Please tell me I'm not wrong

Discussion in 'Self Defence' started by Hauk, Jan 31, 2016.

  1. Hauk

    Hauk Valued Member

    I saw this on tumblr with over 700,000 notes and lots of praise:

    [​IMG]

    I'm no authority on martial arts. I was into it a bit for a period of time but at this point in my life I'm happy to watch other people beat each other in the ring.

    But surely this can't be right can it? I know that self defence is about deterrence, de-escalation etc. but lets just talk about the physical aspect for now. This has got to be wrong on so many levels right? Or is everything I know about martial arts and self defence wrong?
     
  2. Dean Winchester

    Dean Winchester Valued Member

    You keep saying it's wrong but haven't said how it's wrong.

    So before others chip in why don't you let us know what you think about it?
     
  3. Dean Winchester

    Dean Winchester Valued Member

    Personally I think she's stupid letting a Walker get that close....
     
  4. Hauk

    Hauk Valued Member

    I wrote this longer thing but got logged out for some reason?

    In short the whole thing relies on your attacker reacting exactly the way you want them to in every step and if he doesn't react in the exact absurd and specific way shown every single time, you're a goner.

    What martial art teaches you to go into the foetal position in order to execute a very slow and easily mitigated attack? If you've somehow managed to headbutt someone squarely in the chin with the full force of your legs and then knee them in the face, why do you need to stop and axe kick him on the ground?

    What if he doesn't just stand there and not react to what you're doing like some mook in a movie who wants to be taken out?

    How much information would you like? I could go on. It's just that hundreds of thousands of people seem to think that this is valid information. It seems ridiculous to me, I was wondering what people who actually know what they're talking about think of it.

    e:

    - in the likely event that you don't land the headbutt squarely, what happens then?

    - What if he moves even slightly or puts you in a headlock, or freight trains you, or throws you around?

    - what if he doesn't crouch over in that weirdly specific way when you kick him in the groin? What if he's under the influence of something/full of adrenalin and doesn't react to the pain in that specific way? What if he reacts to it in another way? What if you don't quite get your target?

    Martial arts are full of what ifs, that's why you don't put yourself in horrible strategic positions and expect everything to go exactly as planned.
     
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2016
  5. Ben Gash CLF

    Ben Gash CLF Valued Member

    I don't think it's terrible, I just don't think it's very good.
    It shows that the best way to defend yourself if you're not trained is to hit and keep hitting, which is true on a physical and psychological level.
     
  6. Ben Gash CLF

    Ben Gash CLF Valued Member

    Then you knee him in the groin?
     
  7. Hauk

    Hauk Valued Member

    I don't think that information was conveyed anywere. It's saying "If you do this, this will happen, and if you do this, this will happen". If it conveyed the information you are talking about and didn't litterally tell you to start in the foetal position, It might be valid. It depends.

    But you're already in a terrible position. You could be in a headlock by now, he might take counter measures. He's in a good position to do so. she's not anchored to the ground very well on step 3 and he has access to her head/spine. You could reply to this by saying you could do something else, but that information is not represented in the graphic, and the whole point self defence is to put yourself in a good position (assuming you can't run or de-esculate etc.).
     
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2016
  8. Simon

    Simon Administrator Admin Supporter MAP 2017 Koyo Award

    There's both good and bad.

    Ben is correct in regard to hit and keep hitting.

    Don't be a victim is the message and no attacker wants someone who fights back.

    It's very hard to do without a strong voice and in my experience getting that voice across is really difficult, even for guys.

    A strong commanding "back off" seems easy, but it isn't.

    The poster assumes awareness has failed at the attack is now on.

    It's easy to pick that apart and say that awareness has failed, but had awareness worked the poster isn't necessary, yet you can't rely on awareness alone and some physical skills may be necessary.

    It's a little long winded for me, but it's no good saying headbutt someone, expect it to work and you'll be fine.

    All in all there's it's to simplistic to pull the message apart.

    A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing, yet a simple message just may save someone one day.
     
  9. Prizewriter

    Prizewriter Moved on

    It's awful but then again there are literally hundreds of clubs teaching this stuff day in and day out. Another critique would be it assumes the defendant and attacker are similar in height. What if the women is 5'2" and the zombie is 6'8"?

    As for it's popularity on tumblr, my brief study on tumblr taught me that it's more about being seen to like or share something that is popular more than anything else. I wouldn't look to the online behaviours of Gen Y (of which I am part, btw) and expect to find anything of any depth or much that us beyond self involvement. I suspect for most people sharing this, it's more important to be seen on social media to support something that makes them seem socially responsible (this is known as social capital) than it is about encouraging women's self defence. Anyone who wants to genuinely help people learn about self defence should challenge this and offer more pragmatic advice IMO.
     
