Re: your number one technique
Quote:
But I thank you because you have offered to me the opportunity to clarify how eyes matter in a fight and how much they may tell to a seasoned fighter - I never managed before to explain better this eye thing, and I feel in this thread, for the first time, I have been able to put it in words that are finally clearer (at least as far as my limited dialectical abilities can go, particularly with English). For me, your posts have been an opportunity to clarify better a point that may be useful to others. To a wider audience, not to you specifically. Yet I see you insist in turning it personal. Why? Do I know you? Have I done something to you? I see that you may have reasons to disqualify any contribution I make, in their totality and in the most unflinching terms, with an obstinacy and an obduracy that any persons savvy in fighting would find odd (whilst so many could confirm what i said make a lot of sense...), but I am fine with that. There is no way to persuade a person who has picked a personal issue out of a generalized thread: I can deal with techincal aspects, and explain myself better as much as I can, but I cannot deal with pride or gratuitous personal antipathy. The street fights we are speaking of, are street fights where your opponent want to beat you mostly bare handed - this is still very classical and happens frequently - instance: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYhYVAm-x4Y How long would you survive aginst a cop like that, Sir? I know perfectly how much I would - but you? Are you expert enough to know it beforehand? In fact, experience can reveal to you these things. And btw in that video who is the guy who is taking it? The one who waches into the face (well, where his foe's face should have been...) as I repeatedly solicited, or the one who looks down, actually exactly down there where the punches of the cop would start so that, as you (you like it personal right? lol :D )suggested earlier, one could "see" when they arrive........ and in fact he saw them arriving, and as I predicted, 100% of them landed on his face nonetheless :D But of course one can defeat the whole argument in a more consistent manner: in a real situation a guy may take out not a knife (as you suggest) but a gun. So, what are we arguing about? Against a gun, or a pack of guys with baseball mats, there is no boxing and no aikido that can make you survive - you're doomed. And this whole thread is useless against a pistol or a pack. However, by the way - you think of guys extracting a knife: you live in a beautiful word Sir - many bad gusy prefer using cutters like this: better to carry, much more dangerous, better hidden, if found by cops can be at least said it was not meant as a weapon, and far more insidious because you may conceal it in a punch. Have you ever seen what they can do with one of those? I have. If one produces the examples you think of, there is no boxing my friend, no aikido and indeed no martial art and no "periphereal vision" that will help you. However, when you wacth your opponent in the eye you do have periphereal vision. You really seem to know nothing Sir. It's not a fault, but you're passing over sound advice that, with such lack of experience, you should treasure instead... However, in a great deal of other situations, having the experience that I mention namely the one that makes you know all the given combinations and how they characteristically articulate and travel, plus the ability to watch in the eyes your opponent and understand his emotional condition in the finest degrees, makes a difference that is monumental. Only your obvious lack of experience makes you believe and argue that such experience would make no difference in many street situations. Between having it and having it not (as you have it not, Sir) there is an enormous difference - and without having that experience, Sir, you should not venture into fights - particularly not into street fights. It is, indeed, regrettable that with so little cognitions about fighting, you feel entitled to step into a street fight in order "to help" the others. But honestly, Sir: I cannot truly relate with a person who is totally incompetent. You have never been in a boxing match, you have never been in a MMA match, and yet you claim to be equipped to judge in the most derogatory terms what those who (unlike you) have been there have to say (as a general contribution to the audience). It seems that since you have beaten a couple of drunkards you feel like a tough guy, the hero of the neighbuorhood, and believe you can beat guys safely and intervene in street fights. Please Sir, consider never intervening in a street situation - the chances that you have of eventually enriching our statistics of tragic street fights are very high. Also the unconsiderate way you deal with the coma of the others by labeling such tragic results as something that can be described as "he did the right thing (...) defended himself, and his attacker was seriously hurt" reveals that you're just another irresponsible guy looking for cheap troubles - and the fact you can qualify the coma of a person like the "right thing" and in the same picture think of yourelf as a (I quote) "the good Samaritan" tells a lot about how truly dangerous you can be. For a person like you, doing the (I quote) "right thing" that you mention (for yourself and for the others), tantamount to this: stay at home, Sir. The best piece of advice you ever got. You may think it is given out of anthipaty but it is not so, Sir. Indeed I am genuinely very concerned for your safety, and for that of the others that you may endanger with your fantasized ideas. Do the real right thing Sir: stay at home. You're a dangerous man - and yes in this you were right and you may find comfort, you're dangerous indeed. Actually, you are into the kind that is the most dangerous of all kinds. |
Re: your number one technique
Quote:
Only, at times one needs to elaborate to make the simplest thing understood - and at times no elaboration seems ever enough as we see. You have got it, Sir. You have understood all that it needs to be understood to fight well, if you understood that. Experience is all. Lots of it. You may enjoy a bit of entertainment then, you earned it and you may take it with humour too :D (the fact is, movies are fictional, however screenwriters normally tap on guys with actual knowledge for their screenplays...) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfeK5xvZcDo True, street fights can be unpredictable - one more reason not to go there if you cannot say "500" - at least MMA or boxing matches lol :D ps also note: in the screenplay the guy does not intervene because a man slapped a lady - the more you know how to fight, the less you feel such urges. In real life, not just in movies. It's ironic how a movie, which is fictional, has touched so many real points - evidenty they had good martial arts counselors for the screenplay.... |
