A Real Life Adept In Action, Poetry In Motion Options

[Cain]

It shouldn't piss anyone off, and I really don't think it'd even piss Bruce off if he was aliev today. Mixed Martial Arts is really just furthering the idea that he...hrm, not that Bruce conceived (because I'm sure there were plenty of folks mixing and matching martial arts long before he came along), but maybe that he forged a path for into the mainstream. "Use what works" was more important to him than "do things the way I do them," so I really don't think he'd be offended at someone pointing students to an MMA school instead of folks diligently practicing what Bruce did almost forty years ago. Folks looking to learn "Bruce Lee JKD" can go find those sort of schools, people looking to learn what JKD has evolved into can be more than happy at a regular old MMA school.

My own JKD/Escrima instructor studied alongside Dan Inosanto, and has certification, etc, right from Dan. He tends to teach us stuff the way he was taught it, because that's what he's the most comfortable with (so a "classic" school) -- but our assistant instructor has studied an assortment of different martial arts throughout his life (and was a combatives instructor in the USMC for a time), so he's right there to show us different ways to accomplish what our main instructor shows us, little variations on a move, a nasty follow-up, etc, etc...so that overall we're left with the option, with almost everything we learn, and it's up to us what we want to take away with us from class. I feel pretty lucky that one's big on the martial, one's a little more focused on the art, and we get to hear them both.

Bruce did popularize the "toolbox" approach, but he never abandoned his original fighting principles. The thing about the "classic" JKD students is that they still take time to evolve and grow, while retaining the core principles of Bruce's fighting style. Too many "Concepts" guys toss out everything, ape what is popular, and call it JKD. You don't know what you're getting. I know many people who think they're studying Bruce Lee's personal style, when they're really just getting a MMA class with a fancy name. This is why lineage is important! It can tell you if the art you're paying money for is the art you want to study.

IIRC, recently the Bruce Lee estate has taken steps to rein in overuse of the JKD name. The "Classic" group are going to be the only ones allowed to use the name; I have no idea of what'll happen to the others.

Most of my Bruce Lee experience was with the older crowd: Taky Kimura, Jesse Glover, Patrick Strong, James DeMile, among others. Their perspective is older, but they all learned their lessons well, and have evolved to suit the times.

[Wounded Ronin]

Hey, any chance we can all get together and have a big DSF throwdown or something? I live in Las Vegas; we could go out for cocktails and roulette later. Like, after we get swollen bruised faces.

[Cain]

I live in small-town Oregon. Getting away to Las Vegas isn't going to be easy for me, and I have a feeling that I'm the one everyone wants to hit. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/cool.gif)

[Adarael]

No, that would be Doc Funkenstein, I think.

[Wounded Ronin]

Some of the well-known casinos are only charging like 70 bucks a night to stay in their hotels. A trip to Vegas is probably one of the cheapest vacations you can take nowadays.

Also, being punched in the head > drinking a beer. They have similar effects on the brain, but one makes you tough, whereas the other makes you fat.

[Critias]

Getting to and from Vegas and getting room and board there is a very cheap vacation, yes. The rest of what is expected of you once you're in Vegas, not so much (which is why they can afford to knock prices for travel and the room down so low).

[hyzmarca]

Getting to and from Vegas and getting room and board there is a very cheap vacation, yes. The rest of what is expected of you once you're in Vegas, not so much (which is why they can afford to knock prices for travel and the room down so low).

Well, you don't have to gamble, or go to any shows, or stuff large-denomination bills into the thong underwear of half-naked people, or drive to a neighboring county with a population of less than 400,000. You can, in fact, spend time in Vegas doing nothing interesting at all.

But we should seriously consider starting a card counting ring.

[Wounded Ronin]

Well, you don't have to gamble, or go to any shows, or stuff large-denomination bills into the thong underwear of half-naked people, or drive to a neighboring county with a population of less than 400,000. You can, in fact, spend time in Vegas doing nothing interesting at all.

But we should seriously consider starting a card counting ring.

