Experiences with the case of emergency

Gentlemen,

maybe it is inappropriate to appeal to such a subject.
I still wanted to ask if there is any interest on speaking of these things.

Many judokas avoid such subjects and would not like to have to deal with real violence and their effects.

I had to deal with all of my life and so I knwo what it is.

If somebody is interested in my experiences, I am ready with pleasure to divide this.

If this is, nevertheless, an inappropriate subject, I would like to apologise.

Greets
Tom

"tis none to you, for there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so."

Speak your peace, good sir.

Allright ...

There are some questions about the worst case, aren't they?

Do we train hard enough to get over in case of emergency?
Do we train the right things?
How we can prove?

In my point of view the most important thing is to have a teacher who has significant experience in dealing with real power.

What do you think?

Yes, we do have the excellent kata Kano Shihan created.
And a lot of judoka told me that it would be enough to do these kata again and again.
But my experiences showed me a different picture.
Yes, that judo kata are excellent and must be repeated hard.

But to get the abilities of stand real violence and very dangerous situations there must be done more.
Much more.

That is what I think.

A good friend of mine was attacked by a group of kickboxing-like guys after his judo training last week. You'll understand that his judo didn't help him, except to take ukemi while being kicked to the ground.
Problem in real life is, that it's not always an equal 'fight' (one on one like in judo) and that aggression is often brutal. Are there proper judo techniques against multiple attackers who kick you all the way around? Judo without atemi? Judo almost never applying techniques without kumikata? Ha! Have a nice grip on a wild animal attacking you with fists or even knives!

Judo is a fantastic way in theory and on the tatami, but against violence in real life nothing helps better than brutal power and absolute domination.

I am sorry to disagree, Rensa.
Please do not think I would be offensiv.
But my experiences are complete different from what you wrote.

A good friend of mine was attacked by a group of kickboxing-like guys
after his judo training last week. You'll understand that his judo
didn't help him ...

Exactely this I do not understand.
Why did his judo not helped him?
Does he train judo as a competition sport only?
Did he never practised atemi-waza in full speed and in full contact in his training?
Did he never struggled in sparring/randori sessions against two or three attackers?

Problem in real life is, that it's not always an equal 'fight' (one on one like in judo) and that aggression is often brutal.

That is absolutely true.
Couldn't agree more.

But ...
It is no problem to be prepared.
It is a matter of how the training is focused.
It is possible to make up the training for such cases.
We do it six evenings a week.

Are there proper judo techniques against multiple attackers who kick you all the way around?

Yes, there are.
But is less a question of "what kind of techniques i shall use", its more a matter of using the principles of judo.
Sorry if I now sound smart-alecky.
And I hasten to add that I do not want to sound condescendingly.

All I can say is that I have a lot of experiences with real violence.
And in my experiences judo as the complete fighting system Kano Shihan built is one of the best to handle dangerous and real violent situations.

Judo without atemi?

Judo includes very good and effective atemi as known.
It is a pity that it is trained today so often without.

Judo almost never applying techniques without kumikata?

I am not sure if I understand what you want to say, please remember that English is not my language.
There are a lot of techniques in judo you don't need a kumikata like in sportjudo competitions.
All the throwing techniques are appliable without the gi.
That is my experience from decades of judo competition, grappling competition and first of all from my numerously clashes with real violence in real situations.

Maybe there are different experiences by different people.
I only can tell about what did happen in my life.

Have a nice grip on a wild animal attacking you with fists or even knives!

Not necessary to grip in such situations.
I never did.
There are much better things you can do.
Use your elbows, use your knees and so on.
And learn how to use a knife as an effective weapon.
Is that judo?
Yes.

Judo is a fantastic way in theory and on
the tatami, but against violence in real life nothing helps better than
brutal power and absolute domination.

I am sorry but I disagree.
I am not heavy, I am not strong.
I do not have much muscular strength.

All my life I had to deal with violence.
I grew up in an Eastern German child home.
Believe me, I do know what that is - violence.
And yes, I do knwo what it's like to have to stand against two or three attackers.

Judo, used as more than a sport ... used as the complete fighting system Kano Shihan built, is one of the most effective thing for real fights I ever saw.
And I saw a lot.
And brutal force is a part of judo too ... but it's a matter how and when used.

Again - I only do share my own knowledge an my own experiences here.

It is to far to me to teach somebody who has gained other experience than me.

Like so many other average judoka, I have never practiced other judo than what the average dojo teaches and never on the street in real fights. Neither does the good friend I mentioned.
Good to read you have also other experiences, being more effective SD in judo.
But you will not be surprised that we don't practice atemi, or 1 on 2 or more. Most judoka do know it exists, but never practice it.

