Davisonsensei Posted January 5, 2011 Posted January 5, 2011 Look up George Dillman. The key to immorality is first living a life worth remembering
bushido_man96 Posted January 5, 2011 Posted January 5, 2011 Look up George Dillman.Even his experiences have come under question. There was a video of an excursion to a BJJ school where his stuff wasn't working. https://www.haysgym.comhttp://www.sunyis.com/https://www.aikidoofnorthwestkansas.com
yamesu Posted February 11, 2011 Posted February 11, 2011 Time to steal shamelessly. Ian Abernathy had his pod cast on pressure points this month. In it he said, after denying and divorcing any mysticsm from the art and down to pure medical science, knowing where to hit is no substitute for knowing how to hit(As in hard).Knowing a particular location to hit helps, but it isn't a cure all. You don't blast a Tiger tank in the frontal armor. You don't punch people in the forehead. However, you don't blast that Tiger tank anywhere with a .30 cal rifle. You use a British 17 pounder. Knowing how to hit means hitting hard. So, just like in muscle cars how there is no substitute for square inches except more square inches, there is no substitute for blunt trauma in a fight except more blunt trauma.Forget secret methods and arcane text on how to kill with a touch. Build sound technique and be always able to apply them. If you want one shot kills, up grade to firearms of a sufficient caliber.VERY well put Fight science (although maybe a little lame a show in itself) has shown Bas Rutten kicking a crash test dummy and causing more chest compression than is seen in a 60 mph car crash (or thereabouts.. I dont remember the exact speed but tis up there...).A knee to the head (high pressure over a small area caused by initial force - re: Newtons Laws) may cause as much if not more pinpoint damage.Im still an advocate for the belief that the one hit kill is possible, but as stated, its prbably more to do with knowing how to hit hard (and without remorse is probably a factor too) as opposed to knowing "where" to hit.Thats not to say that if someone could hit hard enough to do so, it would happen every time...Simply speculating. "We did not inherit this earth from our parents. We are borrowing it from our children."
bushido_man96 Posted February 13, 2011 Posted February 13, 2011 The "everytime" is where we run into problems. I think that what it comes down to is that the one-hit kill didn't or wouldn't happen often enough to warrant serious consideration. If it does happen, it probably has a lot to do with a lot of contributing factors, coming from both the striker and the recipient; things like strength, overall health and fitness levels, etc. https://www.haysgym.comhttp://www.sunyis.com/https://www.aikidoofnorthwestkansas.com
yamesu Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 The "everytime" is where we run into problems. I think that what it comes down to is that the one-hit kill didn't or wouldn't happen often enough to warrant serious consideration. If it does happen, it probably has a lot to do with a lot of contributing factors, coming from both the striker and the recipient; things like strength, overall health and fitness levels, etc.I agree 100%The human body is only so strong (stable maybe a more apt term???), and so its logical that a certain amount of applied force will cause damage. Accounting (or trying to anyway) all of the other external factors is where the concept may fall apart.OSU. "We did not inherit this earth from our parents. We are borrowing it from our children."
MMA_Jim Posted February 21, 2011 Posted February 21, 2011 Look up George Dillman.Thats supposed to support your argument?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now