Greetings from Systema Spetsnaz (Russian Martial Art)!

I'm not arguing against any of that... I believe in basic fundamentals before anything else too.

My points are these. MMA/Ufc are not the only way or even the best method of being Street Effective.

Just because someone isn't a professional or competitive fighter this does not suddenly discredit them or their ability.

Pressure test, train hard. Spar, apply. I am all for these things.

Just because some people may not publicise or market as well as others doesn't mean they don't train in similar ways.

 

Then you didn't properly train beforehand.

You're in your car with your loved one, bleeding to death. There's a traffic jam in front of you, and a sidewalk wide enough for a car. Would you run over the pedestrians just to save your loved one?

When you are past caring that means you screwed up big time, and there is no "GOOD" future for you and your loved one, just worse and worst. If that happens that means your training sucked big time.

Good luck surviving a beatdown post-orbital bone fracture...

Don't compare the effect of a gloved hand in training with a bareknuckled strike intended to bash your head in so you look like a ninja turtle. Two VERY different things. The latter one might not care if it breaks his hand as long as you yell cowabunga and have a craving for pizza afterwards...

 

Facepalm. Way to take the points I've made prior to these posts on board.

 

Then what ruleset do you train under in order to be effective? MMA is a ruleset, UFC is a promotional organization.

I have to say, MMA is the SAFEST ruleset with the WIDEST latitude for technique variety, and a MMA fight/match is a SAFER venue than a street assault.

 

I don't think people choose to be assaulted in the street. Of course a sanctioned competition is safer than a live SD situation.

I believe in taking skills from effective arts and pressure testing them in a RBSD setting.

 

Then what is the RBSD ruleset?

 

RBSD = Reality Based Self Defence.

 

Yes, I know. WHAT ARE THE RULES is what I'm asking.

Limitations (Thou shall not grab the balls of the guy in the armor and wring them out, etc). Laws and context (Cannot floor the armored guy with a sucker punch while the talks going on due to Phil. laws, etc.) Regional culture (in certain parts of my country expect a guy who's "old enough to be circumcised" aka 12-13 and above to have a knife on his person, other areas will have the mob "joining in the fun" targeting the loser, etc.)

That's why I don't believe in "no rules". There are always rules, break them and get spanked or worse. What I believe in is "current LAWS and NORMS not applicable in this situation".

So I'm asking again: what ruleset does your RBSD train in?

 

To my knowledge there is no single method of training RBSD. I am sure there some recuring themes but RBSD is a very broad umbrella term, 2 different groups may both be RBSD based but may look quite different. It would be easier to specify what each individual does that bases their training in reality.

CrowZer0 what is it that you do to make your training "realistic" and how much of your training time is set aside for that?

 

I haven't done anything RBSD based in months. Other than maybe getting together with some friends. I haven't done much in the sense of RBSD. Due to access to good places and a recent move and juggling a new job. Usually playing out situations sometimes going full blown with some gear on or practicing certain techniques. Right now what I have time for is only maintenance. I'm up at 6 Monday to Saturday. Back by 10pm after a gym session on weekdays. I only really get to train any MA on Fridays and Saturdays. Recently I've broken my rules of Sunday rest days to incorporate some HIIT training. So recently not much at all. I haven't had many incidents in the street in the past few years but I did have a pretty major one last August and then I was trying to keep my head down. Stay away from trouble but I have now had to deal with two situations since July. One involving my brother as mentioned and another breaking up a fight when after a party some neighbours were about to kill each other.

I'm up early because of a new job where most days I'm. In the office 10 to 12 hours.

 

It doesn't really matter what the rules are. The point of RBSD is to train in a realistic scenario but as safely as possible so to minimise possible injury to the participants. The minute you start allowing people to stab each other in a class with a live blade when they're not looking, just because it's deemed more realistic someone might stab you that way, is the minute you're taking everything to a completely different extreme.

Fighting or sparring under specific rulesets may not prepare you for everything, but having pressure tested your skills in a live environment where someone else is trying to take your head off goes much further than no form of realistic physical resistance at all. Having been kicked in the groin many times (with a cup on fortunately) I can safely say I know to expect a low shot, or give one with effect.