The most vital part of self-defense is the ability to recognize situations in which you can use what you know. A runner can only escape a threat if he has space to run, so a vital skill for such a person would be to create the necessary space. In a similar way we must recruit skills that aren't routinely taught in judo in order to apply judo off the mat. This comes naturally to some people, but for most of us this requires very deliberate training.

What people consider "good" self-defense depends on the context in which they picture themselves fighting. People who really subscribed to what the Gracie's were selling ("the most effective self-defense system in the world") probably thought of applying grappling techniques when they were fighting one person with no interruptions. Empirically, if you're mounted on top of somebody controlling their arms, you're totally exposed to another attacker. In that situation, it's not that GJJ is useless- rather, in order to make sure you don't get soccer kicked in the head you have to recruit other skills or apply what you know in a different way. This isn't very descriptive because how to practically apply judo in self-defense situations depends on many variables. What those variables are and how it changes what you should do is discussion worth having, but not necessarily what the OP was after.

Rensa wrote:Like so many other average judoka, I have never practiced other judo than what the average dojo teaches and never on the street in real fights. Neither does the good friend I mentioned.
Good to read you have also other experiences, being more effective SD in judo.
But you will not be surprised that we don't practice atemi, or 1 on 2 or more. Most judoka do know it exists, but never practice it.

Yes, that is true.
And it is such a pity.
All I can do is to offer my knowledge and experience to share.
And to hope that nobody will misunderstand this.

I find this thread very confusing.

genetic judoka wrote:I find this thread very confusing.

Why?
I try to discuss judo as a system called by Kano himself "for fighting in earnest".
Seems to be get out of the focus a bit that judo is more than a sport.

Allright, to make my point of view clearer I told something about my background.
I tried to ask some questions I find important for the training focused on self defense.

Please explain, why this is confusing.

At the moment I can't understand ...

Trained reflexes learnt through the repeated and repetitious practice of techniques in Judo and Aikido (learnt in the Police Force and practised to this day) have greatly assisted my escape from harm on many occassions and have resulted in less harm to the person projecting the violence. I have also found these skills invaluable in preventing individuals from self-harm. These days I am getting a bit too old and don't think so quick on my feet as I used to. The repeated and repetitious practice of techniques has become even more important to ensure my safe return to my wife and kids.

A ramble.

No such animal as total self defence (sd) There is always going to be a situation or assailant who will give us a hiding regardless of our so called expert abilities in some form of budo or martial art, whatever.

No such thing as the best SD, its never been the art but the chap who knows how to use his abilities.

many of THE most effective street criminals have never even seen inside a dojo so don't think for a second learning any MA is going to make one a capable street fighter.

True SD for Joe public like you and me is to learn to use ones head. Put the testosterone away, temper that male ego and simply avoid situations where you KNOW crap happens. Lets be honest, most fights are predictable and avoidable but not all.

if one truly desires to learn a manner of SD be prepared for a very very long course of years of hard dedicated training and even then its far from a guarantee.

Be well aware of the law. It is now all to common to see burglars suing there victims as the house holder has defended himself against an assailant. Being old is also no guarantee against prosecution. Some laws are rather odd in Europe and on times even tend to favour the criminal.

To truly master an SD is dangerous. One has to learn to harm and hurt another human being without consideration, that is a classic reason why judo is not a wise choice to make when looking for a pure SD. The education of judo is to lead to world peace, you can't accept that notion then go bash some one or hurt a partner in training to prepare you to go bash some one that is the reason kano Shihan developed judo away from a ju jutsu and enrolled judo into a budo, a passive combat art where the aim is to win against the self not some would be attacker. I am not suggesting an experienced judoka could not deal out some decent SD but with its philosophy of care for our partner it is far from the number one activity to learn. Now true ju utsu would be much higher on the list. problem there is true ju jutsu one harms every lesson ones opponent, that it the ideal and intention. ju jtsu is not a sport any more than judo is a sport. Where the two activities separate is in their intent toward how they are practiced through the mind set of the practitioners. A ju jutsuka is not there to look after his opponent he is there to learn self physical survival and if you are in the way then one walks home for tea the other doesn't.

Judo is about developing character, a strong, humane, mature, thinking character who avoids harming another person, hardly an ideal philosophy for an SD..?

Todays judo is a sport just like cycling etc. Go back some 50 years and that was not the case, not at all. If a person truly desires to learn SD join the army for a period, see active service and then lets talk again.. In comparison most tihngs done in a gym are play school when compared to fighting in a live active theatre of conflict or what we call war.

