PDA

View Full Version : Marc Scott RBSD vs. Sport Articles



Pages : [1] 2

Red Elvis
3/05/2005 8:33pm,
Was just perusing the Internet and found these two interesting articles by Marc Scott whom some of us are familiar with on these boards. (One article follows the other on the same page.)

Iím not going to post the whole thing here but hopefully these articles will lead to some good discussion regarding RBSD and MMA type training mix which is somewhat of an interest of mine. As some of you may know I train or have trained in a variety of martial arts over the years and have also been in both the military and unfortunately in numerous street fights. So I always find myself playing devils advocate in conversations regarding reality versus sport going back and forth from one side to the other. Now, personally I feel that sport training (MMA) does lend itself to reality in a fairly large degree and that there is also knowledge to be gained from reality type training such as weapons training mindset/technique, combat psychology, de-escalation, the law and the use of different tactics for different scenarios. I am not however a huge fan of what I would call 80% of RBSD training/dogma or the da3dly Phil. These articles are damn close to my thoughts on the subject. Enjoy. EDIT: (p.s. If you're over the whole RBSD thing then don't read it or post... I already know it's a old subject but these were interesting.)

Click here for both articles. (http://www.realfighting.com/issue8/scott.html)

Here are some good quotes:


The very things Ken talks about such as multiple attackers, weapons, environmental concerns etc. are the very motivators for taking cues from sport fighters and looking at their training methods to see how they operate. I would wager that a sport fighter who has never had a vest and duty belt on would still be in a better position and have a better chance of disengaging from a ground fight to avoid those things mentioned than the combatives trained patrol officer who has worn a belt every day since he started on the job. Taking the training method of the sports fighter and applying it to the training of the officer while training in full gear would only better prepare him.


No training will represent the totality of what is faced in the real world. The artillery man may simply view all these discussion as a moot point because it never takes into account the use of shells, the sniper may feel all of this is unimportant as it doesn't take into account 1000 yards, etc. It is too easy to not see the forest for all the trees in this case. We cannot train for the totality we can only train for a small piece of the many things that may face us.


There is though an extremely important part of ground fighting that both schools of thought should agree on. That is the importance of learning how not to go to the ground and how to get back up when you find yourself there. Being on the ground in a fight is not the place you want to be. As discussed earlier you often don't get the chance to dictate and you may find yourself on the ground and it is here that having ground fighting skills will come into play. You may know 1001 dirty tricks, including biting, scratching and poking eyes, but the person on top can do all the same and more. You need more than simply tricks you need to have an ability to dominate position. The place you learn to dominate position in by grappling in class on a mat. I guarantee you that if you can dominate in the class you can dominate on the street. You do not need to ignore the eye jabs, and biting, etc. you simply need to see these as secondary to the situation at hand.


Those of us who teach RBSD have to take into account that the sport fighters' primary purpose is not to fight on the street, and yet they manage, all things being equal, to do far better than the RBSD proponent in unarmed combat. By and large they are unprepared for weapons, and though they seldom work against multiple attackers, they still seem to completely dominate the world of hand to hand combat.

Red Elvis
3/05/2005 8:37pm,
Another little diddy to ponder:

A buddy of mine who started training with me back in í94 is now a police officer in Long Beach, CA. I would say this is a difficult beat as he regularly is forced to go into less than desirable areas. He has told me multiple stories of him using his training in real life and a lot of it comes from our MA training and not what he was shown in the academy. Does this mean the academy stuff doesnít work? No. What it means is that his ground control skills, clinch skills, throwing skills and martial arts attributes such as balance, agility and awareness are further enhanced when added to his weapons retention, cuffing, stick work etc. A favorite of his to control a resisting opponent on the ground while cuffing is a BJJ modification of knee on the spine as opposed to on the belly. He says youíd be amazed how fast they calm down with 200 lbs of force directly on their spine. He's also thrown people for what might be considered an ippon (sp?).

