Karate defence against BJJ

[White Warlock]

If we are talking about street attackers, current statistics will show that people expertly trained in martial arts do not constitute the majority, but in fact an almost insignificant minority.

I would like to see those statistics. Does the definition of martial arts, as pertains to said statistics, include wrestling/boxing? And, in these statistics, is it merely formal training that defines whether someone is skilled in committing violent acts?

Nonetheless, if you believe you should be an expert and highly skilled even for ordinary street threat, I cannot blame you or criticize you for it.

Ordinary street threat? I wish there was such a thing. As i noted earlier in my post, there are plenty of 'violent career criminals,' with an emphasis on 'career' because... frankly, it is what they do for a living, day in and day out. When/if you are attacked by one of these persons, it will likely be by surprise... possibly more than one assailant. A weapon may be involved, or merely a bullrush manuever with plenty of commands. It could very well be that the encounter will give you a moment to regain your footing, or to be overwhelmed by your adrenalin, thus frozen in place.

There are concepts in the arts that sometimes are lost because of extended 'theory' in the dojo, but in the streets there are no theories, only practice. and in those instances of application, nothing is practice. It's all real, all now. If you are trained to manage the adrenal surge, you will be one-up on most other victims, but not necessarily one-up on your assailants.

For as long as you realistically assess the threat confronting your situation and prepare for it adequately, you should be okay and won't need a shrink yet.

This is not an issue of paranoia, but of reality. Although we do not personally witness violent crimes being committed on a daily basis, they nonetheless do occur... and far more often than people would care to believe. It has happened to family members, to friends, and to me sufficient times that i do not dismiss it so easily. Violent crimes do occur, and you don't necessarily have to be at the wrong place, or at the wrong time.

I want each of you do something right now. Spend just a few minutes doing this... for it will be an eye-opener. Visualize being the victim of a violent crime. Aim to visualize at least three versions... one where the threat posed is minor, another where the threat is major, and another where a loved one is at the scene. Examine these situations... and determine if you feel you are 'ready,' or if these visualizations undermine your confidence... bring fear to your heart.

...

...

It is 'expected' that you will feel fear and that the situations you present cause you concern. That is the nature of the unknown. If in your visualizations you found no threat, or were not in the least disturbed by what you presented, then you are either not presenting reasonable threats... or you are dangerously overconfident. Consider this... and consider as well, there are no guarantees. We study the martial arts to edge our bets, but surviving a violent encounter is a gamble that we can lose.

[lgm]

If we are talking about street attackers, current statistics will show that people expertly trained in martial arts do not constitute the majority, but in fact an almost insignificant minority.

I would like to see those statistics. Does the definition of martial arts, as pertains to said statistics, include wrestling/boxing? And, in these statistics, is it merely formal training that defines whether someone is skilled in committing violent acts?

I'm referring here to street attacks perpetuated by people who have been expertly trained in martial arts. In my part of the world, there's not a single mention in our daily newspapers or on TV for the months from January up to October this year of any kidnapper, carjacker, holdupper and other notorious street criminals as having a background of a formal training in a martial arts school. Can you cite your statistics in your area if you believe the majority of street attackers have been trained in martial arts, if you are of different view?

Nonetheless, if you believe you should be an expert and highly skilled even for ordinary street threat, I cannot blame you or criticize you for it.

Ordinary street threat? I wish there was such a thing.

By "ordinary" street threat, I refer to the usual kinds of street attack reported in your community or area. In my community, we have such ordinary or usual street threat types, we also have rare ones and extremely rare types. As we live in different geography and socio-cultural milieu, we don't have the same specific types for these three classifications of street threats according to frequency.

For as long as you realistically assess the threat confronting your situation and prepare for it adequately, you should be okay and won't need a shrink yet.

This is not an issue of paranoia, but of reality. Although we do not personally witness violent crimes being committed on a daily basis, they nonetheless do occur... and far more often than people would care to believe. It has happened to family members, to friends, and to me sufficient times that i do not dismiss it so easily. Violent crimes do occur, and you don't necessarily have to be at the wrong place, or at the wrong time.