Just a scratch on the surface post to start with.

Mike

Judo Dad wrote:Trained reflexes learnt through the repeated and repetitious practice of techniques in Judo and Aikido (learnt in the Police Force and practised to this day) have greatly assisted my escape from harm on many occassions and have resulted in less harm to the person projecting the violence. I have also found these skills invaluable in preventing individuals from self-harm. These days I am getting a bit too old and don't think so quick on my feet as I used to. The repeated and repetitious practice of techniques has become even more important to ensure my safe return to my wife and kids.

I have well trained reflexes on a judo mat. I still jump a foot when my grandson hides on me and jumps out.! SD is so much more and very complex.

Mike

Hanon wrote:A ramble.

No such animal as total self defence (sd) There is always going to be a situation or assailant who will give us a hiding regardless of our so called expert abilities in some form of budo or martial art, whatever.

No such thing as the best SD, its never been the art but the chap who knows how to use his abilities.

many of THE most effective street criminals have never even seen inside a dojo so don't think for a second learning any MA is going to make one a capable street fighter.

True SD for Joe public like you and me is to learn to use ones head. Put the testosterone away, temper that male ego and simply avoid situations where you KNOW crap happens. Lets be honest, most fights are predictable and avoidable but not all.

if one truly desires to learn a manner of SD be prepared for a very very long course of years of hard dedicated training and even then its far from a guarantee.

Be well aware of the law. It is now all to common to see burglars suing there victims as the house holder has defended himself against an assailant. Being old is also no guarantee against prosecution. Some laws are rather odd in Europe and on times even tend to favour the criminal.

To truly master an SD is dangerous. One has to learn to harm and hurt another human being without consideration, that is a classic reason why judo is not a wise choice to make when looking for a pure SD. The education of judo is to lead to world peace, you can't accept that notion then go bash some one or hurt a partner in training to prepare you to go bash some one that is the reason kano Shihan developed judo away from a ju jutsu and enrolled judo into a budo, a passive combat art where the aim is to win against the self not some would be attacker. I am not suggesting an experienced judoka could not deal out some decent SD but with its philosophy of care for our partner it is far from the number one activity to learn. Now true ju utsu would be much higher on the list. problem there is true ju jutsu one harms every lesson ones opponent, that it the ideal and intention. ju jtsu is not a sport any more than judo is a sport. Where the two activities separate is in their intent toward how they are practiced through the mind set of the practitioners. A ju jutsuka is not there to look after his opponent he is there to learn self physical survival and if you are in the way then one walks home for tea the other doesn't.

Judo is about developing character, a strong, humane, mature, thinking character who avoids harming another person, hardly an ideal philosophy for an SD..?

Todays judo is a sport just like cycling etc. Go back some 50 years and that was not the case, not at all. If a person truly desires to learn SD join the army for a period, see active service and then lets talk again.. In comparison most tihngs done in a gym are play school when compared to fighting in a live active theatre of conflict or what we call war.

Just a scratch on the surface post to start with.

Mike

I agree with all your points but must clarify that constables have different objectives to soldiers. I am long retired from the force but would expect that certain basics remain the same and that the constable endeavours to restrain and control an aggressor and where required present them in reasonable condition (for the circumstances) before a court. BTW: I would not want to be in their shoes these days with the legal situation as you quite rightly describe it.

Health workers can also be subjected to acts of aggression (often unexpected) from disturbed persons but a response that inflicts excessive harm is not acceptable. So quick reflexes, getting out of the way or beating a retreat may be the only option.

Todays judo is a sport just like cycling etc. Go back some 50 years and that was not the case, not at all. How true, you have brilliantly summed up the current state of Judo.



"the man who is at peace with himself is unlikely to make war on others."

I think the distinction perhaps ought to be made between the ability to defend oneself and the ability to win a fight. Though they are basically both combat there are important differences between fighting with the intent to hurt someone else and fighting with the intent to preserve ones own well being or life (which may not even involve physical combat at all); and arguably, Judo and associated principles of behavior is far better suited to the latter than the former? If what you're doing is actually self defense and duly motivated then you don't even need to be able to defeat and overpower the threat at all, only escape from it; which is often a far more feasible option anyway and entirely different from a combat situation where both sides intend to injure or kill.

Quicksilver wrote:I think the distinction perhaps ought to be made between the ability to defend oneself and the ability to win a fight. ...... If what you're doing is actually self defense and duly motivated then you don't even need to be able to defeat and overpower the threat at all, only escape from it; which is often a far more feasible option anyway and entirely different from a combat situation where both sides intend to injure or kill.

