I prefer to have more options to "finish it". Legally, ethically, morally and, what is more important (to me) I want to be free to choose how to "finish it".

I don't see how a system where there's not alternative to t3h deadly can be used as a self defense method even if it works.

For war, could be in some cases, but not as civilian self defense nor LE defensive tactics.


And are signed by Phil Elmore himself.

All good points. I'm not trying to convert you to Sna-fu, although that might be fun; I am pointing out that it's impossible to fairly test a literally no-holds-barred fighting style via friendly sparring.

Your Sna-Fu guys seem to believe that thier willingness to do anything at all to win/survive a fight would be an advantage to them. On the surface it's a good thing but It's flawed becouse the next man could be even more ruthless than they are and a better fighter.

That's the general vibe I'm getting anyway.

Any fighter would be disadvantaged up against a more ruthless and better opponent in a no-rules situation; surely the more ruthless one is, the higher up that totem pole one is likely to be.

You are still bound by the legal requirements of the use of force continum. Saying in court, "Well, yes Your Honour, I could have choked him into unconciousness from that position. But he was going to rape my little sister. He deserved to be maimed." is a surefire way to get yourself a roommate named Bubba.

Yep. That's the risk they're prepared to take.


So the time to pressure test RBSD is when your life is in danger? Forgive the rest of us if we want some sort of validation of a techniques effectiveness before we trust our lives to it.

Oh, no; the Sna-fu guys do pressure test, again, within the bounds of reasonable safety. They grapple to a decent level, their punch defense is based on boxing, all those good things. They also use impact suits (similar to those seen earlier in the thread) for full-contact scenario training.

Again, though, because this point may be in danger of getting lost in the imaginary world that is Sna-Fu; under whose rules are they supposed to spar in order to satisfactorily test their style?

Oh, no; the Sna-fu guys do pressure test, again, within the bounds of reasonable safety. They grapple to a decent level, their punch defense is based on boxing, all those good things.

You just shot yourself in the foot.

In order to actually grapple at "a decent level" they would need to learn grappling. Same goes for their "punch defense" being based on boxing. You cannot train the defense without learning the attack. In order to train to defend an armbar attempt, you need a training partner who knows how to do an armbar.

What you have actually described, therefore, is an MMA class with the "add dirt" philosophy. It is not the martial art based on "illegal" moves that you first postulated. As such, the delivery system is testable in a sparring situation.

You just shot yourself in the foot.

In order to actually grapple at "a decent level" they would need to learn grappling. Same goes for their "punch defense" being based on boxing. You cannot train the defense without learning the attack. In order to train to defend an armbar attempt, you need a training partner who knows how to do an armbar.

What you have actually described, therefore, is an MMA class with the "add dirt" philosophy. It is not the martial art based on "illegal" moves that you first postulated. As such, the delivery system is testable in a sparring situation.

ToMAYtoes, toMAHtoes ... what seems to you like MMA + dirty tricks, the disciples of Sna-fu see as a set of high percentage, fight ending techniques - SO DANGEROUS THEY HAVE ALL BEEN BANNED FROM MMA! - supported by an efficient delivery system. As I said right at the start:


At best, I could restrict my sparring to what amounts to boxing and wrestling, but see, that wouldn't actually be a test of Sna-fu.

ToMAYtoes, toMAHtoes ... what seems to you like MMA + dirty tricks, the disciples of Sna-fu see as a set of high percentage, fight ending techniques - SO DANGEROUS THEY HAVE ALL BEEN BANNED FROM MMA! - supported by an efficient delivery system. As I said right at the start:

Well they're not high percentage fight ending tehcniques but anyway, these guys just sound like the Krav, arguably the most tested RSBD but still too LARPY on the whole.

ToMAYtoes, toMAHtoes ... what seems to you like MMA + dirty tricks, the disciples of Sna-fu see as a set of high percentage, fight ending techniques - SO DANGEROUS THEY HAVE ALL BEEN BANNED FROM MMA! - supported by an efficient delivery system.