:munky2:

Strong Machine
3/05/2005 9:52pm,
"weapons training mindset/technique, combat psychology"

I'll accept the weapons.But as far as combat psychology...I used to get so emotional during heated potentially violent situations that I suffered all the effects you hear about...time distortion, the feeling of unreality etc.
Now after years of Grappling and Kickboxing when someone gets in my face out in the real world the only emotion I get is mild amusement.
Boxing boxers is scary.Boxing scrubs on the street is fun.
Of course I'm not bullet proof(yet!) so I probably SHOULD be scared.But try as I might the threat of violence just doesn't do it.And I find this is true of many sportfighters.

Remember these key words.It isn;t what you train for.
It is how you train.
They train for the street in RBSD.
But real violence is alot more like what you see going on in a sportfighting school.
It is a far closer simulation that listening to a highschool drop-out who bounced for 6 months tell you about the psychology of crminals.
Listening as an egomaniac rants is NOT training.
As for the desescalation thing...

In the history of man no one has ever walked into a martial arts school or RBSD course seeking to learn what to do AFTER violence has taken place.
No one.
Not one person ever.
I did a study.

Red Elvis
3/05/2005 10:37pm,
I'll accept the weapons. But as far as combat psychology...I used to get so emotional during heated potentially violent situations that I suffered all the effects you hear about...time distortion, the feeling of unreality etc.
Now after years of Grappling and Kickboxing when someone gets in my face out in the real world the only emotion I get is mild amusement.
Boxing boxers is scary. Boxing scrubs on the street is fun.
Of course I'm not bullet proof (yet!) so I probably SHOULD be scared. But try as I might the threat of violence just doesn't do it. And I find this is true of many sport fighters.

Maybe you are the rule to the exception. I'm not talking about those affects in typical streetlights as I've had my fair share and to be honest after years of MA training I agree with you. I often have pursued the fight when I could have walked away because I enjoy it. What I am talking about are situations where you encounter people who are not the typical drunk in the night club but the knife wielding gang bangers you find here intent on hurting you or a loved one. That would make me experience many of the symptoms you have already mentioned regardless of my MA training including Kali where I learn to deal with that ****. The point of psychology in terms of fighting I'm making is that learning what happens to you physically and mentally is not a detriment but can actually help. Understanding that your fine motor skills may be lacking and that in a confrontation you are best to stick with the basic gross motor skills can make a difference. Not all MA school even talk about these changes. I've seen and heard about decent fighters who freeze in these situations and those who try their fancy **** and low and behold it doesn't work like it did in the dojang. Even more importantly I'm talking about the people who are not a seasoned as we are (or think we are) but MA noobs, women in MCDojo seld defense classes etc.




But real violence is a lot more like what you see going on in a sport fighting school.
It is a far closer simulation that listening to a high school dropout who bounced for 6 months tell you about the psychology of criminals.
Listening as an egomaniac rants is NOT training.

Maybe to you and me it's like sport fighting but I wouldn't call that the majority of real violence. (Murder, rape, robbery, assualt). Who said anything about a high school dropout or an egomaniac like Phil talking about psychology? I thought I made that clear that 90% of RBSD is NOT what I'm talking about and that I think it's shite. I'm talking about people like Scott who are not full of ****, inexperienced internet warriors etc. who are talking about combat as it relates to police officers and military people as well as us civilians. There are real physical changes that take place and understanding them is better than ignorance. You understand them, as do I. Many people don't.



As for the de-escalation thing...

In the history of man no one has ever walked into a martial arts school or RBSD course seeking to learn what to do AFTER violence has taken place.
No one.
Not one person ever.
I did a study.

I was under the impression that de-escalation was something one did in order not to fight. Are we talking about the same thing here? Iím too old to be fighting nowadays unless it really has to be done. There is too much crazy **** where I live and young punks not afraid to kill to gain status in their hood. Why not learn how to calm someone down or how to walk away safely while being aware. Awareness is the key for me on this subject. Iíve been the recipient of a few sucker punches back in the day when I thought something was over and done with. Now Iím smarter and know that I need to keep alert.