This is a good point and there's a lot of truth in it. I will say, though, that being female and small, I might need to incapacitate someone to get away, given that most men will be larger, stronger, and faster than me. And I wouldn't hesitate to do it. If I got to the point of physical confrontation it would be because I or my kids were in a life-threatening situation, and I'd rather be sued or arrested than dead. That said, I am extremely unlikely ever to be in such a situation--I'm a big fan of "the best weapon for self defense is your BRAIN!!!" I would hand a mugger my wallet and ask if he wanted the keys too. BUT--if he tried to force me into a car, one of us would be hurt really badly or dead fairly quickly, and hopefully it wouldn't be me. (Or at least not just me.) If it was, well, it would still be better than what would have likely happened later.

I train jujitsu as well as judo--a rather untraditional style with a lot of sparring and resistance. It has (literally!) pounded into me that my size and strength (and I'm strong for a woman) are a real liability, BUT I do have tools, especially against someone who isn't trained. I just better react fast because I don't have much time. I hope I never find out if I can use it on the street--but I don't think I'd be helpless and that's a good feeling.

Erika

tom herold wrote:

genetic judoka wrote:I find this thread very confusing.

Why?
I try to discuss judo as a system called by Kano himself "for fighting in earnest".
Seems to be get out of the focus a bit that judo is more than a sport.

Allright, to make my point of view clearer I told something about my background.
I tried to ask some questions I find important for the training focused on self defense.

Please explain, why this is confusing.

At the moment I can't understand ...

the reason why I find this thread confusing is that it refers to using judo for self defense, and it speaks of making it better for self defense. if I am required to fight to defend myself or others near to me, my goal is to maim. my goal is to quickly separate my attacker from his ability to cause harm. unfortunately that often means causing harm to them (restraining and calling the cops is ideal only in a 1on1 situation).

judo was created as a means of training that does not cause harm when done properly. if I throw you and you get hurt, either I threw you wrong or you fell wrong. either way something went wrong.

now, does that mean that skills developed in judo are not useful for self defense? of course not. an osoto gari can kill. but that's not what we train for. I do judo because I have no interest in fighting. I spent the early part of my life fighting a lot (often in defense of others), and I have no desire to do any more fighting. if I was searching for an art to practice that is intended to hone my fighting abilities, judo would not be the one I'd pick. that's why I find this thread confusing.

Dear Genetic Judoka,
I do respect your opinion.

Please do not misunderstand me, but in my point of view that what you write stands a little in contradiction to some statements of Kano.

I think to remember that Kano Shihan called the first level (of three levels) of his fighting system "defence against attack".
And when he said so, there were no idea of judo as sport as far as I know.

Kano declared that there should be a systematic and concrete study in judo in the Kodokan to realize his ideal of judo, not as a sport but as a martial art.

This is also the lower level of judo, based on his whole judo concept of 1918 (Kano, 1918). It means that the Kodokan officially had a mandate to study other martial arts since 1926.

Fumiaki Shishida, Waseda-University, (2010):
"Jigoro Kano's pursuit of ideal judo and it's succession: Judo's techniques performed from a distance"
[quote]

Kodokan Laboratory of Martial Arts

In March of 1926, Kano (1926, p.3) announced the mission of the Kodokan and its undertaking as follows.
−−
The Kodokan will establish a Laboratory of Martial Arts. In the group,
we will study traditional Japanese martial arts as basics and, in
consideration of foreign countries’ martial arts, practice those martial
arts, etc.

−− The Kodokan’s policy is that we will study and
teach Kenjutsu (the art of fencing), Bo-jutsu (the art of staff
fighting), So-jutsu (the art of the spear), Kyu-jutsu (the art of
archery) and Naginata-jutsu (the art of the Japanese halberd), and all
other martial arts as elements of judo.

−−
We will place emphasis on empty-handed arts, but the kata of both
Kenjutsu and Bo-jutsu will be added to the list of arts now.

−− We will apply the principle of “Seiryoku-zen’yo” in the Kodokan to study and teach them.

Again Fumiaki Shishida:

Abstract: Jigoro Kano, the founder of judo, had great interest several other martial arts: boxing, karate, aiki-jujutsu, bo-jutsu, wrestling and others.
He studied them enthusiastically to improve judo with the objective of making it the best that it could be. The new training method that Kano conceived in 1918 was to be a combination of judo and kendo and was the result of his studying those other martial arts. The purpose of this study is to examine Kano’s involvement with those five other martial arts.

