Excellent article on MMA and tactical SD

**The Bad Place** · Posted On: 5/04/2005 2:30am

Is it not true, given the manner in which the motor-cortex reorganises itself, that one is much more likely to react with techniques they have trained recently if put in a high adrenaline situation?

**Meager** · Posted On: 5/04/2005 2:37pm

Originally Posted by Feryk

He is trying to use a real example from his work to demonstrate the point that an armbar (which would be a great move in an MMA match) was not the right move in this situation.

It's not a good example. He talks about self-defense and then to back it up uses an example (having to remove two violent drunks from a bar without damaging them too much) which is not only not self defense but also one in which most people who train MMA are not going find themselves.

**Feryk** · Posted On: 5/04/2005 2:55pm

Originally Posted by Meager

It's not a good example. He talks about self-defense and then to back it up uses an example (having to remove two violent drunks from a bar without damaging them too much) which is not only not self defense but also one in which most people who train MMA are not going find themselves.

So does that invalidate his position? I guess I'm asking whether or not you think he has a point.

**Meager** · Posted On: 5/04/2005 3:33pm

Originally Posted by Feryk

So does that invalidate his position? I guess I'm asking whether or not you think he has a point.

He uses alot of words and really doesn't say much.

Is MMA the be all and end all of self defense? No, but it's not meant to be and anyone who trains in it is going to be far ahead of the curve when it comes to defending themselves. He then goes onto a spiel about how training should be focused on tactics not techniques. I can't offer an opinion on this since he doesn't into any sort of detail (he's apparently saving those for the next article). Then there's a big long useless example which is a fun story but has nothing to do with self defense. He then finished up saying that striking and wrestling are more important in most self defense situations than submissions and I can't say that I disagree.

So I guess he sort of has a point, but he took way too long to get it out and I don't like how he spent so much time talking about tactics over technique only to offer nothing substantial on the subject in favor of a story about bouncing.

**Strong Machine** · Posted On: 5/04/2005 10:38pm

"Is it not true, given the manner in which the motor-cortex reorganises itself, that one is much more likely to react with techniques they have trained recently if put in a high adrenaline situation?"

I suppose.
I guess then one shouldn't train, eh? Because if the situation dictates face stomping and one has not recently actually face stomped in training, then ones selection of techniques will suffer when one needs it most.

Therefore(logically) it is the completely untrained who shall best survive a violent situation.

**Rashomon** · Posted On: 5/05/2005 12:10am

Originally Posted by MrMcFu

Duh everyone.

Restraining someone and trying to kick their ass are two different things. So is bouncing at a bar and being in a "streetfight".

Exactly.

"Fights" are also different from self defense situations.

I also found it interesting that the author started out talking about how MMA does not prepare you for self defense, then goes on to talk about how dangerous finishing submissions can be. If I'm in a "self defense" situation, meaning fighting for my life, not trying to bounce someone, I'm going to rip the guy's arm off. Why? Because it is a "self defense" situation - not a fight.

**Rashomon** · Posted On: 5/05/2005 12:15am

Originally Posted by Feryk

So does that invalidate his position? I guess I'm asking whether or not you think he has a point.

WTF *is* his position?? "Don't jump and pull guard in a street fight?" Is anyone *really* dumb enough to do that??

Of course you fight like you train. That seems to be an argument FOR MMA-style training.

**Bry** · Posted On: 3/02/2006 1:34pm

I agree he did make it sound like tactics where the most important thing, and then never really came out and said anything about them. I do believe tactics are a very important thing to teach if you are teaching self defense. Unfortunately they are also a very hard thing to teach and learn. You can look at some officers who have been sited for excessive use of force to see that either their training in tactics was deficeint or their ability to learn and apply the tactics where deficeint.
I believe that if you are going to teach self defense then you have a responsibility to teach tactics.
Also, I don't believe that every self defense situation is a life threatening situation. Yes it sounds good to say, yea I wouldn't have a problem breaking their arm, but when you are sitting in jail, or have a law suite pending that will hit your pocket book hard you might think differently.

Bry