Case in point. My instructors brother got in a bar fight with a cop and kicked his ass. He gets thrown out and as heís chilling in the parking lot the cop comes out, they get into it again and BamÖ cop shoots him dead. If Iím not mistaken he watched the cop go to his car to retrieve something first. Thatís what Iím sayingÖ bells and whistles should be going off in your head here. Maybe de-escalation is not what Iím referring to after all rather than awareness. Awareness is key, especially for women. There are things to look for that should signal trouble in big blinking lights that most people ignore. This is worth understanding and it can help.

Don Gwinn
3/05/2005 10:38pm,
As for the de-escalation thing...

In the history of man no one has ever walked into a martial arts school or RBSD course seeking to learn what to do AFTER violence has taken place.
No one.
Not one person ever.
I did a study.

That's not what de-escalation is. De-escalation is what you do to keep a situation from "escalating" and growing more serious. Defusing a verbal confrontation, for instance, or getting out of a situation where the odds are against you. The classic example is buying the truculent guys a round of beers.


In the history of man no one has ever walked into a martial arts school or RBSD course seeking to learn what to do AFTER violence has taken place.

Would you consider Lethal Force Institute (Massad Ayoob) to be RBSD? He teaches knife and hand-to-hand combatives. . . . but he's most famous for firearms and what El Tejon calls "Problem Number Two." This is an in-depth study of the legal and moral issues surrounding the use of force and deadly force. He does a pretty brisk business at it.

Frankly, if your attitude is (and maybe it isn't, I'm just saying here) that you're going to go out and have street fights for the hell of it and it's silly to think about what you're going to do after the fight, I wish you luck. Some people go their whole lives doing that and it never costs them much. Some people wake up one morning and wonder how things got so out of control that they find themselves in a jail cell or worse.

Red Elvis
3/05/2005 10:48pm,
Would you consider Lethal Force Institute (Massad Ayoob) to be RBSD? He teaches knife and hand-to-hand combatives. . . . but he's most famous for what El Tejon calls "Problem Number Two."






OK, I'm just busting your balls there. I know what you meant.

Owww... <sound of my ball busting>

I don't think I agree with anybody 100%. Massad says some **** in regards to knife fighting that I disagree with. Like "people will say in a knife fight expect to get cut... I disagree with that...". Well, I disagree with that. I've sparred with training knives and seen enough Dog Brothers Gatherings to know that most of the time you both are getting hit which = cut/stabbed. It's not always a fight ender but you should be prepared for it.

Red Elvis
3/05/2005 11:02pm,
That's not what de-escalation is. De-escalation is what you do to keep a situation from "escalating" and growing more serious. Defusing a verbal confrontation, for instance, or getting out of a situation where the odds are against you. The classic example is buying the truculent guys a round of beers.

Well put, I'm not crazy afterall about the definition of de-escalation.

BTW... Recently I have bought a beer for a guy who I accidentaly bumped into and it spilled. Back in the day I would have let him get right up in my face so I could get a better angle with my modified plumb grip head butt I perfected.

:angel3:

Red Elvis
3/05/2005 11:10pm,
As a side note:

Pyschology in a fight relates to gun fights too in regards to your fine motor skills and vision which is worth understanding. Talk to the po-po about this one. Training to overcome this or to deal with it effectivley saves officers lives. This is also why it holds my interest as I am an **"avid certifiable gun totin' wing nut."

**Name in red supplied by Mothers Against Red Elvis.

Don Gwinn
3/05/2005 11:11pm,
I'm not saying you have to agree with the guy, and I'm sorry about your ball. I was actually talking to Strong Machine.

My point was that people do indeed walk into schools and training seminars expecting to learn what to do after the fight is over. That IS what Ayoob teaches, whether one agrees with what he has to say on the subject or not--and people plunk down good money to learn it. I'd like to take LFI One this summer, but I probably won't unless I get a better job in the spring. It's just too much money at the moment.