Where the area you live indeed has such violent crimes committed by people with knowledge of expert martial arts occurring on a daily basis, then one should realistically respond with commensurate measure of defense and technical preparedness for the near probability that you will be attacked by thugs who are experts in martial arts. Probably getting a license to carry a gun and be proficient in its use for such street emergencies will even be better than reliance on unarmed martial arts.

I want each of you do something right now. Spend just a few minutes doing this... for it will be an eye-opener. Visualize being the victim of a violent crime. Aim to visualize at least three versions... one where the threat posed is minor, another where the threat is major, and another where a loved one is at the scene. Examine these situations... and determine if you feel you are 'ready,' or if these visualizations undermine your confidence... bring fear to your heart.

...

...

It is 'expected' that you will feel fear and that the situations you present cause you concern. That is the nature of the unknown. If in your visualizations you found no threat, or were not in the least disturbed by what you presented, then you are either not presenting reasonable threats... or you are dangerously overconfident. Consider this... and consider as well, there are no guarantees. We study the martial arts to edge our bets, but surviving a violent encounter is a gamble that we can lose.

These visualizations are useful and one should indeed drill and practice how they would respond to such street threats. Just bear in mind that where the attackers are armed, your unarmed martial arts may fall short of its expected efficiency to save your life. If it’s your possesion they want, lose it rather than your life, even if you pride yourself to be an expert in several forms of martial arts. If it’s your life that they want and they are advantageously armed, you have a choice to either cry in fear, do nothing and pray for a quick death, or die fighting. Again, if you truly believe your neighborhood is extremely dangerous to your health and survival, trust weapons more than your empty hands and feet. But, the better option is to change neighborhoods if it is within your means.

[AndrewGreen]

"there's not a single mention in our daily newspapers or on TV for the months from January up to October this year of any kidnapper, carjacker, holdupper and other notorious street criminals as having a background of a formal training in a martial arts school. Can you cite your statistics in your area if you believe the majority of street attackers have been trained in martial arts, if you are of different view? "

There is not a single mention of someone who did not. In fact, the subject isn't mentioned at all.

This is not valid statistics, and you made the claim, it's up to you to produce valid evidence, not to redirect it when someone asks to see your evidence.

[Ego Assassin]

Unless you go to Brasil the chances of being attacked w/BJJ techniques are like NONE. Most people who start MA do so because of certain insecurities and others to so called get in shape. The point is most people will not fight when provoked and criminals are way too insecure to believe they need anyone to teach them how to fight. Criminals feed off fear and intimidation.

And they rely on it. Back to the topic though if you want to learn to defend BJJ I'm sorry if you don't like it but you have to learn BJJ at least the basics.

And keep in mind no matter how good you get theres always someone better . So lets not be paranoid here guys and girls.

[AndrewGreen]

Well truthfully my chance of being attacked in any way are pretty much none, but that's not the point here is it

There are a lot more former wrestlers around then BJJ though, and with the UFC gaining main stream popularity I think you'll see more of it in fights then 10 years ago, and more in another 10 then there is now.

[Ego Assassin]

Yeah but you live in Canada. And the name of this topic is not criminal stats and MA.

[lgm]

"there's not a single mention in our daily newspapers or on TV for the months from January up to October this year of any kidnapper, carjacker, holdupper and other notorious street criminals as having a background of a formal training in a martial arts school. Can you cite your statistics in your area if you believe the majority of street attackers have been trained in martial arts, if you are of different view? "

There is not a single mention of someone who did not. In fact, the subject isn't mentioned at all.

This is not valid statistics, and you made the claim, it's up to you to produce valid evidence, not to redirect it when someone asks to see your evidence.

It may not be valid statistics to you. But, for me and in my experience, it is statistics describing frequencies of observed phenomena in a qualitative form, and it means zero (0)count on violence perpetuated by criminal elements who have training in martial arts out of total violence reported from Jan. to October this year in our dailies and TV. This means all violence reported were done by non-martial artists, as far as I have noted. It is just another way of reporting statistics though not the in the form of exact numbers or quantitative measures.

Unfortunately, in my country, no one is keeping counts exactly on how many crimes in total or sum that have been reported in these dailies and TV. But, for the purpose of this discussion, I believe it should suffice as it is the best I can produce for my country's situation.