And so on and so on ...
If you like I can give you some more words of the founder, showing that his judo should be much more than an sport end more than an "educaitional system".

Kano (1918, Vol.7: 5) says in 1918, “Judoka will come to exert their energy to study boxing in the future.” In fact, in 1927, nine years later, Kano (Kano, J., Otaki. T., ed., 1972, p.118) warned how to approach a boxer and gave a concrete example about how to fight with a boxer.

In 1924, Kano created a new kata, a gymnastic exercise called Seiryoku-zenyo-Kokumin-taiiku or “National gymnastics created on the basis of the principle of Seiryoku-zenyo” (S. Oimatsu. (1984) translated as Seiryoku-zen’yo as Worthy Use of Human Efforts). Kano invented the kata from the techniques of various martial arts in order to develop a robust person. The kata consist of two parts: a solo practice and a paired practice.
The solo practice was composed of two parts:
(1) 15 techniques with 10 striking and 5 kicking techniques; (2) 13 striking techniques, practiced by the pair in two parts: (1) 10 techniques from
Kime-no-kata; (2) 10 techniques from Ju-no-kata (Kotani and Otaki, 1971, pp.169-191). As it is known, judo has three categories of techniques:
nage-waza (throwing techniques), katame-waza (grappling techniques) and atemi-waza (striking techniques). The term atemi-waza, which includes
kicking, is sometimes shortened into atemi (or ate).
When we study this kata, it is clear that Kano tried to improve the judoist’s awareness of atemi as well as people’s health.

This is an very important point I think:

Kano (1931a, p.3) says in 1932, "This technique is one of the methods developed
against western boxing. This kata was formulated as a counter technique against western boxing, though there is no doubt that it is applied not only against
boxing but also in other cases.
It is obvious that randori is needed, but we cannot practice atemi in randori.
A martial art that lacks atemi is a deformed martial art.
Therefore, we have to practice in parallel both randori and kata, but kata is generally neglected while practitioners apply themselves sincerely to randori.

So far ...

These words of the founder did show to me that there is no intention of "only sport" in judo.
There is - in my point of view - no intention to be nice to everybody in every situation.


Last but not least this:

In 1921, when Ad Santel, professional wrestler, visited Tokyo to fight with judoists of the Kodokan by the brokerage of a promoter, the public opinion was in a fervour over the bout. The basis of Kano’s argument (1921, pp.2-5) was that in the narrow sense, judo is the best way of using body and mind aiming at offense and defense.
Therefore, a judoist uses any weapons, like, bo (stick), sword, pistol, if it is useful. If so, a bout with a judoist could not be organized unless a challenger is prepared to die. Kano says, “I would like you to keep in your memory that a bout between a judoist and another martial artist is organized only as a real fight.”

For me that sounds not like sports ...
The founder himself said so.

That's why for me judo is much more than a sport.
According to the words of the founder I see judo as a martial art.

Please note, that is my personal point of view.

tom herold wrote:But is less a question of "what kind of techniques i shall use", its more a matter of using the principles of judo.

This is at the core of the self defence we teach. We believe that practicing to apply ude gatame from a straight punch or kote gaeshi from a clothes grab is doomed to failure in a fight. Why? If the conditions are not the same as practiced (the attacker punches / grabs differently or resists the technique or attacks you at night on a grassy slope) the technique will not likely work. Because kata-based self defence styles usually do not have 'plan b's' for their techniques, when a technique fails in a real situation and the student has no backup, he/she panics. There is enough sensory stimulation in an attack without adding panic from failed defences.

We have found principles-based fighting to be the most effective means of defence. A few good strikes, clinches and throws can be adapted in a multitude of situations. What is meant by principles-based fighting? Applying universal principles. For example: balance; one must take an attacker's mental, emotional and physical balance (about in that order) in order to control the fight. Body position: finding good body position reduces the chance of being damaged and allows one the opportunity to strike effectively or control the opponent's physical balance. Base: establish a strong base and weaken the opponent's (whether by strikes, distractions or unbalancing). Etc, etc.

With principles-based training, judo is perfectly useful as a means of self defence ... with two provisos! First, strikes must be a part of fighting. Use them to take the opponent's balance (mental, emotional and physical) and to maintain it. Fill up any space with strikes. Secondly, one must practice fighting in order to fight. Randori (I'm talking fight randori, here) is central to learning how to find good position, unbalance the opponent and weaken his/her base before slamming them with your favourite throw or king hit. Randori does not have to be full-on, full-contact; working at, say, 60% allows the conscious brain time to work things out and learn. That said, occasional 100% sessions are needed, too, to train the unconscious brain and control our emotional responses to attack. Strikes need not be full-contact but they should be hard enough to be respected and solicit a response.

