[so-called "anti-grappling"] Why are people so gullible?

**strategist** · Posted On: 12/22/2005 2:54pm

Why are people so gullible, in your opinion? Many, many practitioners believe it's actually easy to defeat a grappler using eye pokes, fish hooking, small joint manipulation, biting etc.
They fail to understand that such "dirty" techniques are only useful if you know how to get into a strategically sound position. Otherwise, the grappler will beat the crap out of you no matter how "dirty" you fight.

Why do they fail to understand that? Because they don't try out their "defences" for real against grapplers.

But then again: why do people believe in bullsh+it when we are living in the "age of science"? Is it so difficult to "get empiricist"? :XXhesitan

**Phrost** · Posted On: 12/22/2005 3:04pm

For one, Empiricism isn't taught in schools in the US last time I checked, outside of the misc. philosophy course. At best, it's glossed over. Most people don't even understand the meaning of the word "theory" as it pertains to Science.

That, and you're fighting years and years of the media and popular culture portraying spinny back kicks and ninja flips as practical fighting methods. For example, Bruce Lee's shitty double leg takedown from Return of the Dragon:

**JFS USA** · Posted On: 12/22/2005 3:13pm

Originally Posted by strategist

Why are people so gullible, in your opinion? Many, many practitioners believe it's actually easy to defeat a grappler using eye pokes, fish hooking, small joint manipulation, biting etc.
They fail to understand that such "dirty" techniques are only useful if you know how to get into a strategically sound position. Otherwise, the grappler will beat the crap out of you no matter how "dirty" you fight.

Why do they fail to understand that? Because they don't try out their "defences" for real against grapplers.

But then again: why do people believe in bullsh+it when we are living in the "age of science"? Is it so difficult to "get empiricist"? :XXhesitan

Whole range of "reasons" ... mostly what is offered as rationale is rooted in people having a vested interest in maintaining whatever delusion - illusion they have bought into.

You are way wrong on the "position" end of it and I attribute your misunderstanding to your being Grappling based. What is the "Mantra" ... position then technique ... position then technique ... position ...

Most of what you term "dirty" are based on virtually -0- leverage requirements. I can hook your eye, nostril, ear canal, etc., with little to no regard for pre-positioning ... targets of opportunity ... take them as they appear.

If you want me to "prove" my position in person then go to the Maryland Throwdown thread and simply show-up, ask for me, and we'll take it out of the school as neither the school nor the TD format support the medium of proof you note, e.g., doing it for real.

I have no problems with doing it for real and will gladly **** you up big time so that you become firmly convinced your thinking is in error.

You note the "problem" but cite to the wrong solution(s). If the idiots you were referring to approached whatever they do in the realm of MA with even a modicum of honesty they would easily recognize and willingly admit to the limitations inherent in their approach. I call such a mindset "learning" and I continue to learn to this very day.

There is no "the" system - style - approach. There is only the individual in the moment and the burden is always 100% on the person. The BEAST

**PirateJon** · Posted On: 12/22/2005 3:20pm

Originally Posted by strategist

But then again: why do people believe in bullsh+it when we are living in the "age of science"? Is it so difficult to "get empiricist"? :XXhesitan

"Age of science" when people have to SUE to get schools to stop saying an invisible man in the sky made everything?

I wish it was an age of science.

**strategist** · Posted On: 12/22/2005 3:42pm

Originally Posted by JFS USA

If you want me to "prove" my position in person then go to the Maryland Throwdown thread and simply show-up, ask for me, and we'll take it out of the school as neither the school nor the TD format support the medium of proof you note, e.g., doing it for real.

R O T F L :tongue11:

**Lu Tze** · Posted On: 12/22/2005 4:17pm

Originally Posted by Skepti-Claus

That, and you're fighting years and years of the media and popular culture portraying spinny back kicks and ninja flips as practical fighting methods. For example, Bruce Lee's shitty double leg takedown from Return of the Dragon:

But, but.. he hits him in the nuts! THE NUTS YOU HEAR! My D&D 67th ed ruleset says groin strike defeats grapplers on a roll of 2+ on a d20.