And I maintain that a delivery system is never going to be efficient without hard contact, full speed sparring against a resisting opponent.

ToMAYtoes, toMAHtoes ... what seems to you like MMA + dirty tricks, the disciples of Sna-fu see as a set of high percentage, fight ending techniques - SO DANGEROUS THEY HAVE ALL BEEN BANNED FROM MMA! - supported by an efficient delivery system. As I said right at the start:


What alot of these guys dont get is that they are not banned from MMA because they are instant fight enders, but because they can do lasting damage without the control element of submissions etc.

They ARE NOT illegal because they would just end so many fights instantly and the show would be over and no money made.

No matter how you rationalize it, at the end of the day if your whole game plan is based upon a few dirty tricks and you come across a skilled fighter, you WILL BE in a world of **** when it doesnt do the fight ending damage you have been hoping it will do.

Would it work to a much higher precentage on a unskilled attacker ? prolly so, but then again so would punches and you dont have to be a slobbering lunatic to do them and why would you want to on someone you could just punch vs maim ?.

Dirty tactics are like two types of gunslingers, one group twirls thier guns and says " i gotta a gun, i gotta gun...i dont need to know how to aim and shoot...i got a gun"....the other group knows they have a gun and can twirl it around if they chose to after they shot you a few good times.

And yes, in a court of law it is going to be much easier to convince a jury som jack hole attacked you and you punched him in defence rather than "yeah..he attacked me and i bit a portion of his face off, ripped his ear half off..gouged out this mans eye etc.

The only thing that would justify this is if he had a knife or was literally trying to KILL you, at which point you should be running and not trying to hold on to his skull so you can scoop his interior out like a pumpkin on halloween.

its never good to be a one trick pony...period.

This kind of reminds me of an article I was reading in BB mag. The premise was that you should take your attackers sight out in order to distract him. This included using your lead hand to claw the eyes or simply cover his eyes then using the rear hand to deliver a punch.

The entire time I was reading it I was thinking if you can reach his eyes to claw them why not just punch him in the face it would probably end the fight a lot sooner

And I maintain that a delivery system is never going to be efficient without hard contact, full speed sparring against a resisting opponent.

Sna-fu* guys throw down! They grapple and train realistic strike defenses, full contact, live-resistance-Thornton-etc.

AND - this is the point that may be in danger of being lost - their system includes techniques that are too dangerous to be tested in friendly sparring. So, again, how can we fairly test that system short of happy-slapping Sna-fu* masters in the streets?

* Disclaimer for those who may not be paying strict attention; Sna-fu only exists in my imagination.

What alot of these guys dont get is that they are not banned from MMA because they are instant fight enders, but because they can do lasting damage without the control element of submissions etc.

They ARE NOT illegal because they would just end so many fights instantly and the show would be over and no money made.

No matter how you rationalize it, at the end of the day if your whole game plan is based upon a few dirty tricks and you come across a skilled fighter, you WILL BE in a world of **** when it doesnt do the fight ending damage you have been hoping it will do.

Would it work to a much higher precentage on a unskilled attacker ? prolly so, but then again so would punches and you dont have to be a slobbering lunatic to do them and why would you want to on someone you could just punch vs maim ?.

Dirty tactics are like two types of gunslingers, one group twirls thier guns and says " i gotta a gun, i gotta gun...i dont need to know how to aim and shoot...i got a gun"....the other group knows they have a gun and can twirl it around if they chose to after they shot you a few good times.

And yes, in a court of law it is going to be much easier to convince a jury som jack hole attacked you and you punched him in defence rather than "yeah..he attacked me and i bit a portion of his face off, ripped his ear half off..gouged out this mans eye etc.

The only thing that would justify this is if he had a knife or was literally trying to KILL you, at which point you should be running and not trying to hold on to his skull so you can scoop his interior out like a pumpkin on halloween.

its never good to be a one trick pony...period.