Really, what I am saying is no different than judo is taught. Before attempting competition, one learns a throw, practices it and then tests it in randori. When uke learns to block that throw, then one learns a combination, practices it and then tries it out in randori. Training for self defence is the same. Take that same throw, practice it from a number of different positions and then test it in randori. When uke learns to block the throw, unbalance him/her another direction or smack him/her a few times, then use another throw.

So, yes, I believe judo is fine for self defence so long as atemi is taught and practiced, and plenty of time is set aside for self-defence randori. Judo randori will help your self defence and self defence randori will help your judo. Just as Kano intended ...!

I always find the "self defense" threads perplexing.

It takes only a few simple rule changes at the Olympic level such as grip restrictions and the whole game changes, this is still the same sport!!

If you take an average lesson plan and then put it into a non-consensual fight the probability is a high degree of failure. This is excepting physical training and aggression.

Take a step back from full self defence and move into a consensual environment whereby a range if techniques are allowed and it comes down to physicality, mentality plus a narrow range of techniques applied with skill and timing.

Move back into self defence it is this physicality and mentality that precedes the fighting and predicates the possibility of success. The skills practiced need be relevant to the application.

An Osoto Gari will KO an opponent more often than a right hook, IF done in the fashion of a fight. Meaning if you cannot apply an Osoto whilst your antagonist(s) are throw punches then it is useless for self defense IMO.

Self Defense combat practice from my observation is practiced in a void from fighting. By fighting I mean actual contact and not pre-rehearsed outcomes.

Self Defense for those without physicality or mentality to fight is very difficult and likely those people should practice awareness and diffusion techniques or screaming, at best they may be able to hurt or distract an attack in dissuasion or escape.

When I'm 70 I'm unlikely, very unlikely, to defeat a 21 yr old aggressor, I don't kid myself, I might still be a mean bastard with a life time of techniques but my physicality will likely void any attempt to "defeat" my opponent.

Cheers

In answer to the question about fights.

Pickups and footsweeps

The average person is a useless fool when they are off the ground, the land hard and you are in top or standing.

Alternatively the average person knows nothing of footsweeps and cannot deed end them, again they land hard and you are on too or standing.

I've applied both well, either escape or tap dance.

Both require calmness of mind and hard physical perpetration in training to use well. Unlike tournaments their I'd no ref to intervene so you get one chance.

Cheers

Now possibly I make myself very unpopular one ...
You may call me a barbarian, but I can't help.

However, I have the suspicion that we do not speak of the same things.

I try to discuss real violence in real violent situations.
And in such situations it is not helpful to have the intention to do the
same things done in sportjudo, only changed in little details.

I'm sorry for saying that.
I really would like not to hurt or to insult anyody.
But I think that many which codiscuss here to never real violence were put out.

Also a "non-consensual fight" on the mat is not the same like a real violent situation.
Sometimes I find in such discussions some points showing me a pink dreamworld ...
I am sorry, I do not want to be impolite.

Maybe I should make more precisely what I mean.
It is no dangerous situation if Mr. Average Voter bumps into me on the parking bay or pushes me.
This is not dangerous.
I talk, instead, of the fact that one is seriously attacked by somebody for whom extreme violence is so normal and everyday like the breathing.
Such people need no reason to attack others. They allow to step up the situation also not bit by bit, but attack immediately and without warning.

Maybe I do not succeed in making understood myself here, but I would like to point out, nevertheless, to the fact that one does not repulse such attackers with what one coaches in the "usual" sports judo.
One also does not repulse them, while one changes the "grip" here and there a bit.

The one and only chance you have is to change your training.
And to do so, you have to change your mind.

To me is aware that many sports judoka do not hear this at all with pleasure.
But if one liked to become well-fortified without deceiving himself, besides, then one must build up the necessary mind-setting.
This means that the training must be differently built up than a "normal" sports judo training.
This means that one must go with an other internal setting to this training.

Above all, however, it means that one must search for himself a teacher who has significant experience with "worst case".
It uses because nothing even if one can be explained from a theorist how one has to behave in "worst case".

Here maybe my setting does not fit in this forum.
Maybe feels one or other from me verbally attacked, even if my view was not.
But I think that clear words are right if it is about violence and the contact by force.
My teacher told me once: You train in case the fight does happen, not in case it doesn't, and you train to be able to fight the biggest baddest mo....f...er out there. Discussion over.