  10. Ben Gash CLF

    Ben Gash CLF Valued Member

    You'll also be in a terrible situation if you do nothing.
    If someone's intitiated an attack at close range then you'll likely be in a terrible situation regardless. Manipulation of angles and posture requires training. Like I said, for the untrained just hit and hit.
     
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2016
  11. Hauk

    Hauk Valued Member

    That may be part of the issue but I don't think it's just that: I think people genuinely want to spread useful information but don't have the knowledge to understand if something is legitimate or not.

    I wouldn't challenge the graphic head on. I'd rather spread legitimate information so that people can know bad information when they see it. Go for the cause not the symptom in other words.

    I talked about something like that in a cringeworthy post a while ago. The problem is I don't really have the experience to make something like that. I just think that it would be good if there was some accessible, well written and reasonably comprehensive information around about the fundamentals of self defence. Not to teach a martial art, just some fundamental things about personal safety and ways to identify legitimate information/training.

    I know there are things around, but the way they're written and the formate they're in, aren't really relevant to a wider audience and the information tends to be scattered imo.

    I don't think we can really give it credit for things that aren't explicitly conveyed in the graphic? As people who know about martial arts, we may read these things into it, but the audience we're talking about have no knowledge whatsoever, and are litterally just going to look at it as is.

    e: eh maybe this edit wasn't neccessary.

    The attack was initiated at long range. A full arms length. The posture you've been told to use is the foetal position. There are many, many steps to this, which you are unlikely to remember from some info graphic that's been read months ago. I agree with what you're saying to some extent (although "hitting" may be problematic at close range/when you're being grabbed) it's just I don't think the graphic satisfies the parameters you've set.
     
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2016
  12. Ben Gash CLF

    Ben Gash CLF Valued Member

    I think you're setting unrealistic parameters for the graphic, and you're wanting it to convey stuff it can't possibly do.
    It doesn't show foetal position, it shows a bob.
    If his front foot is less than six inches from her's, in assault terms it's a close range start.
    How is an untrained person going to do anything but hit at close range? Anything else requires A LOT of training.
     
  13. Hauk

    Hauk Valued Member

    Can I ask what parameters I've set and what specifically is the information I want it to convey that it can't?

    Regardless of what the position is called and whether it has some applications in some circumstances, I don't think the situation in step no. 2 and 3. is something you should be telling people to get into. I don't think it's tactically sound.

    The info about what close range is, is good to know. I'll take it on board.

    I'm not saying don't hit at close range. I just don't think it should be done the way that's depicted.
     
  14. Ben Gash CLF

    Ben Gash CLF Valued Member

    You're wanting it to convey sophisticated tactical detail. There is no "perfect quick self defence". Like I say, this isn't terrible, but it's not great either.
    What especially do you think is tactically unsound about 2 and 3 beyond "if it doesn't work you might have problems"? Again you can't teach sound defensive structure without training, so anything is going to create problems if it doesn't come off. A rising headbutt is a fairly high percentage move for an untrained person against an oncoming attacker though.
    What would you advocate for someone with no training in said scenario?
     
  15. Hauk

    Hauk Valued Member

    Not true. I've said repeatedly that I don't disagree with what you think these things should convey. But there are two issues:

    - I don't believe that this graphic conveys what you believe it to.

    - Don't belive what the graphic is imo conveying to be sound advice.

    This:
    I think this is also important to note:
    I still think you can teach people not to bob when someone's trying to grab you. I still don't understand why this is a good course of action. You can still teach someone to do basic things without going into heavy detail.

    I don't know. I think you've missed the point of why I’ve made this thread. I've said that I'm not qualified. I've asked for people's opinions on the graphic. People who know more than me.

    I wasn't specifically asking for people to clash horns with in a debate. I will still pick apart and scrutinise what's said to me though: That's not a way of saying I'm better than anyone or that I know more, I just want to thoroughly understand what's been presented too me and to pick things apart as thoroughly as any attacker would.


    I don't understand how step 1 to 3 would work (or the rest for that matter). From personal experience there are two ways you can encounter techniques that seem counter intuitive: There are these silly little things like not bending your head back when someone throws a punch at you, things that your survival instincts tell you to do, but you train out of it and you understand why and it's all fine in the end.

    Then there's cases where you know, with every fiber of your being that if you take a certain course of action, it will end badly. That doesn't mean that whatever you're being told to do doesn't ever work, or that that someone else couldn't do it, or that it might not work in some circumstances. It just means that as it stands, with the information you have, it's not going to work. From personal experience I think this is the type of circumstance where you should listen to your gut.

