Confidence in your art

[Jeffrey]

Having confidence in your art is one thing but as Sensei8 said you must first have confidence in yourself. You have to know your body and how it works. Adrenaline being friend or foe is something that rarely gets touched on. It's that wonderful little cocktail that gets pumped into your body when you under go stress or are put into a situation where the body could come under harm. Having confidence in yourself and your art will help get through the dump of adrenaline the body gets.

Congrats on the Green Belt.

[brickshooter]

I'm not sure whether more sparring is better for self defense.

The problem with sparring is that you're limited to techniques that won't permanently harm your classmates. Can't really poke him or her in the eye. Can't crush his testicals with a bionic grip. Can't improvise by grabbing a brick and hammering him with it.

Second, the military and police don't generally spar. They do self-defense drills. Over and over until it's second nature. Yet there's no outcry for the need of more sparing in either organizations.

Eye poking, biting, groin grabbing and brick bashing don't really require practice. Also I have had people (some supposedly skilled some not) try to eye gouge in a fight and grab at my groin. I've also been kicked in the groin. I wouldn't rule them out but not exactly high percentage moves.

Is it possible that you drew an incorrect conclusion? Eyes and goin are extremely vunerable targets, hence all combat sports ban them. But they're low percentage because they're small targets centered on the body, so they're easily defended.

More difficult targets generally require more practice to attack them. Not less. They're more vunerable. Not easier to hit.

About your skilled opponents, you know your opponents better than I do. But it is a possiblity that they claim to be skilled in eye and groin attacks because they were shown the technique at some time in their lifetime? I think you need to actually ask them a little about their actual training rather than take their word for it.

I think that most people incorrectly assumes that eye and groin attacks require no practice. Then without practice, they try doing it doing a fight and fail. Then they assume that it's false target. But the reality is that their lack of training failed.

[JiuJitsuNation]

I'm not sure whether more sparring is better for self defense.

The problem with sparring is that you're limited to techniques that won't permanently harm your classmates. Can't really poke him or her in the eye. Can't crush his testicals with a bionic grip. Can't improvise by grabbing a brick and hammering him with it.

Second, the military and police don't generally spar. They do self-defense drills. Over and over until it's second nature. Yet there's no outcry for the need of more sparing in either organizations.

Eye poking, biting, groin grabbing and brick bashing don't really require practice. Also I have had people (some supposedly skilled some not) try to eye gouge in a fight and grab at my groin. I've also been kicked in the groin. I wouldn't rule them out but not exactly high percentage moves.

Is it possible that you drew an incorrect conclusion? Eyes and goin are extremely vunerable targets, hence all combat sports ban them. But they're low percentage because they're small targets centered on the body, so they're easily defended.

More difficult targets generally require more practice to attack them. Not less. They're more vunerable. Not easier to hit.

About your skilled opponents, you know your opponents better than I do. But it is a possiblity that they claim to be skilled in eye and groin attacks because they were shown the technique at some time in their lifetime? I think you need to actually ask them a little about their actual training rather than take their word for it.

I think that most people incorrectly assumes that eye and groin attacks require no practice. Then without practice, they try doing it doing a fight and fail. Then they assume that it's false target. But the reality is that their lack of training failed.

I semi agree with you. My question is how do you train to bite, eye gouge and hitting people with random objects? I don't need someone to teach me how or where to bite I wouldn't bite in the first place> I have a thing about hygiene and body fluids. lol I've seen an art that revolves around biting which will just infuriate me not back me off. I tend to look at all situations as if the person is game and not easily detoured.

Now me personally I am fully aware that if you stick you finger in a mans eye to the knuckle you'll find his off button. But honestly easier said thatn done.

[brickshooter]

I semi agree with you. My question is how do you train to bite, eye gouge and hitting people with random objects? I don't need someone to teach me how or where to bite I wouldn't bite in the first place> I have a thing about hygiene and body fluids. lol I've seen an art that revolves around biting which will just infuriate me not back me off. I tend to look at all situations as if the person is game and not easily detoured.

