Tommy good point

Tommy,

Something I've been meaning to get around to for a few days mate...got tied up.

Over on Steve's one of the guys (Nick I believe) said people break their hands punching and nobody says punches are irrelevant - or words to that effect - talking about the conditioned response of the grappler who shot in on the concrete and broke his knee.

You said it was a good point.

Actually I disagree. Punches when done right, don't break your hand at all. The two times I've broken my hand were once hitting a motorcycle helmet and the 2nd time clipping someone who zigged (when the fooker should have zagged) with my little finger knuckle. That's it. Most karate guys I worked with on the doors had similar experiences.

Now, I know Nick's point wasn't that correct punches don't break but I think the comparison was flawed. If we took a bunch of karateka and had them punch people in the head, and then a bunch of grapplers and had them shoot in full force on their knees on concrete the comparison would be evident. A vastly greater percentage of grapplers would have damaged knees as a result than bare knuckle punchers would have damaged fists.

I think the other point that was missed was - why was he shooting at all? Everybody, even the grapplers I talk to, admit going to the ground voluntarily in an environment as volatile as the street is dangerous. His conditioning led him to do the move, overriding comon sense and logic under pressure due to countless hours practicing that particular move.

Nick

PS: On your tire drill I noticed you threw predominantly to one side all the time. Do you balance an equal amount of time to throwing from the left, or not?

Nick Hughes wrote:Tommy,

Something I've been meaning to get around to for a few days mate...got tied up.

Over on Steve's one of the guys (Nick I believe) said people break their hands punching and nobody says punches are irrelevant - or words to that effect - talking about the conditioned response of the grappler who shot in on the concrete and broke his knee.

You said it was a good point.

Actually I disagree. .......

I see your point. Just a note; I'm not a ground fighter or a guy who shoots. That's for young "fast guys"

PS: On your tire drill I noticed you threw predominantly to one side all the time. Do you balance an equal amount of time to throwing from the left, or not?

Actually, there was two parts to that clip and I can't get the other one up until tomorrow. In that one I do use more of both sides and I use another tool (a wheel chock) other than just the tire. I do try to work both sides and even on bag work I switch. But I will admit that I tend to over do my right lately. My preference is kind of forced at times due to injury and such. I have an anchor in my right shoulder holding the tendon to the bone from rotator cuff surgery. That killed my right punch and forced me to make my left my power punch. There still certain things I can't punch with my right and in general it lost a good deal of power. Now it seems my wrists and hands are suffering a bit of something (I don't know what ...arthritis?) so my left kind of quits sometimes which has forced me back to my right. It took me two years to come back from my shoulder and I don't think I can go through that again. The older you get the more you leave behind when you lose training time. I still wake at night with my arm in pain.

But in answer to your question....at the end of the day "yes" I devote equal time...or close to it.

Tommy

I feel your pain re the shoulder...I've got a partially torn left...getting old is awesome ain't it.

Nick

Nick Hughes wrote:
Punches when done right, don't break your hand at all.

Yes but then the same is true for the shot WRT knees - which is exactly my point. However it is true that in the pressure of a fight people apply techniques wrongly - but that fact doesnt invalidate the shot anymore then it invalidates the punch (you even admit to having broken your hand twice from punching!)

Nick Hughes wrote:
If we took a bunch of karateka and had them punch people in the head, and then a bunch of grapplers and had them shoot in full force on their knees on concrete the comparison would be evident.

Well thats a moot point (for example punching the head is one thing - punching the head when people can use their elbows to block is another) but as I explained (but which you dont seem to grasp) you dont need to put your knee on the floor when you shoot

If you actually had some experience in grappling for the street youd know this but its obvious from what you write that you dont

I think this clip will help educate you

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=KnpYwPkslH0&feature=related

I don't think that clip backs anything up at all mate. How many people in a street altercation punch like that. The only person who has ever punched me like that is my grandad.

Chris

CJS wrote:I don't think that clip backs anything up at all mate. How many people in a street altercation punch like that. The only person who has ever punched me like that is my grandad.

Chris

Here is the technique used against an elite MMA fighter - does your grandad punch like Matt Serra?

Its at 25 secs in. And again at 5 mins in.

http://www.mmascraps.com/2008/04/matt-serra-vs-georges-st-pierre-video.html

Nick,

The point you're not grasping is in all the fights I had - bareknuckles, no wraps, no gloves, I ONLY broke my hand twice and both of those punches were wrong. In one I clipped the guy with the little finger knuckle (I was only seventeen and a brown belt and still learning the ropes) which resulted in a boxer's fracture and the other I punched a guy who refused to take off his motorbike helmet during our fracas.

No experience in grappling for the street - and there we have it in a nutshell. Please explain to me - and I'm sure other's are interested - in why you think it's viable to to grapple in such an environment.

I really am curious as to why you would think it makes sense strategically, or tactically to do what Mr Machado is doing on that clip, in a street fight. You've gone in on a guy, in an environment where he may have a knife or mates and grabbed him...FOR WHAT FOOKING PURPOSE? I assume to take him to the ground???? Again, are you going to tell me strategically or tactically that makes sense in the street?