Re: your number one technique
Quote:
Dealing with that sort of person's largely a matter of getting your guard up and driving right through the middle of it till you're in a position to take him down. Black guy's problem was he was trying to stand there and box with him - and they were both really bad boxers. The cop was, admittedly, better, but he wasn't much better. Edit: Well, security guard. He's not a cop. |
Re: your number one technique
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: your number one technique
Quote:
You have no fighting competition experience Sir. If you qualify for MMA or boxing Sir, please consider practicing sparring every day for at least one full year. We are not speaking of Aikido, but of dealing daily with guys who are "autorized" to actually beat you/being beaten by you. Then you will understand perfectly what I said, and you will concur. Unfortunately there is no way to make such points totally understood to a person who has never had the opportunity to fight intensively and daily for prolonged times. I understand why you consider them "fantasy". Place one full year of experience under your belt with MMA or boxing competitons Sir, and you will see what a difference that will make. You will know it beforehand, inclusive of your defeat well before it occurs! |
Re: your number one technique
Quote:
Glad that you noticed that :D Perhaps you may also have noticed another evident element: his punches were not hurtful. So, you could afford close quarters, and since he was inclined to uppercuts (well, the other guy kept his head lowered and could see his arms instead than looking at him in right the face, so he was inviting uppercuts...), find marvelous ways to his chin tip by hooks - for with uppercuts his face sides are exposed to hook routes. However, another thing immediately obvious - you could not count on making him run out of breath any soon... this is suggested not by the fact he is so forceful (guys who start fast may end fast, actually) but by the fact he is while keeping physical composure (the guys who was beaten instead was very unorderly). That (composure) spells for some factual experience. At the end of the video the "cop" fires a good straight right - too bad we cannot see more to guess how he could behave or find himself comfortable with distance fighting. All small things that you can process just within the first 10 seconds. However, a person who is not used to fist fighting (and that was a regular street fist-fighitng, for which MMA or boxing experience makes the difference) would not last 2 minutes with that secuity guard. Less than one round and then it's over. |
Re: your number one technique
My number one technique are when those occasions come up where I allow myself to completely let go of technique and consequently the technique recognizable or not just happens!
|
Re: your number one technique
Quote:
Most of what the guard did missed. He even misses the initial counter. His virtue, such as it was, was that he was throwing out enough that the other guy wasn't really giving him anything in return. But he wasn't keeping it together. He'd just got into a position where he had to keep swinging to stop the other guy making any decisions. If was experienced he'd have picked his shots with a purpose that set him up to actually deliver stuff, rather than just throwing it out and praying for a hit. Most of what I saw wasn't suited for the range at which he was attempting to employ it. He didn't either didn't appreciate or hadn't trained the reflexes to adapt the tactical role of his movements. That suggests to me, rather than fist fighting experience where he'd have run across that problem before, he had some gym training - boxing perhaps - and bad training at that. Could he beat up some random numpty who'd never thrown a punch in their life? Sure. Could he have taken your average drunkard? Sure. But anyone who'd got a couple of week's worth of paired reaction drills and some light-contact full-speed fooling around to their name would, I suspect, have had him for breakfast - even a beginner with no experience actually fighting. They wouldn't have had to work out what his game was, they wouldn't have found themselves being forced into a certain pattern of response that set them up on the losing side. He didn't have a game - he'd managed to adequately paralyse his decision making process without anyone else doing anything other than standing in front of him. |
Re: your number one technique
Quote:
Quote:
I know this may sound alien to most persons, however this video proves I was speaking of something that exists indeed. Maybe not casually, this comes from boxing: you need experience in actual fighting in order to know how a fight may end. In this case the guy, as stated repeatedly in the video (first time at min 00.59), knew even before the fight begun how it would go, till the tinest detail (this doesn't surprise me in the least, but maybe surprises many others?) The fact the person featured here is a great champion makes no difference: when long ago I was speaking of this, I spoke so not as a great champion but as one of the many suburban bums who practiced for a while. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FZBzGhxERg I hope this helps to understand. This is how great features you may develop if you allow a martial art to go martial and act martially. But you will never come to know a thing about this with Aikido unless it will get rid of its epidemic tendency (not in all dojos, but in most) to hyperprotected and highly fictional attacks. Real fighting is made of anticipation (and this is how you may know in advance). But you cannot anticipate if you have not sparred to know what may come your way given a starting setting, You need to face attacks that are ruthless and free to come at you and keep pursuing you with the greatest liberty, in order to learn all the possibilities and know beforehand what will come your way given the alley you're in. |
Re: your number one technique
my number one technique:showing up at the dojo
|
Re: your number one technique
Soyou got to a fight or a sparrng session and run away to the dojo?
what? |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:06 PM. |
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.