I'm just sayin' that if we were to have a DSF throwdown or meet up or whatever that Las Vegas is just perfect and cheap at this current point in time. Not even touching on the possibility of stuffing one dollar bills into thongs at Palomino's or whatever.

[Rad]

Also, being punched in the head > drinking a beer. They have similar effects on the brain, but one makes you tough, whereas the other makes you fat.

^
|

I want to party with this guy. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Child being kidnapped: Run and scream! A child trying to take out a full-grown adult is futile.

I dissagree. It took at least two *trained* adults to physically restrain me when I was grade school age--usually three to keep me from being able to hurt one of them. Then again, I was pretty badass when I was a kid, and had a talent for cracking skulls with the back of my head when people tried to grab me.

Hey, any chance we can all get together and have a big DSF throwdown or something? I live in Las Vegas; we could go out for cocktails and roulette later. Like, after we get swollen bruised faces.

Sounds wonderful, I could use an excuse to start training again. I've been getting fat and slow ever since the last time I took a trip to spar with somebody I knew from an online forum. He was a former Muay Thai champion, we sparred in a field for about 45 minutes before he suggested we call it a draw. Best Halloween ever.

[Cain]

I dissagree. It took at least two *trained* adults to physically restrain me when I was grade school age--usually three to keep me from being able to hurt one of them. Then again, I was pretty badass when I was a kid, and had a talent for cracking skulls with the back of my head when people tried to grab me.

Leaving out the machismo, that's two or three adults trained in using gentle, nonharmful techniques in subduing a child. A kidnapper won't handicap himself like that, restricting himself to a handful of techniques that barely work under the best of circumstances. Typical child vs typical adult = kidnapped child.

Including the machismo, that's exactly the sort of attitude that get's people hurt. "Why should you stand and fight instead of running away? Because I'm badass, and for $75 a month, you can be badass too." (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sarcastic.gif) Dude, you are not as badass as you think you are.

[knasser]

I live in small-town Oregon. Getting away to Las Vegas isn't going to be easy for me, and I have a feeling that I'm the one everyone wants to hit. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/cool.gif)

Look at it this way, Cain - it would be your one chance to win an argument with me. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

A DSF throwdown in Las Vegas? I'd be up for that, but I don't want to even think how long its been since I sparred! I went to a BJJ class last year just for old times sake. I was pleased to realise I could still fight, but wow was I out of shape. It would be a good excuse to get fit again, though.

I don't think we should allow SnowFox, though. I don't think she can be separated from her guns. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

K.

[Rad]

Leaving out the machismo, that's two or three adults trained in using gentle, nonharmful techniques in subduing a child. A kidnapper won't handicap himself like that, restricting himself to a handful of techniques that barely work under the best of circumstances. Typical child vs typical adult = kidnapped child.

Including the machismo, that's exactly the sort of attitude that get's people hurt. "Why should you stand and fight instead of running away? Because I'm badass, and for $75 a month, you can be badass too." (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sarcastic.gif) Dude, you are not as badass as you think you are.

Not at all. That was two or three child abusers using illegal restraint techniques that left me permanently physically disabled. Running was always my first choice back then, and it rarely worked. There were more of them, with longer strides and better ability/training to coordinate as a group. I couldn't observe their actions as they were chasing me, so I had no way of responding, but once we were in contact, I had several reference points to determine their position and aim an attack, even without being able to see them.

The machismo you keep referring to is your own creation. I don't think I'm a badass, and I never said that. I said I used to be. Today I am physically impaired, out of shape, out of practice, and very aware of it--hence my wistful/humorous comment about being "pretty badass when I was a kid." On the plus side, I don't have to defend myself against people 2-3 times my size too often these days, so I can get away with being lazy.

Why should you stand and fight?

Because if you injure your attacker, you have a much better chance of escaping. Because running does not stop them in any way. Even when I did manage to get away, I eventually had to go back, ensuring that I would face the same situation again. Sometimes there is no one who can or will protect you, and the only way to ensure your safety is to harm your attacker.