I always thought that film was called "Way of the Dragon" btw, or is that just in Britain?

**JFS USA** · Posted On: 12/22/2005 4:33pm

Originally Posted by strategist

R O T F L :tongue11:

Careful you don't bruise your ***** rolling on the floor ... Noob.

Here, things are a bit different ... "proof" by way of "doing" is prized most. So far, you are -0- in the substance department ... Noob. The BEAST

**JFS USA** · Posted On: 12/22/2005 4:41pm

Originally Posted by PirateJon

"Age of science" when people have to SUE to get schools to stop saying an invisible man in the sky made everything?

I wish it was an age of science.

Yeah, go figure ... I mean we have the evolutionist 'tards who have a theory so gapped out it's beyond laughable. Sure ... the Dino. are "now" being depicted as being most like birds ... seems the "scientists" forgot to factor in things like body mass in relationship to ground density ... you know ... science.

Of course, "good science" clearly indicates we evolved from ape like creatures ... that's why there are still apes, monkeys, etc., ... right? They are just slow learners ... in fact, no fossil remains indicate "they" have made any progress ... at all.

Evolution ... Big Bang ... funny how all that "gas" ... and matter, which can neither be created nor destroyed, just happened to all of a sudden ... you know ... be there ... science ... hmmm ...

Reads like an old Steve Martin joke regarding how to bcome a millionaire ... "First, get a million dollars ..."

I go with a Divine Creator ... if it turns out to be Darwin in White Robe ... oh well ... Hell is no stranger to me ... The BEAST

**I aint punchy!?** · Posted On: 12/22/2005 4:59pm

Stick to MA JFS, your evolutionary-science-fu is weaker than a 13-year-old at a McDojo.

Originally Posted by JFS USA

Yeah, go figure ... I mean we have the evolutionist 'tards who have a theory so gapped out it's beyond laughable. Sure ... the Dino. are "now" being depicted as being most like birds ... seems the "scientists" forgot to factor in things like body mass in relationship to ground density ... you know ... science.

Dinosaurs aren't depicted as being like birds, except that people tend to try to fill in things that we have little evidence for with a bird-like-model, as birds are the only living descendants of dinosaurs. There is limited fossil evidence for this approach to. They aren't suggesting that dinosaurs had a similar bone density to birds in general. Rather the argument would be a typical bird's bone density, lung structure etc is an adaptation for conditions encountered for flight.

Originally Posted by JFS USA

Of course, "good science" clearly indicates we evolved from ape like creatures ... that's why there are still apes, monkeys, etc., ... right? They are just slow learners ... in fact, no fossil remains indicate "they" have made any progress ... at all.

The Earth went through a very long stage of having large quantities of jungle all over it. During this time a group of mammals with the capacity to brachiate did very well. Of course, good things don't last for ever, and as these jungles restricted, many of these species went extinct. A large number of ape-like mammals did very well. We are related to a group within this group, the hominids. Monkeys and apes are distantly related to hominids. They are like very distant cousins... and last I checked I didn't refer to my cousin as my grandfather, i.e. he isn't my direct ancestor. That picture you see of there being a line of ascent from chimps to man is complete and utter scientific BS, which still gets waved around by people of no real knowledge.

You should also know that evolution isn't about progress. Its about tracking your environment.

**Shuma-Gorath** · Posted On: 12/22/2005 5:14pm

Originally Posted by JFS USA

W
Most of what you term "dirty" are based on virtually -0- leverage requirements. I can hook your eye, nostril, ear canal, etc., with little to no regard for pre-positioning ... targets of opportunity ... take them as they appear.

Having allowed people to attempt to poke me in the eyes, rip at ears and jab at nerve centers during grappling, I can say that if you are in an inferior position those things don't have the desired effect and take away effort you should be spending trying to escape. Therefore, they are most definitely not zero-leverage. Nothing is.

Since no one who requested to use those moves has ever been in superior position on me I can't judge their effect, but then why would they do them anyway?