Martial Arts V Self Defence

[bushido_man96]

one could fight gangs, and call that training and it really is training or some would call that experiance, either way, it still has the end result of the trained or experianced fighter.

Typically, what is normally referred to as "training" takes place in a controlled environment, where most of the parties involved are aware of the goals and objectives of the session. The idea behind training is to use the controlled environment to build muscle memory and combat instinct through repititions. Walking up to a gang to start a fight would constitute more of an "experience" session, I believe, because there is no control over the situation. This is where the training comes in handy, because you have ingrained the movements into the muslce memory, and it will hopefully be recalled when and if needed, in my opinion.

[Menjo]

one could fight gangs, and call that training and it really is training or some would call that experiance, either way, it still has the end result of the trained or experianced fighter.

Typically, what is normally referred to as "training" takes place in a controlled environment, where most of the parties involved are aware of the goals and objectives of the session. The idea behind training is to use the controlled environment to build muscle memory and combat instinct through repititions. Walking up to a gang to start a fight would constitute more of an "experience" session, I believe, because there is no control over the situation. This is where the training comes in handy, because you have ingrained the movements into the muslce memory, and it will hopefully be recalled when and if needed, in my opinion.

Ah, thats a good point, and I have to agree with you.

[glockmeister]

EThe soccermom example isn't killer instinct at all. It's adherence to our most simple, basic instinct. The need to eat. Unless she's killing half dead survivors, then that is not killer instinct.

I agree maybe using that example wasn't the best i could have used. My only point being that by our nature, there is "killer instinct" in all of us, it only takes different things to bring it out. I don't believe using a boxer is a good example however of someone having more killer instinct.

[bushido_man96]

I'm not sure that I buy into everyone having the "killer instinct" just because we are mammals. We are also by nature social creatures, and if we were that predatorial, the society thing would not work out well. And besides, not every animal in the animal kingdom is a killer. There are predators, and their are prey.

I think it is important to be able to defend oneself to the best possible abiltiy achievable. However, training that killer instinct is not as easy as training physical ability. You can even see this in some professional athletes. There are those great athletes, who also have a great demeanor. Then, you can also see those athletes who are good, but are also nasty, and play without any regard to how others may be affected.

Maybe it is unfair to say that not everyone has the instinct. However, not everyone ever develops it.

[cross]

Yes there is a difference,

what are you thoughts ?

There certainly is a difference. If you ask people where they would go to learn self defence, the majority would say "a martial arts school, obviously". Rarely would a person even think about going to a conflict managment course and learning how to run.

When martial artists talk about self defence, intentionally or not they often only refer to the physical part of self defence. This is the same thing you will experience in most martial arts classes. When schools have there "self defence sessions" to practice "self defence techniques", the majority of the time they are learning how to escape wrist and lapel grabs against a complient "opponent". The person walks up and without any aggression or conversation, grab your wrist and stand there waiting for you to perform an overcomplicated escape for a situation that is far from reality. The pre and post fight parts are often only mentioned for a few moments, time is not spend practicing the skills required to deal with these parts.

Self defence training involves practicing and learning about conflict de-escalation, signs of aggression, pre fight posturing, pre emptive strikes, legal implications, dealing with police interviews, your rights in terms of defending yourself, dealing with post traumatic stress, the possibility of revenge attacks etc.

If your martial arts training doesnt include this then you are really only looking at a very small part of the self defence puzzle.

[Konoko]

Yes there is a difference,

what are you thoughts ?

There certainly is a difference. If you ask people where they would go to learn self defence, the majority would say "a martial arts school, obviously". Rarely would a person even think about going to a conflict managment course and learning how to run.

When martial artists talk about self defence, intentionally or not they often only refer to the physical part of self defence. This is the same thing you will experience in most martial arts classes. When schools have there "self defence sessions" to practice "self defence techniques", the majority of the time they are learning how to escape wrist and lapel grabs against a complient "opponent". The person walks up and without any aggression or conversation, grab your wrist and stand there waiting for you to perform an overcomplicated escape for a situation that is far from reality. The pre and post fight parts are often only mentioned for a few moments, time is not spend practicing the skills required to deal with these parts.

Self defence training involves practicing and learning about conflict de-escalation, signs of aggression, pre fight posturing, pre emptive strikes, legal implications, dealing with police interviews, your rights in terms of defending yourself, dealing with post traumatic stress, the possibility of revenge attacks etc.

If your martial arts training doesnt include this then you are really only looking at a very small part of the self defence puzzle.

Good post, never thought about it like that

[bushido_man96]

There certainly is a difference. If you ask people where they would go to learn self defence, the majority would say "a martial arts school, obviously". Rarely would a person even think about going to a conflict managment course and learning how to run.

You make a good point here. Many people are thinking about the physical conflict part, and not the management part of it. I think that both are important. However, I get the feeling that most people think it may be easier to learn the conflict management part than it is to learn the physical confrontation part. Therefore, I think most people seek to be taught the physical aspects.

When martial artists talk about self defence, intentionally or not they often only refer to the physical part of self defence. This is the same thing you will experience in most martial arts classes. When schools have there "self defence sessions" to practice "self defence techniques", the majority of the time they are learning how to escape wrist and lapel grabs against a complient "opponent". The person walks up and without any aggression or conversation, grab your wrist and stand there waiting for you to perform an overcomplicated escape for a situation that is far from reality. The pre and post fight parts are often only mentioned for a few moments, time is not spend practicing the skills required to deal with these parts.

I agree with you here, stating that the pre- and post-fight situations should be dealt with as well. However, I don't think that a lot of black belts have experience in these areas either. However, it would be good for many to learn. Also, spending some time on some common sence scenarios would help this as well.

Self defence training involves practicing and learning about conflict de-escalation, signs of aggression, pre fight posturing, pre emptive strikes, legal implications, dealing with police interviews, your rights in terms of defending yourself, dealing with post traumatic stress, the possibility of revenge attacks etc.

I agree. These are excellent points that should be stressed.

[2007]

[quote="cross"

There certainly is a difference.quote]

i agree with thiis post by CROSS

[mmljpp]

well if your training in a traditional art they focus more on kata and one and two step sparring and are not quite as relisitc as what self defence is but the martial art i train in now is aimed for self defence mostly what we train is to effectivly defend ourselfes

[yingampyang]

Yes there is a difference,

what are you thoughts ?

well martial arts is kata after kata , and self defence is on the spot action. so in that case they are different. But to become very effective know just how to throw a punch is no where near good enough, that is were martial arts and training is a big advantage in the street.

so in one case they are different , but in the other case they mix and fuse together.