What a magic example of sports training poisoning real world fighting that you would think that good - regardless of whether or not his knees were anywhere near the floor.

Do you have to know how to fight your way off the ground if you slip or get taken down inadvertantly? Yep, said it many times. Been arguing with TMA guys for years about it. Do you voluntarily take someone down there? Only if you're a complete fucking jackass!!

Nick

Nick Hughes wrote:

I really am curious as to why you would think it makes sense strategically, or tactically to do what Mr Machado is doing on that clip, in a street fight. You've gone in on a guy, in an environment where he may have a knife or mates and grabbed him...FOR WHAT FOOKING PURPOSE? I assume to take him to the ground???? Again, are you going to tell me strategically or tactically that makes sense in the street?

Nick

Well, to start why assume that all street altercations involve mutiple opponents and knives.

Many are just 1 on 1, both parties unarmed.

And anyway what if you have mates too.

Also if a guy has a knife deployed and you see that and you are not armed why on earth would you want to fight him? Surely youd just run away? And if you did have to fight him why on earth would you be better off with karate then grappling. Empty hand vs knife is always odds against you no matter what you do. And I have yet to see any effective Karate knife defence. FMA has the best stuff but even that involves controlling the weapon arm (i.e. grappling). Karl Tanswell did years of that stuff and he still got stabbed 6 times before he could counter. And the STAB program he developed subsequently is all modified grappling.

And why cant you take someone down and not follow them to the ground? You could just stamp on their balls/head, go to knee on stomach and strike etc. Or use that moment to make your escape.

In short I just dont get your questions at all. They are so riddled with faulty assumptions (as with the broken knee cap post you made on Steves forum).

Well, to start why assume that all street altercations involve mutiple opponents and knives

Go read Mick Coup's post on 'negative thinking' and you might understand why.

To begin with, it's safer to assume they do than they don't. Let's say you and I are out on the town and we end up about to be in a fight with what appears to be one person. I will assume he's tooled up, or he's got mates and fight him accordingly and, lo and behold, he tries to access a weapon, or his mates move in I'm covered.

You, on the other hand, assuming he's unarmed and on his own move in to grapple with him. His mates then kick your head in and he stabs you while you're rolling round with him.

Now, which assumption is better to make strategically?

It always, in combat, military or mano a mano, is better to plan for worst case scenarios because if it's not that bad, you're covered. If you assume the best case - i.e. what you're doing, you're screwed. Did I mention go read Mick Coup's post on 'negative thinking?"

Any one with any serious street experience will tell you most of the time people are stabbed they didn't realize the other guy had a knife or that they were being stabbed. So, what do you think is the wisest course of action knowing that? Assume they're all armed, or assume they're probably/hopefully not? Faulty assumptions indeed!!

Also if a guy has a knife deployed and you see that and you are not armed why on earth would you want to fight him? Surely youd just run away?

Er...because it's my job!!! And they don't pay me to run away. I can see it now...Sarge, they're armed, run awayyyyy. Bouncers aren't paid to run away. Security guys aren't paid to run away. Cops aren't paid to run away. Body guards aren't paid to run away. Soldiers aren't paid to run away...we're the guys who get the money to deal with the shite our employers don't want to deal with.

How about another faulty assumption Nick. You're assuming you're faster than the guy with the knife. How do you know? When you beat him round the corner or when you get the knife stuck between your shoulder blades. I'm 6'8" and 280 pounds...I'm relatively fast but I'm not going to take a chance I'm faster than some 167 pound crack addict who's high as a kite. Are you?

Here's some more faulty assumptions for running away. What if your girlfriend/wife is with you, and she's got heels on? Gonna leave her are you mate? What if your kids are with you? Everyman for himself is it?

Just where are you running to? Could you be running somewhere worse. A guy ran from one of my mates in Melbourne Australia one night and vaulted a fence...sadly for him it was the fence over the railway yard and an eighty foot fall later and a fry up on the electrified track illustrates why running ain't the be all and end all of defense.

What if you're running and you end up in a blind alley and now you have to turn and fight, only now your tired...you've used your thirty second adrenalin boost being fleet of foot and now the fight is on.

Run my arse...shows just how little real world experience you actually have.

And if you did have to fight him why on earth would you be better off with karate then grappling.

Please tell me this is a trick question!!

FMA has the best stuff but even that involves controlling the weapon arm

Have you actually done any FMA? I ask because their control of the weapon arm isn't by any stretch of the imagination, grappling. PS: I've studied it for years...I agree, it is good stuff.

Karl Tanswell did years of that stuff and he still got stabbed 6 times before he could counter

Karl did years of karate and Karl got stabbed so therefore Karate doesn't work...is that the gist of it? I did years of it as well, and I have successfully defended against guys with weapons...what's your point here?

And why cant you take someone down and not follow them to the ground?

Never said you couldn't. Read my article on "A Rethink on Judo" in FAI and I think I mention the efficacy of throwing/footsweeping. That's a far cry from voluntarily grabbing someone and taking them down to the ground with you.

Nick

Nick Forrer wrote:Well, to start why assume that all street altercations involve mutiple opponents and knives.

To assume ANYTHING less than that, could get you and yours killed. Worst case scenaio thinking, every time.