To head off your next comments. Yes I told people. Yes I told the cops. I have a whole medical history full of documentation. It doesn't help when the people in charge don't want to believe it. Denial is a powerful force, and to this day I sometimes encounter doctors who react funny when they find out how I got injured.

What I'm saying is not machismo, and it's not "they hurt me and I want to hurt them back". It is simply what I learned in the course of staying alive. Bullshit and self-deception do not last long in those situations, be it machismo or pacifism. You're lucky that life has allowed you to maintain your illusions, Cain, but they could cost you, and they could cost anyone you pass them on to. That's the funny thing about learning the hard way: You either get it right or you don't graduate.

------------------

On a much, much lighter note: Yeah, the Vegas thing could be a lot of fun. I've always thought a forum sparring meet would be hilariously cool. There's the concern about meeting people IRL, but ironically, if you're meeting for a fight it's actually safer--there's no surprise round. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Cain]

Not at all. That was two or three child abusers using illegal restraint techniques that left me permanently physically disabled.

Then if you're telling the truth, you have my sympathy. But you forgot the second half of the formula: "Scream for help". If you're being chased by strangers, that alone is enough to deter most of them. I've been accosted at the mall by security, for trying to bring my own child home-- I was accused of being a kidnapper.

If you're lying-- and a story about being attacked by not one, but three strangers-in-trenchcoats simultaneously, is a pretty tall tale-- you just lost all credibility. About the only way I can see that story being possible is if you were in trouble with the state somehow, in which case they were trained in how to corral a kid and were improperly using "safe" restraint techniques. That also casts your whole story in a different light, because the only time they're supposed to apply that kind of force is when the patient is the one resisting and running-- you don't jump on a guy who's not putting up a fight.

The machismo you keep referring to is your own creation. I don't think I'm a badass, and I never said that. I said I used to be.

Bragging about how macho you used to be may be even more pathetic than bragging about how macho you are.

Why should you stand and fight?

Only when you have to, which is fortunately almost never.

You're lucky that life has allowed you to maintain your illusions, Cain, but they could cost you, and they could cost anyone you pass them on to.

And now you've pissed me off. You have no idea what I've been through, junior. All you know is that I haven't been bragging and boasting about all the fights I got into, plus tossing in a "woe-is-me" child abuse story with no proof to back it up. You may have been hurt once, and want to keep hurting the world as a result, but that doesn't even come close to a hard lesson learned, sonny. Nor does it mean that lashing out is the best means of self-defense.

So far, I've posted a list of realistic self-defense scenarios, and demonstrated how violence is seldom the best response. Your only reply to that list is a personal anecdote of dubious quality. Do you have any better counter-examples?

[JaronK]

The idea that humans have no instincts is absolutely rediculous. I'm pretty sure we have instinctive drives towards sex, the fight or flight response, instinctive knowledge of how to breast feed, instinctive desires to play fight with siblings, etc.

But back on topic, one "adept" I can think of was that FBI agent in IIRC the 20s. He was said to never have missed when shooting, and when asked how he shot so accurately, he said you just had to watch the bullets as they travel to the target. At once point, a science magazine did a slow motion video of him holding a quarter out at arms length, dropping the quarter, drawing his pistol, and shooting the quarter in midair about a foot below where he dropped it from. Insane speed on that guy, and insane accuracy, he fits the definition of a pistol adept perfectly. Sadly, I can't remember his name right now.

JaronK

[Method]

Jelly Bryce

And although you think its ridiculous, the fact is that there is great debate by people who know a lot more about this shit than (probably) any of us.

[Cain]

The idea that humans have no instincts is absolutely rediculous. I'm pretty sure we have instinctive drives towards sex, the fight or flight response, instinctive knowledge of how to breast feed, instinctive desires to play fight with siblings, etc

You're wrong on all counts except for the breast-feeding one, and even then you've got the details wrong. However, the rooting reflex, in addition to not engaging the parts of the brain required for a true instinct, extinguishes itself pretty rapidly.