It is useless to discuss: "If I would be attacked I would use footsweeps ... I would use this jointlock or that stranglehold ... no, I do prefer a hip throw ... "
The technique used in such a situation is not the point.
The point is to be able to do so without any restrictions.
No doubt, no fear, no restraint, no hesitation.

One can coach this.
Judo is very well used for that because it was created exactly for it.
The idea to use judo ALSO as a sport and as an education system came much later.

If interest insists on discussing with me the training methods which make sense if one judo as "martial art" understands, I am ready with pleasure to share my experiences here.

However, I would not like to suggest myself.

A non-consensual fight happens off the mat, by its nature.

People looking for magical bullets to defeat their enemies without sweat and toil speak more of fantasy than anything else.

The most dangerous thing about Self Defense is the "What If" monster, it cannot be contained, it transcends logic and physics.

But like I said, very perplexing premise is the "self defense" world.

I now bow out of this conversation.

Cheers

tom herold wrote:Now possibly I make myself very unpopular one ...
You may call me a barbarian, but I can't help.

However, I have the suspicion that we do not speak of the same things.

I try to discuss real violence in real violent situations.
And
in such situations it is not helpful to have the intention to do the
sam things like in sportjudo, only changed in little details.

I'm sorry for saying that.
I really would like to do wrong to nobody.
But I think that many which codiscuss here to never real violence were put out.

Also a "non-consensual fight" on the mat is not the same like a real violent situation.
Sometimes I find in such discussions some points showing me a pink dreamworld ...
I am sorry, I do not want to be unpolite.

Maybe I should make more precise what I mean.
It is no dangerous situation if Mr. Average Voter bumps into me on the parking bay or pushes me.
This is not dangerous.
I talk, instead, of the fact that one is seriously attacked by somebody for whom extreme violence is so normal and everyday like the breathing.
Such people need no reason to attack others. They allow to step up the situation also not bit by bit, but attack immediately and without warning.

Maybe I do not succeed in making understood myself here, but I would like to point out, nevertheless, to the fact that one does not repulse such attackers with what one coaches in the "usual" sports judo.
One also does not repulse them, while one changes the "grip" here and there a bit.

The one and only chance you have is to change your training.
And to do so, you have to change your mind.

To me is aware that many sports judoka do not hear this at all with pleasure.
But if one liked to become well-fortified without deceiving himself, besides, then one must build up the necessary mind-setting.
This means that the training must be differently built up than a "normal" sports judo training.
This means that one must go with an other internal setting to this training.

Above all, however, it means that one must search for himself a teacher who has significant experience with "worst case".
It uses because nothing even if one can be explained from a theorist how one has to behave in "worst case".

Here maybe my setting does not fit in this forum.
Maybe feels one or other from me verbally attacked, even if my view was not.
But I think that clear words are right if it is about violence and the contact by force.
My teacher told me once: You train in case the fight does happen, not in case it doesn't, and you train to be able to fight the biggest baddest mo....f...er out there. Discussion over.


It is useless to discuss: "If I would be attacked I would use footsweeps ... I would use this jointlock or that stranglehold ... no, I do prefer a hip throw ... "
The technique used in such a situation is not the point.
The point is to be able to do so without any restrictions.
No doubt, no fear, no restraint, no hesitation.

One can coach this.
Judo is for it very well geeigent because it was created exactly for it.
The idea to use judo ALSO as a sport and as an education system came only much later.

If interest insists on discussing with me the training methods which make sense if one judo as "martial art" understands, I am ready with pleasure to share my experiences here.

However, I would not like to suggest myself.

I think I see what you mean... correct me if I'm wrong, but your concern lies less with the physical capabilities or techniques a person may use in a fight, but rather the development of the kind of attitude required to do so without hesitation?

Self defense is- or, has become- a rather complicated and convoluted subject particularly when related to martial arts, and this often makes it difficult to have a straightforward discussion about.

Depending on ones individual personality and general outlook, hurting another human being without experiencing fear, guilt, disgust, general unwillingness or any other negative emotional reaction is generally not only very difficult, but outside of extreme situations something that I personally wouldn't want to train into someone even if I could. That's the attitude not of a Judoka but of a trained killer, and also the sort of attitude I'd expect of the person for whom 'extreme violence is as normal as breathing'; it would be ironic indeed if this hypothetical training produced people no different from the very threat against which they initially sought to defend themselves...

This could be toned down to the rather different attitude of simply being able to respond to a threat not without unwillingness to harm another human being, but without allowing this to limit the effectiveness of ones defense, which arguably may be aided by your garden variety Judo class simply through the process of becoming comfortable with engaging in physical combat with someone; but a class situation is still rules, safety precautions, other people and a partner who's hopefully not actually trying to injure or kill you, and a very great many other variables away from an actual full blooded fight of the kind you describe; and if that's the sort of situation for which you want/need to be prepared, then perhaps the police force or military or another specialized system would be a far more suitable place for the necessary skills to be learned, practiced and taught than Judo dojo.