Now me personally I am fully aware that if you stick you finger in a mans eye to the knuckle you'll find his off button. But honestly easier said thatn done.

Eye jabs (not gouges) can be done on a Bob Bag. If one can hit another with a jab, one can hit another with an open hand jab aimed at the eye. Of course, they only temporarily blind the attacker on one side so a finishing technique is required to take him out.

Biting. LoL. I give up on this one. But I think that biting vunerable spots are more effective. For example, biting the coratic artery is more effective than biting forearms.

Weapons. One can tightly roll up a magazine and it becomes a stick. And now it's really a fight between a defender with a stick and an unarmed attacker. So training should include how to quickly make an improvised weapon, and how to use such weapon. Pen = dagger, etc. Belt = rope.

Anyways, my point is that sparing could teach a person many things, but not everything.

[JiuJitsuNation]

I can see that. I more tend to go with fact than theory. In theory you may bite the carotid but there is no documentation of anyone ever doing this. There are some very high percentage places you can strike to knock someone out. And I am absolutely positive about choking someone to sleep and beyond.

As for weapons I believe that most people will need extensive training to be effective and yet other need only a couple rules of thumb. I have heard instructors say never take a weapon into a fight, as it may be taken from you and used against you. Now you have escalated the situation. I wouldn't necessarily take one into a fight but I can see the need to improvise as a real possibility.

What do you think?

[Jay]

On the biting thing the art is called Kino Mutai.

I did some research about the biting thing according to this article the human jaw is capable of exerting a hell of alot of force. Although inevitable this would be measured from the canine teeth as they have the smallest area.

ttp://https://www.elasmo-research.org/education/topics/r_bites.htm

Imo I think you would have to rip at someones neck to actually puncture their jugular

http://l.yimg.com/a/i/edu/ref/ga/l/558.gif

Here it shows its behind quite a bit of muscle and as our teeth are not made for puncturing would be pretty hard to do.

So I think its possible but you would have to have several goes at it and the other person isn't just going to lie there.

[brickshooter]

I can see that. I more tend to go with fact than theory. In theory you may bite the carotid but there is no documentation of anyone ever doing this. There are some very high percentage places you can strike to knock someone out. And I am absolutely positive about choking someone to sleep and beyond.

As for weapons I believe that most people will need extensive training to be effective and yet other need only a couple rules of thumb. I have heard instructors say never take a weapon into a fight, as it may be taken from you and used against you. Now you have escalated the situation. I wouldn't necessarily take one into a fight but I can see the need to improvise as a real possibility.

What do you think?

I think that the most difficult thing about training with weapons is finding a qualified instructor. But training itself is like any other training. Instruction on techniques, drills, then basic sparing.

Re getting your weapon taken away. It's pretty difficult to do so versus a untrained weapon attacker. It's going to be extremely difficult to take away a weapon of a trained person.

Re using a weapon. We don't get to pick our attacker. According to the FBI, roughtly 3/4 of all street aggravated assaults are by attackers using a weapon. So on the streets, we're not the ones bringing in weapon. They are.

[ps1]

The problem I have with strikes is simple. No matter what the target is, the outcome is rather unpredictable. As a science geek, I love predictability. That's why I love grappling so much. It doesn't matter if they guy has a tough chin, high pain tolerance, is really strong ect... when I choke him...he sleeps. When I heel hook, their knee and/or ankle give out. When i take away their base, they fall over.

Moreover, with large amounts of training on the mat, you can predict the outcome of even small movements. A black belt in BJJ has an average of 2000 hours of training. The average Black Belt in other arts has about 500. 4 times the training will equal 4 times the ability to predict.

This is why I, personally, love grappling. This is why I am supremely confident in my ability. I've done it over and over again.