As you point out, Ayoob is a lightning rod. He says a lot of things that I don't think he's backed up. The one that bothers me the most is his constant harping about handloads vs. factory ammunition for self-defense. I don't believe there's any evidence that anyone has ever had a jury turned against him because he used handloads IF the shooting was otherwise justified. If it wasn't really a good shoot, then I don't see how you can say the use of handloads was what caused the jury to convict.


On the issue of expecting to be cut in a knife fight, I think I understand his point. I don't believe he's saying you can expect NOT to get cut. What he's saying is that it's become such a truism that everybody and his brother wants to lecture everybody else on how deadly knives are and how you absolutely will receive gruesome wounds if you face a man with a knife, even though we've all heard it a million times at this point.
In the process, the concept that truism was supposed to be teaching has been lost to many, and has been replaced by a fatalistic attitude that almost amounts to telling people to give up when they see a knife.

Don Gwinn
3/05/2005 11:19pm,
Unfortunately, gun nuts here in the GSI (Great State of Illinois) are not allowed to tote guns. The only exception is unloaded guns in "fanny packs" or other containers. So if you ever need a firearm, and you have room and time to remove it and a magazine from a fanny pack, load it and chamber a round, you have the right to defend yourself. It's beautiful.

Just out of curiosity, you sound like you've seen the occasional "optional" bar-type fight. . . have you ever done that while carrying a gun? That would scare the hell out of me.

I'll just admit right now that I'm boring. I don't go to bars or nightclubs and coincidentally I also don't get into many fistfights. ;)

Red Elvis
3/05/2005 11:19pm,
No worries about the nut... I have five more.

Yeah, I see your point about truism but rarely do I see a knife fight *in training* or comp that ends decisivley with no one getting hit. I'm sure it happens.

I haven't read his thoughts on hand loads so I have some research to do. He's saying it's worse in court if you use them? Huh. Wery wery Intervesting says I.

:confused2

oh yeah... If I see a knife I'm going to "give up" and run. Yes sir! Unless I have to fight which is why I always roll with no less than two knives.

:evil7:

Red Elvis
3/05/2005 11:24pm,
Toting is a bad phrase perhaps as I don't have a permit. I live in KKKali... Goooooooooo.... Arnie!

No, I meant that I have them and am an avid shooter. Would not want to get into a bar type fight with a gun. BAd bad scene that is. All my cop buddies carry there backups/personal weapons into bars though... I think it's strange but there is good rational for it that I can't disagree with.

JackHanma
3/06/2005 3:47am,
I liked the articles and they represent an improvement on the side of the RBSD movement, However, they are still completely wrong about their training methods.

Here is a good quote from the article.

Quote: "Ken cannot offer totality, I cannot offer totality, and the armed forces with all their might and money cannot offer totality."

Kunglfoolss won't like that at all. After all, SCARS is the PERFECT system. A SCARS practitioner is able use the principles of the SCARS system in any circumstance including facing mutiple tanks, snipers, special op forces, and air support. If you can't figure out how to fight yourself out that situation then you are an amateur.

Here's the best part of the article:

"Sports fighters and their training methods have proved in an empirical way that they are able to train people to perform under pressure and with great success."

Here is why sports fighting is better than all of the RBSD. Sportsfighters training is
emprical performanced based training. Sport fighters know their limitations because they are always measuring their abilities in competition unlike RBSD/Combatives who are always role-playing. When you are role-playing you are creating a fantasy and divorcing yourself from reality and emprical objective measurement of performance and thereby making the training entirely worthless.

Sportfights is closest thing to scientific fighting because is based on one thing and that is constantly improving your physical performance in an objective manner. I can use the principles of sport fighting and have my athletes do better on the street in any situation by simply taking whatever scenerio you want and making it into a sport...aka a competitive physical activity with a defined objective, rules of engagement which people observe and critique based the results relative to the objective (that is the definition of a sport and I don't even see how people can say any activity outside of that definition is "training" let alone reality based).