And I don't train in any form of RBSD, for the record. Though I could certainly apply many techniques from the arts I train in, within a live RBSD scenario. All the gloves do is make it hurt a little less for the other guy and prolong the chance of knockout or serious injuries like cuts for the benefit of helping a fight last a little longer.

 

Just reviewed all your posts in this thread again. Let me say: if what you are referring to as "RBSD setting" is a TRAINING scenario (probably with an armored guy to beat), it is missing a very basic, YET very crucial element in interpersonal violence compared to MMA: motive.

It's very hard to fake motive, for the body betrays in many ways.

Who is the (training) bad guy? Part of the teaching staff? Does he have a purpose to beat your head in so you look like a ninja turtle? Or does he have a VESTED interest in keeping you safe? (well, you are a PAYING student).

Compare that to MMA. They have a base reason to make you look like Splinter's Sons: Ego. Whichever MA master said that in a dojo, one must leave ego at the door is full of beefcrap. Ego always plays a role, if one cannot harness its power, he comes in with a disadvantage. Pecking order is crucial in physical-dominated organizations.

Add to that actual competition. NOW they have more of a reason, one you can rarely find in in-group training. The same incentive can also be found in an actual criminal assault, which you agreed is more dangerous than MMA competition. Unless you are paying the RBSD guy MORE money to beat you up, you cannot elicit the same motive in normal training.

That's why when I referenced that orbital bone fracture, what I'm referring to is "hitting like you mean it". It makes for a very different effect (if you really got hit on the throat with that kind of intention you need a hospital visit), and the guy doing the technique will only proceed with it if his judgement deems it safe from retribution, so that means he will try to gain every possible advantage and strike for maximum DESIRED effect, something that is hard to elicit outside of competition(even in-house competition is way hell better at that than a prescribed "bad guy" scenario).

 

Then there are rules, and THEY DO MATTER. Unless you want to throw safety out the window. That's why I'm asking Crowzero the ruleset he uses. The differences those have compared to the MMA ruleset.

And by the way, forget stabbing for a while, punching another while he's not looking/aware is still in the realm of both SD and MMA. The only difference is that in MMA you know the guy's going to punch you, but you don't know when.

If in that scenario a guy cannot survive and thrive in that what more when other variables are leveraged against him(don't know WHO will attack)? That's why I'm wondering why Crowzero thinks that way about MMA compared to, let's say haniballistic. If you really are preparing in RBSD then you wouldn't nave big problems in MMA (the lower levels/amateur. The top tier are another matter). You say you can blitz an attacker into unconsciousness or you are training for that, do it in lower-level MMA or a similar competition format. They have pretty good incentives for keeping your own consciousness and taking the other guy's away.


My rule is: if your art/style has punches, kicks, throws, submissions,etc. which MMA also has and yet you can't hack it even in amateur MMA, stop teaching and go back to white belt. You don't have the your basics pat down enough.

Even kung fu guys have lei tai...

 

Already fought at amateur level, in Muay Thai and Kickboxing, in both decision and non decision bouts. I also fight professionally, for an English title, next month, so I'd say there's good incentive right there.

And to be honest, I've had sparring sessions with world class fighters that have been harder than the real thing.

I'm not blind to the realities of how a fight can start, end or what can happen inbetween. I am well aware that there are so many different scenarios and parameters that it would be impossible to truly prepare oneself for anything and everything. However what I can say, as an active fighter, is that I have a skill set that has been tested in live physical scenarios, both competitively and in practice, that allow me to see if my techniques have an effect or not on a fully resistant opponent who is actively trying to do the exact same thing in return. Whether that be competitive or not doesn't really matter, we both have an intent to do physical harm to one another and have to protect ourselves via defensive and offensive techniques that can realistically, and easily, be applied in a self defence scenario also.

 

I think you guys are arguing for the same thing - that regardless of how you train there is an abstraction and a set of unwritten rules. Hell, even within combat sports there are unwritten rules. You look like a real douchebag if you cross face the 15 year old girl who just started taking classes into oblivion, for example.

 

I have had enough confrontations and fights to know what does work for me and what doesn't.