    At the moment, with the information I have the graphic falls into the latter category for me. If that's going to change, the discussion needs to turn into a technical discussion rather than us trying to one up each other.
     
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2016
  16. Ben Gash CLF

    Ben Gash CLF Valued Member

    It's one of the standard methods of countering this type of attack in wrestling and Muay Thai and an often taught entry strategy against a taller/rangier opponent in boxing.
    She's on the balls of her feet driving forward in 3, how is she "not anchored to the ground"? Personally I'd rather see the other leg forward as well, but it's not a deal breaker.
    What's horrible about her position? The illustration is a little expanded but she's negated his range advantage, and inside his arms with my head into his neck is exactly where I'd want to be in that situation.
    and she has access to his which she didn't have before.
    What's there to understand? As he advances with his hands extended she changes level, enters under his arms and then once inside comes back up and headbutts him.
    No-one's trying to one up you, you just keep saying "it won't work" or "t's bad" without really offering any better solutions. This is negative criticism and isn't especially helpful.
    For a woman with no training defending a two armed straight grab is tricky because the range disadvantage she experiences means that she can't just attack over or under the arms as you or I would. Angular footwork requires training. As I said at the start, the untrained person's best hope is to attack and keep attacking. The easiest way for a shorter person to achieve this is to enter under the arms.
     
  17. Ben Gash CLF

    Ben Gash CLF Valued Member

    [ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vdcx4U0foho"]Wrestling Moves KOLAT.COM Level Change Post Counter - YouTube[/ame]
     
  18. ap Oweyn

    ap Oweyn Ret. Supporter

    Would an attacker HAVE to have both arms up in that position for the headbutt to be a valid counter? Seems to me that his current (unrealistic) position makes the head butt a lower percentage counter than it would be if he were (more realistically) trying to chat her up and then made a sudden advance on her. Whether he takes a haymaker, has his arms (seemingly) casually at his sides, or looks like he's going in for a harmless (if unwelcome) peck on the cheek, driving your head into his face seems equally likely to connect.

    You say "what if it misses?" Well, what if a jab in boxing misses? Trainers still teach jabs. Books on boxing will still show the application of a jab, cross, hook combination. Yes, it might be different because nobody goes into boxing thinking they'll be ring worthy after watching a picture sequence. And ideally EVERYONE would take a proper course on this stuff. (Well, ideally, they wouldn't need to.) But for what it is, it doesn't seem unreasonable. No crescent kicking a gun out of anyone's hands. Just a series of reasonably straightforward and not far fetched movements.

    And unless you have an alternative more realistic or palatable than "do nothing" or "commit to years of training"...

    Is it unlikely to work out like it does in the picture? Sure. Do we know roughly what the same scenario would look like if the woman did sweet sod all? Tragically, we kind of do.
     
  19. philosoraptor

    philosoraptor carnivore in a top hat Supporter

    I think what you're running into is the misconception that a lot of people have that martial arts and self defense are about learning some moves. There's no way that seeing a comic book illustration will prepare someone adequately for hand to hand combat. I can show you a picture of an arm bar, but unless you drill it a few hundred times, it's not going to sink and it's not going to be effective. These moves are not necessarily contingent upon my opponent allowing me targets of opportunity - through training you learn to create opportunity.
     
  20. Latikos

    Latikos Valued Member

    Those are possibilities in every situation you could end up, once it got physical.

    Most MAs need quite some training until you can actually use them.
    And this training has to be organized in a way, that you can do *something*, once the other resists.

    I don't think that this graphic is the non-plus-ultra, but at least it shows *something*, that can be done.

    For example it at least shows, that you have to keep the opponent bent-over when you want to knee him (in the graphic she uses the crook of the arm; personally I prefer the neck).
    That's actually something, that comes as a surprise to a lot of people.
    Literally every newbie I trained with doing Hiza-Geri has to be reminded: Keep me bent over!


    I'm not sure but maybe you give that graphic too much credit.
    It's not supposed to show: Look at this and you will be invincible!

    I think it's more about: Here, look: Fight back, try to resist and defend yourself! Don't just stand there and let this Walker bite you!

    Nobody in his right mind, martial artist or not (Non martial artists aren't stupid either after all ;) ), will look at this graphic and think himself invincible; usually people are able to think and see: It's a way, a possibility, to try and defend myself.
    Most likely they know, that something might happen anyway, that a punch misses his goal or that a kick might end up somewhere else - yet, people still learn to punch and kick.
    Often resistance is more then enough and the attacker will let go, because you're not the easy victim, they expected you to be.
     

Share This Page