Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Competitive Rulesets for Self Defence Training

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Absolutely see what you're saying and I like what you've outlined there, but I also don't necessarily think getting out of a room is the definition of success in a self defence situation. It might be accurate in many cases, but is also too specific to be a robust SD training system in itself.

    What got me thinking about all this was having read through the Sanshou rules, and how points are allocated (i.e. 1 point for a leg kick/2 points for the body kick) but, for all it's qualities, I would see that as needing to be reversed to be closer to practical. Now, that still isn't going to cut it, because then you end up with relentless leg kicking matches, but I hope that gets the idea across. Other stuff that got me thinking were how rules create the difference between BJJ and Judo groundwork, or how TKD generally doesn't allow head punches or leg kicks, arguably the most useful striking techniques (an extreme example, I know).

    I suppose what I'm really looking to conceive is a competitive martial art, where you strip away the potential for impractical tactics and insist on realistic application through the specific ruleset, but still have all the stress testing/quality control that comes with two people trying to decisively incapactitate each other.

    It's not a complete (read intelligent, at will) solution, but I think it could be an effective middleground between typical MMA training (which might not be tactically viable) or SD training (with the various sacrifices that are often made in the course of it).

    Comment


      #17
      How about multiples. Two teams of five for example. Yes somone would probably get killed but it would be bloody fun to watch.

      (I think I have proffesional wrestling on the brain today)

      Comment


        #18
        Originally posted by gregaquaman View Post
        How about multiples. Two teams of five for example. Yes somone would probably get killed but it would be bloody fun to watch.

        (I think I have proffesional wrestling on the brain today)
        Hell, even 3-on-3. I would laugh as the referee tried to monitor all the TKOs.

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by gregaquaman View Post
          How about multiples. Two teams of five for example. Yes somone would probably get killed but it would be bloody fun to watch.

          (I think I have proffesional wrestling on the brain today)
          I've seen 2 vs 2 and 1 vs 1 vs 1 fights with training knives at Dog Brothers gatherings. Lots of movement, lots of killshots when someone was busy fighting someone else. At the last one, at Gokor's gym, there were four guys that wanted to do a 2 vs 2 stickfight, but Guro Crafty said that it was too dangerous since it's a lot more likely to get whacked in a blind spot on your head. When he says something's too dangerous, I believe him. Two of the guys were muay thai fighters with almost no weapons training, and they did surprisingly well in both stick and knife fights. One of them was an expert at dumping people on the ground from the clinch.

          Comment


            #20
            Originally posted by gregaquaman View Post
            How about multiples. Two teams of five for example. Yes somone would probably get killed but it would be bloody fun to watch.

            (I think I have proffesional wrestling on the brain today)
            all while the Stray Cats "Rumble in Brighton" blares in the background

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by gregaquaman View Post
              How about multiples. Two teams of five for example. Yes somone would probably get killed but it would be bloody fun to watch.

              (I think I have proffesional wrestling on the brain today)
              This reminds me slightly of that triple threat style MMA league that some jagoffs tried to start a year ago or so. Basically it was 1-1-1 until someone tapped or got KOed etc. and then I think they went one on one.

              Comment


                #22
                Originally posted by Iainkelt View Post
                This reminds me slightly of that triple threat style MMA league that some jagoffs tried to start a year ago or so. Basically it was 1-1-1 until someone tapped or got KOed etc. and then I think they went one on one.
                What if one guy is being armbarred on both sides by the other two and has no hands free to tap?

                Comment


                  #23
                  A lot of RBSD training (the good stuff, anyway) already involves this type of competitive scenario training, in combination with padded armor drills, etc.

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Originally posted by Permalost View Post
                    What if one guy is being armbarred on both sides by the other two and has no hands free to tap?
                    Feet or verbal

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Originally posted by DdlR View Post
                      A lot of RBSD training (the good stuff, anyway) already involves this type of competitive scenario training, in combination with padded armor drills, etc.
                      Got any examples of systems/organisations that do this and/or rulesets they use?

                      Also, can it be enforced that all matches last as long as, and are accompanied by, this:

                      Comment


                        #26
                        This is basically an ad., but it shows several different types of scenario drills, with levels of resistance ranging from almost full compliancy to what is effectively sparring. The rules depend on the scenario (whether the object is to escape, restrain, disable etc.), but generally there is an element of role-playing in which the designated "attacker" will tap out or otherwise give up if they're subbed and/or if they judge that the "defender" would have disabled them if not for the protective equipment.

                        Last edited by DdlR; 2/24/2011 10:58pm, .

                        Comment


                          #27
                          I've used the High Gear several times in self defense drills, really nice stuff for force-on-force training. I know Blauer offers courses at times in his Ballistic Micro-Fight program, which is a course on develping realistics close quarter confirmations. Tis may be a Mil/LEO only course though, not sure.

                          Comment


                            #28
                            This is really, really interesting. Add some partial drills focused on principles and technics before reaching the stage in which you do the "fight" (dont know how to call it at this point) and voila, you got yourself a really good self defense training system.

                            Originally posted by M1K3 View Post

                            I think your modified MMA rules will work for some of what you are trying to do but you are going to have to come up with a different way to look at it and score it. One person is the aggressor and the other is the target. Aggressor wins by actually winning the fight ie victim taps outs or is overwhelmed. Victim wins by surviving the round (equivalent of the good guys showing up and stopping the fight), escaping the ring, or overwhelming the attacker.

                            Round lengths are variable say between 30 seconds and 5 minutes. Neither the aggressor nor the victim knows the length of the round.

                            No weight classes and M/F matches are a long term goal.

                            Aggressor may verbally abuse the victim before the timer goes off to set up the adrenal dump. Victim may respond with whatever you have taught them about controlling the situation including trying to maneuver to the exit spot of the ring even before the bell rings (maybe, not sure on this one). Once bell goes off victim may use a preemptive strike, they do not have to wait for the aggressor to attack.

                            Its ok if the victim loses a lot. You are trying to be realistic (Rbsd) and so sorry that's the way it is in real life.

                            Just my 2 cents/pence.
                            Last edited by BoogieJitsu; 2/27/2011 5:36pm, .

                            Comment

                            Collapse

                            Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                            Working...
                            X