Opinion on unarmed combat training?

S

Slip

Joined
Nov 24, 2000
Messages
41
I would like Mr. Caracci's opinion on the pros and cons of which type of unarmed combat training is available to the average person.

While I accept that the characteristics of the person who is training and also the experience / ability of their instructor are big determining factors in whether someone can make their training 'work' in the real world, different types of training do have different strengths and weaknesses....

As I see it, we can split it up like this :-

- 'Traditional' martial arts: Aikido, Karate ryu-ha, Judo, Kenpo, etc.

- 'Eclectic' - Fashionable Mixed Martial Arts, Vale Tudo, Fillipino Martial arts / Jeet Kune Do

-'Combatatives'- CQC training from a variety of people like Hock, Jim Grover, Defendu, Kary etc.

I know there are probably people out there grinding their teeth as they read this, because this kind of thing just defies categorisation and I apologise in advance if I've stepped on anyone's toes in the way I've laid this out. (for example, the art I study, Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu I would regard as fitting in all three of the categories as we drill like the FMA, and the techniques and goals resemble combatatives- IMO).

What's your opinion, Mr. Moderator? :) Do you feel strongly about this?
 
Well sir,....I would expect that as CJ answers a variety of other inquiries on UJ, which he has already begun to do, a comprehensive understanding of his views will be revealed and ultimately, provide answers to the questions you pose.

CJ's "program", as he calls it, contains fundamentals which become deeply personal to the practioner over the course of his/her training and experience. It is for this reason that I suspect the BEST way to understand CJ's views on this inquiry is to let his thoughts trickle down through the posts...

Thanks for your contribution and welcome to the Jungle! :)
 
Slipster, great question,
I expect to see that a lot.
The first thing I need to know is what one is trying to accomplish. A "Martial Art" suggests that you are learning an art form and many elements exist for tradition/art sake. That is not to suggest that a Martial Art cannot be practical,I just mean that there is more time needed to reach it.
Many of these "fighting schools" are supposed to be more practical, often however I observe them teaching complex techniques. Your first clue is that I begin with a worst case scenario and work backwards. Therefore in a life and death struggle the technique must be simple and physiologically effective. I would avoid punches for instance due to the required training to be effective and avoid injury. I find knees, elbows and head buts to be on my favored list.If I had to recommend a single Art form it would be a Jujitsu school they generally are more versatile. Another example to be leery of is the mysterious nerve techniques because people are not all made the same and an overconfidence in these techniques can put one in a very precarious position.
Obviously I could go on and on but it is better for you all to ask more specific questions after I answer them fundamentally.
 
Thanks for answering.
I guess this question is probably going to turn up in one form or another every two days or so, :D so this is issue will probably be beaten to death over the next few weeks/months.
 
I find once you wade through all the self-imposed mysticism of the arts, there can be some very impressive and effective info (whether or not someone has the ability to use them in an actual fight is another matter) The problem I find is that the exercises and drills become a thing unto themselves and the original intent of the movement is lost.

On the other hand are these 'practical' forms of self defense that don't seem to go far enough. They give you a set of tools, but don't tell you how to develop them effectively, or how to use them in conjunction with proper body movement and placement. An implied (sometimes stated) notion that "Once you've watched my video/attended my 4 hour seminar you can kick anyone's butt" that just simply is not true.

I think what is needed is introspection, which leads to innovation. I think the gentleman who moderates this forum is proof enough of that. Learn what you can from individuals like him, they know what they are doing. Just make sure that at the end of the day, you do too.
 
CJ, I think what they want to know is do you have any personal
experience with SCARS (Peterson) or have an opinion about it?

What have you formally trained in?

Thank you in advance for your reply.

Mike D
 
Originally posted by MikeD
CJ, I think what they want to know is do you have any personal
experience with SCARS (Peterson) or have an opinion about it?
Mike D
Click to expand...

Hi Mike-

Sorry, but that wasn't what I was wondering at all- I think if you read my post again you'll see that I wasn't just limiting myself to asking about SCARS (though if I had mentioned it, I would have grouped it in with 'Combatatives'). I actually deliberately said ' training available to the average person' because the needs of the Teams and the needs of Joe Ordinary aren't always the same. :)

As for SCARS: based on seeing one video when I was in the states(whatever that's worth)- lots of hype, fairly okayish mediocre system, but certainly nothing new or earth-shattering.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top