Regards,


-Q

I think I see what you mean... correct me if I'm wrong, but your concern lies less with the physical capabilities or techniques a person may use
in a fight, but rather the development of the kind of attitude required
to do so without hesitation?

This was one of my points, yes.
Thanks for understanding.


Techniques are important, but more important is the mind-set.
Techniques are only the impreesion of this mind-set.
And, I want hasten to add, I do not mean the sport like techniques of judo.
I do mean the old school ones.

Self defense is- or, has become- a rather complicated and convoluted
subject particularly when related to martial arts, and this often makes
it difficult to have a straightforward discussion about.

Seems so, yes.
But in my point of view there is no such thing as "self defense".
There is only fight.
In various ways - it can be done as a sport (in my opinion this has few to do with "fight") or in the way it is designed for.
I am sad about the fact that nearly all judoka has forgotten what judo was for, beside the later applications of sport and education.

Depending on ones individual personality and general outlook, hurting
another human being without experiencing fear, guilt, disgust, general
unwillingness or any other negative emotional reaction is generally not
only very difficult, but outside of extreme situations something that I
personally wouldn't want to train into someone even if I could.

I hesitate to contradict you, but ...
This is exactely what I call the problem.
If the situation is going worse and you never before practised what to do now, you are unable to do so.
You want to be able to leave the place upright at least?
Then practice exactely that. Learn what you need for that and learn where in judo curriculum you will find it.
Nothing else will help you.
Nothing.

I do respect everybody who says: I do not want to do such barbarian things!
Ok.
But then you are a victim if things go worse.
Confronted with real violence, you will be a victim then.
I do know that most sport judoka don't want to believe that.
But my experiences over decades showed me exactely that.

Maybe most of sport judoka never will be seriously attacked in real life.
Maybe.
But is there a guarantee?
Call me a freak, but I can you tell that violence will be find in places you never would expect.

That's the attitude not of a Judoka but of a trained killer, and also
the sort of attitude I'd expect of the person for whom 'extreme violence
is as normal as breathing'; it would be ironic indeed if this
hypothetical training produced people no different from the very threat
against which they initially sought to defend themselves...

I am bit sad to read this.
Especially because you can find phrases written by Kano himself who told that the first level of judo is "defense against attack", and he did not mean sport.
And Kano - as I wrote before - said that judoka should learn from boxers.
If wished I can bring this words of Kano (and lot more) again,

And by the way - how you will handle the attack of a person who is extremely violent?
How will you leave upright at least if you are unable to attack the aggressor effetive because you never trained to do so?

I never wrote: Kill him!
I say: Do what is necessary!
And if it is necessary to kill him ... if that is the way you can survive his attacks ...
Then do it.

I know there are many judoka interested in getting abilities of "fighting in earnest" (like Kano wrote).
Again and again it is told them: "Not here in this judo club! We do civilized judo, we do not harm anybody! Try it elsewhere! Judo is not for what you want!"

And that, I am so sorry, is crap.
I do not want to be impolite. Really not.

But what about the guys who want to do judo as an effective martial art?
Judo was as ancestor of koryu designed for that.
The "sport" idea came much later.

Allright, I thought I could find here judoka interested in other aspects of judo than sport or education.
Sorry, my failure.

I am a bit disappointed now, but it's ok.
I thaught I would find guys here interested in discussing training methods for reality. I thaught I could find guys experienced in training of atemi-waza like Sakujiro Yokoyama and Nakabayashi recommended.
I hoped to find other guys experienced in worst case too.

Please do not think I want to be impolite.
But what for do you have that "Self Defence" subforum if nobody wants to talk about really violence and nobody wants to know what to do against this violence?
I am confused about that because all I could read is: "No, man, go ahead, nobody is interested in knowledge about really worse situations of violence. We want to do judo as a sport only. And judo is not made to be used in such situations, so what the crap you talking about?"
Sorry, that is what I read in your postings.
Nobody did ask: "Hey, tell me more about your training methods. Where are they from? What Japanese teacher showed you such things? Why do you train such way and what exactly you do during your training sessions? What kind of experiences with worst cases of violence do you have?"

No problem.


Probably this is the wrong forum.
I am sorry if I should have interfered.
I wish you furthermore a lot of fun in the training.
Yours sincerely

Tom Herold