Like Method said, there's large debates going over rather or not humans have instincts. I'd pull up a bundle of APA studies on the topic, except the stuff would be boring as hell to read, and the rebuttals would be just as bad.

[Rad]

Then if you're telling the truth, you have my sympathy. But you forgot the second half of the formula: "Scream for help". If you're being chased by strangers, that alone is enough to deter most of them. I've been accosted at the mall by security, for trying to bring my own child home-- I was accused of being a kidnapper.

If you're lying-- and a story about being attacked by not one, but three strangers-in-trenchcoats simultaneously, is a pretty tall tale-- you just lost all credibility. About the only way I can see that story being possible is if you were in trouble with the state somehow, in which case they were trained in how to corral a kid and were improperly using "safe" restraint techniques. That also casts your whole story in a different light, because the only time they're supposed to apply that kind of force is when the patient is the one resisting and running-- you don't jump on a guy who's not putting up a fight.

Group homes, omae. Screaming doesn't help when the only adults in earshot are the ones chasing you. But yeah, in most situations, yelling for help can be very effective.

For the record, the authorization to use force kicks in when you're "being a danger to yourself and/or others" and there's a lot of leeway given with that definition. In my experience, the rules of when and how to use force were largely disregarded anyway--that kind of job attracts a lot of messed-up people with control issues, and there's very little accountability or oversight to rein it in.

And now you've pissed me off. You have no idea what I've been through, junior. All you know is that I haven't been bragging and boasting about all the fights I got into, plus tossing in a "woe-is-me" child abuse story with no proof to back it up. You may have been hurt once, and want to keep hurting the world as a result, but that doesn't even come close to a hard lesson learned, sonny. Nor does it mean that lashing out is the best means of self-defense.

No, I don't know what you've been through. I do know you're holding on to some ideas that I know to be untrue, and that you're so devoted to them that you choose to insult me and dismiss my arguments rather than consider them rationally. I'm sorry if I pissed you off, but you've been attacking my character since your first response.

I didn't mention all that to brag, or to give some sob story, I did it to illustrate my point and the fact that it is the product of experience. Being violently attacked every day for over ten years will teach you some things about keeping yourself safe, and having to live in that environment forces you to cut out the BS and get practical.

I'm not arguing from emotion or pride here. If you could drop your attitude and prejudice you might be able to see that. I could be wrong, and if you think that I am, I'd like to hear your reasons--but insults and statements of faith will not convince me.

In my experience, a child running from an adult doesn't have much of a chance unless they've got a pretty big head start. Kids are quick, but adults have a longer stride and a longer reach, and from what I've seen an adult can overtake a kid more often than not. We tend to think of children as being faster, but I'd say they just go full-throttle more often. When an adult and a child go all-out, the adult is usually faster.

At least, that's what I've observed. I don't have any hard data on the subject, but generally having longer legs increases your speed, because you can cover more ground with each stride. If we're talking about an adult chasing a teenager or someone more their size, then it probably comes down more on youth and fitness level.

So far, I've posted a list of realistic self-defense scenarios, and demonstrated how violence is seldom the best response. Your only reply to that list is a personal anecdote of dubious quality. Do you have any better counter-examples?

Actually, you've presented those scenarios and then stated that violence is seldom the best response. Most of the arguments I've seen from your are just statements of fact, with another unsupported statement offered as proof. For example, saying that running is the best response, then stating that striking exposes you to more risk.

I've provided several reasons why both of those statements are untrue, such as your inability to see and respond to your opponent while running, and the fact that turning to run takes time and telegraphs your intent. I've yet to see you address either, you just fall back on your litany of "running is best", or attack my character instead.

Dismissing someone's argument as "macho BS" is just name-calling, if you can provide an example to support your point, I'll be glad to hear it.

[Critias]

I think it's amusing that folks can (for lack of a better term) "agree to disagree" when it comes down to the nit-picking little side argument of "do humans have instincts or not," but refuse to do so on the overarcing point of "is it better to ALWAYS run or ALWAYS fight?"