If you want to the best knife fighter in the world then go buy yourself a no "lie blade" put and duel for vital points (heart, lung, throat etc... ) in a full contact competition until you can beat everyone (i.e. hit vital point before anyone can cut you) willing to compete and after that then go 2 on 1, then 3 on 1 etc.... after years of playing that sport at that level I bet you easily kill any knife expert out there with ease. The only limitation with sport application to weapons is technology and such limitations are rapidly disappearing. Simutitions and marking safe blade technologies are just the beginning.

Wake people people and stop training like religious cultists. Start training like professional athletes and you might actually get good at something for once in your life.

Errorr
3/06/2005 9:49pm,
Clarify for me please what the no lie blade is? My just now and brief research is that they're blades with markeresque ability so noone has the chance to play soldier games like you did when we were kids.

"I shot you!!"

"no you didn't, I dodged it!"


Thanks

Strong Machine
3/06/2005 10:34pm,
I used deescalation when I should have used "post fight" which is a new rage in RBSD.

"Maybe to you and me it's like sport fighting but I wouldn't call that the majority of real violence. (Murder, rape, robbery, assualt). "

I suspect that brawls (matchfights whatever) happen a HELLUVA lot more than murders and rapes.
But regardless.I am referring to all violence.I was accosted just recently by several men who were attempting to shake me down.I would probably have been killed by them had the all attacked simultaneously.But I saw the humor in the situation, I laughed and they walked off.It isnt even about living, dying, winning whatever.
Ift is about boxers not being afriad to get beat up.I am not, as I get beat up alot.Therefore I suggest that SPORTfighting is the ultimate in self-defense.RBSD guys are so scared of real violence that they go on lameass websoites and debate simple points about the mechanics of a fight without actually just meeting up and actually fighting so as to decide the point.

"My point was that people do indeed walk into schools and training seminars expecting to learn what to do after the fight is over. That IS what Ayoob teaches, whether one agrees with what he has to say on the subject or not--and people plunk down good money to learn it. "

Seriously? Cause I get calls and emails from inquisitive prospective students(often a few a day)who ask all kinds of things about self-defense.From defending vs exotic animals to the combat applications of a phonebook.
But in years of these communications I've never once heard reference to it.And if I did I'd respond.
"Sir, NOT DYING is your job in a SD situation.If you are worried about what goes on after the combat (in which you may die)your priorities are horribly skewed.
Now go talk to a lawyer, or better yet, a shrink.
Not some Isreali with a cheesey ad in Blackbelt.

Don Gwinn
3/06/2005 10:41pm,
Yeah, Errorr, you've got the idea. That's reall all they are. They're aluminum trainers with a felt marker along the edge, which you press into ink before sparring with them. They mark people but have no sharp edges. You can do the same with foam knives and such, but the No Lie blades really are pretty nice and feel a lot more like a real (large, fixed) blade in the hand.

Elvis, Ayoob's point is that if you carry handloads, and you are forced to shoot someone with them, then the anti-gun prosecutor will tell the jury that you are such a diabolical madman that you even "made your own killer bullets, cooking up ever-deadlier loads in your basement" to prepare for the day when you finally got the chance to pop someone.

And if that doesn't happen, then certainly the ensuing civil trial will get you!

The thing is, this is pretty plausible stuff. It probably could happen if you got the right mix of a bad, anti-defense prosecutor and some blissninnies on the jury. But when Ayoob presents it, he generally claims to be proving that it has happened--and then he doesn't. In the examples he gives (his famous Case Number 1, Case Number 2 . . . ) the shooter always does something else badly wrong, like chasing the bad guy out of his house to shoot him again. In other words, he's taking people who were convicted more or less for the right reasons and assigning a different reason to it. And I still have yet to see any evidence that anyone has actually been put away for a good shoot simply on the basis that they use reloaded ammunition.

Ayoob's advice isn't actually bad. He simply says you should load a defensive weapon with quality factory ammunition, preferably close to the type used by your local police department. Then, if you're ever in a position to be questioned as to why you used something evil and unPC such as 41 "MAGNUM" to shoot the poor misguided youth who was raping your wife, you can reply that it's what the local police use and therefore seemed like a judicious and reasonable choice.
This is actually reasonable if only to decrease your chances of a malfunction.