So they work toward a compromise of good strength with less body weight. As a result, you don't see any huge muscular gymnasts.

In all those cases, a lot of the muscle development you see is actually a result of training that specific activity. Long distance runners develop slow twitch muscle that doesn't bulk up, is not explosive (and so of limited use in doing fast, explosive attacking movements), but which happily keeps ticking along after a lot of time. They develop it mainly by, well, running long distances. But musclebuilding exercises still help them in other ways. Gymnasts have to worry about things like square-cube law and the like, and so reducing their total mass even at the cost of total strength is a valid goal in and of itself for them. They do a lot of bodyweight exercise where losing eight pounds of weight but simultaneously lowering the amount of weight they can lift by four pounds represents a substantial increase of strength in their eyes.

Anyone who gains muscle mass while slowing down will be an edge case. You have to be doing a lot of very specific min-maxey things for a very long time to achieve it. It's a little bit like suggesting to someone that they "Walk around and explore" only to have them complain "But I might end up in Tijuana!" Well... not by accident you won't.

Yeah, the bulk I don't see. these pictures are probably the outer limit of what you could possibly get without changing your diet and such building up strength. (This is an estimate based on correcting for specialized diet with another specialized diet.) These people are not absurdly bulky. And they spent a huge amount of time and effort getting to the point they're at. And even if you did gain bulk - it's all "engine weight". Putting a bigger and heavier motor in a vehicle typically doesn't slow it down, it speeds it up.

Yeah, but hostage situations often have a "move victim to second location" baked in. I tell my students that if someone wants to move them to a second crime scene, that if their response results in them dying there, they're still probably better off than if they went to the second location.

Claims to. In practice it looks identical to something Hypnotists and certain religious leaders who do very showy things in a crowd of 'true believers' do as part of a show for other people. The ones who do it to show off their hypnotism powers and to manipulate people knowingly are more honest about it, but the techniques and setup involved are the same regardless.

I think a big part of this is the fact that the defenses used to deal with legal attacks when in certain positions are also applicable to illegal attacks in the same position. I'm sure that takedown quality would need to increase to deal with the possibility of ending up on the ground with a still-standing opponent.. that or they'd have to work some of our material into their mix somehow.

In this case it was an issue that 'not using muscle' meant using body alignment and posture - and the strength needed to maintain that structure was lacking. But tensing up is a disaster also, yes.

Did you ever mention what style and lineage you had studied? What tactics does your school prefer?

Yikes! This turned out pretty well, considering. I note that the comments had people thinking that a gun would have been more dangerous - I can't see how. This is a pretty bad situation either way. That said, does anyone have any thoughts on how best to deal with a situation of this sort? I don't think I could have suggested the tackle so much as gesturing "Throw him the money" and pointing at the GROUND a ways away. he'll have to move to get it, and then crouch down to pick it up, and both of those things will make opportunities to get the guy clear of his hostage if he hasn't already. If he doesn't break up, and tries to move to a second location, follow closely. I'm not sure whether it's advisable to pull the trigger on the reasonable full escalation of a "second location" attempt if it's someone else who has to suffer the effects. I'm not sure what others think, though. Honestly, I think this guy got exactly what he wanted: To get put back in jail. Society isn't really supportive of former inmates, so high recidivism is to be expected when they get hungry and can't find work.