Page 1 of 1

The lads are back...

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:03 pm
by GrahamB

Re: The lads are back...

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:13 pm
by GrahamB

Re: The lads are back...

PostPosted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 1:51 am
by vadaga
kicking the drone off the mountain was awesome.

Re: The lads are back...

PostPosted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 7:13 am
by Tiga Pukul
Hmm according to these lads all fights go to the ground. In their own way of thinking if you knock someone down with a hit, the fight goes to the ground. Actually...no. If you knock someone down or to sleep and he falls to the ground, what's the use to go to the ground as well and choke him out there? If it's a dangerous situation, better take off after a knockdown and find some safe place.

A saying of one of my teachers was 'your opponents needs to be put to sleep before he hits the ground'. That sounds a lot more wise than trying to join him on the ground for some ground and pound, and get blindsided by his friend who knocks you on the back of your head.

The application solutions of Jake Mace are terrible though...

Re: The lads are back...

PostPosted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 7:34 am
by GrahamB
Wow - sounds great in theory. How many people have you put to sleep before they hit the ground I wonder? ;D

Re: The lads are back...

PostPosted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 8:28 am
by marvin8
Tiga Pukul wrote:Hmm according to these lads all fights go to the ground. In their own way of thinking if you knock someone down with a hit, the fight goes to the ground.

If they end on the ground...that means they start standing up.

Excerpts from, "The myth of 90 percent of fights end up on the ground:"

Wim Demeere on January 10, 2013 wrote:Correlation does not imply causation

This is a classical mistake scientists are warned about and one they should always strive to avoid. Just because one factor is correlated to another, doesn’t mean it causes it. Or to put it in relevant terms:

Just because 90% of the fights go to the ground and Gracie ju jitsu focuses on fighting on the ground, doesn’t mean it’s the best system for fighting.

The logic just doesn’t hold up, even though it seems to at first glance. The burden of proof lies with whoever poses a theory and Rorion used the LAPD study for this. Unfortunately, that study proves no such thing.

The second problem is that Rorion misinterpreted the LAPD study he is quoting. Maybe he didn’t read it completely. Maybe he misunderstood it. Maybe he did it on purpose. Who knows? Either way, it doesn’t matter as he kept on using this study as proof of his theory about the superiority of his family style. ...

Conclusion

Like I’ve written about ad nauseam: context is king. It determines which tools you should use. Or like a good friend of mine would say: stay on mission. Know what your goal is and use the appropriate tool to achieve it. Meaning:

• If your goal is competition, then you train differently than for self-defense.
• If your goal is to choke people or tap them out on the mat, then you train differently than if you want to learn how to get up right away after you end up on the ground in the street.

Determine your goal first and only then pick your tools. Regardless of how good other tools are for other goals, if they don’t help you for that particular job, they’re not a good match for you then and there. I believe the same is true for all fighting arts: determine first and foremost why you train and then pick the system(s) that helps you achieve that goal.

While you go through the selection process for that system, beware the marketing hype and unproven theories (including all of mine). Think things through and do your own research so you can at the very least be comfortable with your choice.

After all, it’s your butt on the line.