I've competed when I was a kid in TKD point sparring. When I was studying DSD Kung Fu which initially came from Nam Pai Chuan it was made by people who held ranks in Judo, an Instructor who had won European freestyle fighting competitions, who rolled with the gracies, and fought in Cage Rage and other MMA tournaments. We sparred inter club with San Da/San Shou rules. After I moved to East London I fell in love with Thai boxing trained in JKO gym before moving to Bradford, training in Muay Thai continued I taught basic self defence classes. For uni members, started a society where we would also train together and mix around ideas. Peace Studies at the University of Bradford. I was lucky enough to have met an Israeli who studied Krav Maga, but was a pacifist himself. A Kyokushin black belt from Lithuania who trained with a knockdown champion. We and various others were we would train together in each others styles visit ACCA gyms together and get humbled. I've bounced during uni. I've fought quite a bit. I've even been to Holmeswood and came across bare knuckle boxing.

I'm no expert, I'm not a badass but I have trained enough to know what works for me. What doesn't. I've come across and trained under various places and gone full blown in many a different rule settings.

I thought about competing when I was younger try to make it professional. But I decided against it. I lack consistent discipline and I was too unstable at the time to give. It 100% I focused instead on what I thought I needed that was Uni and a career. Stuck with Thai when I got back to London and some Bjj here and there so I could get a grasp and some perspective on it. I suck on the ground. But it didn't really appeal to me.

So pressure testing and competition is not something that I am in any way against. My weight class is hard to. Come by, I've always been big. I started powerlifting in Uni. At my peak was around 130kg. I'm currently around 106, lost a lot of muscle and a lot of fat too.

 

Fighter B has been trained to pull his punches and simulate street lethal attacks. Because otherwise, he'd be seriously injurying his training partners. So what about his trained conditions? When instinct takes over, why does Fighter B not default to precisely what he did in training? Why is fighter A the only automaton?

To my mind, a skilled boxer selecting the Adam's apple versus the chin or a muay thai fighter targeting the knee in stead of the thigh is making a smaller leap than someone who has rehearsed countless street lethal attacks, but not with realistic timing, range, and power.

Come to it, what's the huge advantage of options? If you've actually knocked people out with a good solid jab-cross, what's to prevent you from doing likewise to a non-conditioned, non-trained assailant? How many options do you need? A handful of good, solid, well-trained techniques. Every self-defense authority I've seen says you'll fall back on well-trained gross motor skills.

 

Other than a sparring situation there is no need for fighter B to pull any punches. When hitting a bag or mitts when does someone need to pull punches? Visualisation and intent behind targeting and putting that into practice can go a long way than always training to aim for the head and the torso and being mentally conditioned to Not do things like go for the throat or the back of the head.

My argument is not against what a boxer or Thai fighter would do or even an MMA fighter in training. It's to do it without restrictions and with the mindset and options of adding more.

Motor skills are exactly what I think would benefit someone not restricted by rules. A good job cross can and is very effective and can work. But in a situation where you need as little risk as possible and be as effective as you can be. Why gamble with something that may backfire? Someone may be knocked out with a jab cross one time but may not again as easily the next. It's not as guaranteed. I can think of a few people who can take a hit to the face and carry on fighting. I can't think of any coming back by a well placed hit to the throat or groin.

 

So… essentially the only thing that you're advocating is that fighters imagine they are hitting someone's throat when they do pad work? That doesn't seem like a substantive change in method. It certainly doesn't make me think that there will be a great gulf in practical efficacy when conditions are changed. If they're still sparring, they're still practicing not going for the throat or the back of the head, quite probably in their most adrenalized (is that a word?) and most pressure tested state.

There's every possibility that a punch to the throat would kill someone, and every possibility that that will result in conviction. How is that risk of backfiring neglected? There's also every possibility that someone just covers up and it's not a problem. Most fist fights don't end with either a groin kick or a throat punch. Is that because people don't visualize enough, or is it perhaps because human beings aren't easy to kill or disable?

 

But you've just gotten finished telling me that I'm underestimating the conditioning that goes on in training. Now you're telling me that someone who's only used to hitting pads full force and trained to pull punches on a real person will suddenly be able to flip that dynamic under the most intense conditions available. The very same conditions under which you insist the other guy will revert back to his ingrained training responses.

A jab is about as low-risk as it gets. There's no risk-free fighting.