[JiuJitsuNation]

The problem I have with strikes is simple. No matter what the target is, the outcome is rather unpredictable. As a science geek, I love predictability. That's why I love grappling so much. It doesn't matter if they guy has a tough chin, high pain tolerance, is really strong ect... when I choke him...he sleeps. When I heel hook, their knee and/or ankle give out. When i take away their base, they fall over.

Moreover, with large amounts of training on the mat, you can predict the outcome of even small movements. A black belt in BJJ has an average of 2000 hours of training. The average Black Belt in other arts has about 500. 4 times the training will equal 4 times the ability to predict.

This is why I, personally, love grappling. This is why I am supremely confident in my ability. I've done it over and over again.

True story ps1. I used to hear stories of the Gracies(pick one) doing seminars then lining people up afterwards to roll. They would then inform everyone of how they would be tapped via arm bar on the left arm and then doing so one after the next with little effort. Everyone knew what was coming and couldn't stop it. I have reached that point regardless of size. (Untrained of course). But it's so easily done now that I can't help but feel the way you describe. How many truly feel that comfortable with what they do? I know the vast majority of MA have questions in their heads and I was one of them for a long time. No more. Extremely comfortable in my own skin with a very realistic knowledge of my abilities. I am just as excited about walking out on the mats for some Jitz today, as I was for my first class. I'm addicted to it. The confidence that comes with those endless hours of training is priceless.

[tonydee]

The problem I have with strikes is simple. No matter what the target is, the outcome is rather unpredictable. As a science geek, I love predictability. That's why I love grappling so much. It doesn't matter if they guy has a tough chin, high pain tolerance, is really strong ect... when I choke him...he sleeps. When I heel hook, their knee and/or ankle give out. When i take away their base, they fall over.

Just for the sake of presenting the obvious flip side (after which we're back to the old arguments and intangibles and the discussion won't go anywhere new in a hurry)...

Fighting's too complex for certainties. You might well know that from a certain position you have it in the bag and can predict and control the fight. Sounds like in your experience people have let you attain that controlling position and you've come to take it for granted. It's like saying "I can always win at chess (but before we play the opponent has to move their king four rows forwards of normal). Even if say a striker had only a 70% chance of ending the fight with _their_ favoured technique, if they can get a 70% chance of striking you with it as you come in for your show-stopper, then the odds are almost exactly back to 50/50. Having a 100% winning technique that you've got to get past a 70%/70% to apply doesn't mean you're not gambling... that's a fallacy of perception. Everybody gambles in a fight. You just have to shore up the odds at each stage of engagement to make it diminishingly unlikely that a whole chain of things can go wrong and culminate in a fight-stopping technique being used effectively against you. The individual gambles can have a multiplicative effect just as the more small bets you make in a casino, the surer you are to loose. The weight of small-risk, small-commitment, uncertain outcome attacks can overwhelm an all-in commitment-required coffin-filler (though you obviously want to seize on bigger mistakes with more commitment). And that goes on both sides... grappling and striking. Don't get too smug or you'll loose touch with the very real dangers of other styles.

Moreover, with large amounts of training on the mat, you can predict the outcome of even small movements. A black belt in BJJ has an average of 2000 hours of training. The average Black Belt in other arts has about 500. 4 times the training will equal 4 times the ability to predict.

A logical fallacy. If people train 4 times more hours _they can be expected to be better fighters_, all other things being equal. It proves absolutely nothing about which style or school is better if the students have put in the same amount of hours (in this case, it just reflects on what a black belt means to each school). And even that's too simplistic because some styles focus on ambitious long-term results (e.g. tai chi), where others focus on short-term results (e.g. a lot of kickboxing schools), so you can't work out which school or style is better by just drawing a line and saying "we'll compare after 500 hours", nor "2000 hours", nor "black belt", unless you actively define that as the end-goal of the students training: "I want to be as good as possible after 500 hours (but don't care if I've a solid foundation to keep getting better quickly after that)". Not much point.

Sadly, nothing's easy to measure, and it all goes round in little circles... (at least for Wally Jay) :-/.