Because (like I said several pages ago), the plain old truth is fucking neither one. It's gonna vary from person to person, attacker to attacker, scenario to scenario, and terrain to terrain. So what are we still arguing for?

[The Neutronium A...]

So what are we still arguing for?

Um, it's the internet?

[Critias]

Um, it's the internet?

SHUT UP, STUPID. NO ONE ASKED Y--oh, huh. Yeah. I kind of see what you mean.

[Cain]

Group homes, omae. Screaming doesn't help when the only adults in earshot are the ones chasing you. But yeah, in most situations, yelling for help can be very effective.

Like I said, state situation. And like you said, that's hardly the normal self-defense situation.

I'm sorry you were stuck in a state home; but if there's any lesson to be learned from them, it's that they're not a stand in for real life.

In my experience, a child running from an adult doesn't have much of a chance unless they've got a pretty big head start. Kids are quick, but adults have a longer stride and a longer reach, and from what I've seen an adult can overtake a kid more often than not. We tend to think of children as being faster, but I'd say they just go full-throttle more often. When an adult and a child go all-out, the adult is usually faster.

That's why I said "Running *and* screaming". A child's best chance for safety is to attract the attention of other adults. You need time and distance to have a chance for screaming to work. Just the other week, I had my daughter start running and screaming from me at the mall, and I had to answer some harsh questions from mall security. That's exactly how the scenario is supposed to work, and it does.

I've provided several reasons why both of those statements are untrue, such as your inability to see and respond to your opponent while running, and the fact that turning to run takes time and telegraphs your intent.

Punching and striking also telegraph your intent. And don't give me guff about how enough training will remove that; if you watch MMA fighters or boxers, you can clearly see it when they go to strike or attempt a move. Running telegraphs less, since the other guy's primed for attacks coming in.

Once you start running, if the other guy is going to get you, he's going to have to grab you. Once you feel that grab, you can easily whirl and attack the arm, since he can't dodge the blow without letting go. Attack your way up the arm, knock him down, and start running again. You don't need to see the guy to anticipate his moves.

[Wounded Ronin]

Um, it's the internet?

NO U R.

[Method]

Interesting article on hoplology.com related to the whole run vs fight debate.

Predatory aggression --> Fight
Affective aggression --> Run/Walk away

[Rad]

I think it's amusing that folks can (for lack of a better term) "agree to disagree" when it comes down to the nit-picking little side argument of "do humans have instincts or not," but refuse to do so on the overarcing point of "is it better to ALWAYS run or ALWAYS fight?"

Because (like I said several pages ago), the plain old truth is fucking neither one. It's gonna vary from person to person, attacker to attacker, scenario to scenario, and terrain to terrain. So what are we still arguing for?

Because banging one's head against the wall is sometimes enjoyable?

Actually, I've been staying out of the "do we have instincts" side of this, because it's patently ridiculous. Human instinct is about as readily observable as any phenomena gets, so there's little possible debate besides semantics and outright BS.

Ultimately, whether people debate something or not is just a question of whether they feel like it at the time. It's not like there's any logic involved.

For myself, I like sparring. ;-)

As for circumstances affecting which response is best, of course that's true--but when you zero those out you can still make a general comparison between two types of responses. The argument hasn't been whether it's always better to run or fight, but which one it's usually better to do, all other things being equal.

Um, it's the internet?

That too. :biggrin:

Like I said, state situation. And like you said, that's hardly the normal self-defense situation.

I'm sorry you were stuck in a state home; but if there's any lesson to be learned from them, it's that they're not a stand in for real life.

Just to clarify, most of them were private businesses, not state-owned, which is part of why there's such an oversight problem. The few state-run facilities I was in were much better, actually.

As for them not being a stand in for real life, I disagree--they're an excellent example of the kind of worst-case scenarios you probably won't find yourself in, but really should be prepared for. IE: Facing multiple foes with a size and skill advantage, with no help available.