I've already answered all of these points.

I've already answered all of these points.

No, what you have done is show up on page 32 with a made up **** name to try an lump all the to deadly bullshit into.

Sna-fu* guys throw down! They grapple and train realistic strike defenses, full contact, live-resistance-Thornton-etc.

AND - this is the point that may be in danger of being lost - their system includes techniques that are too dangerous to be tested in friendly sparring. So, again, how can we fairly test that system short of happy-slapping Sna-fu* masters in the streets?

What you are describing is boxing/MT/BJJ/Wrestling with 'dirty tricks' added.

I still maintain that 99% of their art is positional dominance regardless of what they believe. They are testing 99% of their art by training in an alive manner and focusing on positional dominance. The other 1% (eyes/groin/mouth/etc...) are opportunistic techniques based on obtaining positional dominance.

How do they test it? They have always tested 99% of their art if they train the positional dominance in an alive manner. They train the other 1% with the assistance of padding/protection.

Arts that focus their training on the dirty tricks (I'll call it Poo-Fu) are missing the positional dominance part of the equation. Poo-Fu practitioners think that the dirty tricks along with some wrist/joint locks will give them an edge.

The major fallacy here is that Poo-Fu people CAN train part of their art (anything that might give them positional dominance) in an alive manner but choose not too. As a result, they have 1% positional dominance training and 99% dirty trick training. Poo-Fu people would rather say their art as a whole is too dangerous because it contains dirty tricks.

I don't think eye gouges, groin strikes, fish hooks, ear boxing, etc... are unworkable. You need positional dominance to make them work.

As a result, the Sna-Fu guys are working 99% of their art under pressure, and with the use of protection, can reasonably train the other 1%.

What you are describing is boxing/MT/BJJ/Wrestling with 'dirty tricks' added.

I still maintain that 99% of their art is positional dominance regardless of what they believe. They are testing 99% of their art by training in an alive manner and focusing on positional dominance. The other 1% (eyes/groin/mouth/etc...) are opportunistic techniques based on obtaining positional dominance.

How do they test it? They have always tested 99% of their art if they train the positional dominance in an alive manner. They train the other 1% with the assistance of padding/protection.

Arts that focus their training on the dirty tricks (I'll call it Poo-Fu) are missing the positional dominance part of the equation. Poo-Fu practitioners think that the dirty tricks along with some wrist/joint locks will give them an edge.

The major fallacy here is that Poo-Fu people CAN train part of their art (anything that might give them positional dominance) in an alive manner but choose not too. As a result, they have 1% positional dominance training and 99% dirty trick training. Poo-Fu people would rather say their art as a whole is too dangerous because it contains dirty tricks.

I don't think eye gouges, groin strikes, fish hooks, ear boxing, etc... are unworkable. You need positional dominance to make them work.

As a result, the Sna-Fu guys are working 99% of their art under pressure, and with the use of protection, can reasonably train the other 1%.

Good answer :icon_chee

The ancient masters of Sna-fu would beg to differ only on the subject of proportions (it's closer to 70% positional dominance through lively training and 30% Poo-fu via protective equipment and similar necessary safety compromises).

Still, that differential is crucial. Like I said way back on page 33 (note, dig7six) Sna-fusians would happily agree that they can spar under friendly conditions. However, they'd take exception to the idea that friendly sparring is an accurate and fair test of their system; at best, it's a test of the 70% of Sna-fu that can be equated to combat sports. The remaining 30% is always going to be hypothetical outside of a life-or-death scenario (q.v. military simulations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_simulation)).

Bonus points awarded to anyone who knows what SNAFU means without looking it up on Wikipedia.

Supposedly in mideval China, the ancient masters tested their deadly techniques on deathrow inmates.

Just saying...


*scampers off*

Supposedly in mideval China, the ancient masters tested their deadly techniques on deathrow inmates.

Just saying...


*scampers off*

Ill pay for that footage !