Do you have you own statistics in your country on this particular issue of "majority committing street crimes are martial arts-trained" which you yourself could positively contribute?

[AndrewGreen]

Again, I have never seen any statistics on the percentage of violent crime offenders with or without training. And it seems, neither have you, but if you can find some I'd like to see it. Until then it is just guessing.

Newspapers aren't going to mention it, not unless it is there career. But otherwise they aren't going to investigate someone enough to find out. There are several well documentated cases of Martial arts instructors being involved in sex crimes though.

My guess would be that a good number people getting in fights WOULD have some training, why? Because they like to fight.

But unless they are a pro fighter or instructor, that fact isn't going to make the news, along with 1000's of other bits of information about them.

[Ego Assassin]

I disagree with the fighting because they like to fight most fights are over nothing with two people one of which absolutely does not want to fight. The other knows this and takes advantage of the situation to prove something to themselves.

[White Warlock]

While the topic of discussion is not about statistics, such was nonetheless presented, and thus it has rendered a degree of our attention. Albeit, at the sacrifice of the context in which things were initially running. But, ah well.

As to newspapers being utilized for statistics that is fine and dandy, but only for information they actually present, not for information they 'do not' present. As a journalist and ex-editor-in-chief i can tell u right off such information would not be presented in articles. They are not relevant to the topic, are not readily available, and do not present insight into the main issue. Media, as a rule, focuses on topics that interest the populace. The populace, as a whole, are not all that interested in whether criminals have 'formal' training in violence. There was, for a time, an interest in weightlifting being available at prisons, wherein the concern was that such things provide an avenue for criminals to become better equipped at being criminals. That particular issue was 'topic' oriented to present such, but violent crimes are generally merely footnotes in newspapers. They present a police blog, along with a few 'victim' interviews. Neither of which would present 'martial arts' information about a criminal, unless that person... as Andrew indicated, owned or ran an ma school. Even then, it is unlikely to be presented because such information requires 'investigation,' and the majority of news articles presented about such things... are not investigative, they are reportive.

Additional points to be presented are: in order for a reporter to obtain such information, he would have to obtain it from either the criminal directly (unlikely), the police (also unlikely, since the criminal would not have indicated such... unless he wasn't really trained in the martial arts), relatives/friends of the criminal (also unlikely as relatives/friends would not communicate to a reporter... unless they were the victims... which touches my other subject presented, and throws a red herring into this whole statistics argument), or the victims (if not related or a friend, they wouldn't know). Even then, were they to obtain said information, it's still not relevant, and thus would not be presented in the article. Any editor of at least basic credentials would ensure such derogatories stay out of an article, for it opens up the newspaper to unwarranted heat. In this case, heat from various martial art schools, possibly even a lawsuit from the school in which this person studied. The goal of a good article is to stay 'focused' on the topic, and not to deviate into peripheral, and possibly slanderous avenues.

As to formal training, i stated above in my post that it is not merely 'formal' settings wherein people obtain training. In fact, many criminals obtain training 'inside' jail and prison. Deal with it, this goes on. Criminals teach each other, given incentives... such as extra rations or merely friendship.

Also... how do you think a criminal commits a violent crime and succeeds in it? Yes, he chooses a victim that he can overcome, but he needs a modicum of understanding, training (formal or informal), in order to be able to gauge victims and overcome them in the first place. Why do you think we, as trained martial artists, are less likely to be victims? Partly because we gain the insight into where 'not' to go, what not to do, etc. But also because we exude a degree of confidence that others can gauge. Especially those with training, or experience in the commission of violence.

We fear life-threatening situations, the possibility of violent crimes being committed against... because they are life-threatening. Just about the only 'violent criminal' i suspect would attack me... would be either a raving idiot, or someone whose confidence is sufficient that he may perceive 'surprise' and 'overwhelm' enough to take me out. He may be right.

That's what makes criminals dangerous. Because they are willing to initiate a conflict on uneven terms.

Oh, and criminals are not neighborhood dependent. Granted, more violent crimes are committed in certain neighborhoods over others, but there is no 'safe zone.'