Sure, you're not likely to win a fight like that, (I never did) but facing an impossible challenge really hones your skills, and forces you to find the most effective ways of improving your chances--rather than just settling for what works in a normal situation.

Even just the regular brawls the broke out among the kids were helpful. Facing multiple opponents on a regular basis who really intend to do you harm is a lot better practice than sparring in a dojo.

That's why I said "Running *and* screaming". A child's best chance for safety is to attract the attention of other adults. You need time and distance to have a chance for screaming to work. Just the other week, I had my daughter start running and screaming from me at the mall, and I had to answer some harsh questions from mall security. That's exactly how the scenario is supposed to work, and it does.

You told your daughter to start running away from you and screaming while in a public mall? Ballsy, but a good way to illustrate it's effectiveness.

Also sounds like a good way to get arrested or have child services come sniffing around--you might want to be careful about stuff like that. I'm glad that mall security isn't as apathetic where you live as they are in some places though. Sometimes a kid screaming and trying to get away from an adult just gets written off as bad behavior--even if they yell "stranger" or the like. Again, I'm speaking from personal experience here, your mileage may vary--I seem to have had a lot of bad luck growing up.

Bottom line is that you can't always rely on other people to help you. I think the biggest difference in our approach to self defense is that you go with what will work most of the time, where I prefer to plan for the worst-case scenario. I try to find what's best, instead of what's "good enough, usually".

Punching and striking also telegraph your intent. And don't give me guff about how enough training will remove that; if you watch MMA fighters or boxers, you can clearly see it when they go to strike or attempt a move. Running telegraphs less, since the other guy's primed for attacks coming in.

Training won't completely remove telegraphs, no, but I have to disagree that turning to run telegraphs less.

First of all, watching a fight from the sidelines or on TV is not the same as facing the guy yourself. You're watching the fighters from the side instead of head on, which makes the telegraphs easier to spot. Secondly, if by MMA you mean crap like the UFC, I haven't been terribly impressed with the level of skill shown there. Granted, I haven't watched much--that last fight between Chuck Liddell and Randy Couture a few years ago pretty much ruined it for me. Big unskilled guy wins because his opponent slipped on some sweat and fell down? Check please.%0

[Cain]

Actually, I've been staying out of the "do we have instincts" side of this, because it's patently ridiculous. Human instinct is about as readily observable as any phenomena gets, so there's little possible debate besides semantics and outright BS.

So, in other words, you believe what you see, and not what science tells you? How's that flat earth working for you, anyway? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/cool.gif)

Dude, it's readily observable that the sun comes up and down each and every day, when in fact it's just an illusion. Don't believe everything you see. The sun doesn't go up and down, we go around and around. Likewise, humans may have things that look like instincts, but when observed from the correct stance, they turn out to be something totally else.

You told your daughter to start running away from you and screaming while in a public mall? Ballsy, but a good way to illustrate it's effectiveness.

I taught her to run and scream from strangers. I didn't expect her to use it on me, but as least I know the lesson took.

Bottom line is that you can't always rely on other people to help you. I think the biggest difference in our approach to self defense is that you go with what will work most of the time, where I prefer to plan for the worst-case scenario. I try to find what's best, instead of what's "good enough, usually".

Nothing works *all* of the time. If you waste time training for situations that never happen, you'll lose time training for the situations that will happen.

THe average martial arts student, IIRC, stays in training for about 3-6 months. During that time, you cannot effectively train someone to defeat a clan of ninja masters, always the worst-case scenario. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) You can, however, give them the tools to deal with the situations they're most likely to come across. That's why you need to emphasize running, instead of fighting.

Training won't completely remove telegraphs, no, but I have to disagree that turning to run telegraphs less.

Try this little experiment. Have a friend throw a quarter at you, and see how often you can catch it. Now, have him throw it at his shoulder, same speed and everything, and see how often you can catch it. In addition to the distance factor, your reactions aren't trained to deal with non-incoming objects.