Article on Grappling - by Marc MacYoung

Clive

Mathis wrote: »

What do you guys think?

His fundamental premise - that being on the ground in a "street" situation is a bad idea is a sound one. It's also a pretty obvious one - I've never heard anyone but fanboys who are still in their first few evangelical years suggest it.

Where the article falls apart is that he uses inaccurate, outdated and often incorrect terminology which makes it obvious that he's not too well up on the area he's talking about. He confuses grappling and groundwork etc.

It also must be made clear that he's not talking about self-defence or real life for normal people. He says "I'm talking live-fire situations and in places where multiple opponents and weapons were very much how violence happened" which just isn't true for people in this country (not that they don't occur but they're not the norm).

Dyr

Clive wrote: »

It also must be made clear that he's not talking about self-defence or real life for normal people. He says "I'm talking live-fire situations and in places where multiple opponents and weapons were very much how violence happened" which just isn't true for people in this country (not that they don't occur but they're not the norm).

I don't get into fights as a matter of habit but I've been in found myself in probably three confrontations in as many years and they all involved multiple opponents and weapons. Even if they didn't come into play they were present. All the assaults I've seen over the last few years involved uneven numbers and very often, also involved weapons. I don't think that dublin is the last bastion of the honourable straightener.


MacYoungs articles tend to be polemics which distracts from whatever valid points they might raise.

Clive

Bambi wrote: »

I don't think that dublin is the last bastion of the honourable straightener.

Neither do I, but we certainly don't have the culture of getting tooled up before going out, and you don't see large packs of thugs roaming the streets just looking to victimise someone on their own. Go to any large town in Ireland on a Saturday night and most of the violence you'll see is pushy shovey between two people or "yeah ... yeah" and a few digs between groups of lads.

simon-king

Quote from article: 'But that isn't what this page is about, what it is about is: Should you cross train?'

He rambles from ranting about 'live fire situations' to this statement. Cross train with what exactly .. 'grappling mixed with automatic weapons training is a win!'

This guy reads as having a Napoleon complex. He uses headings pointing at grappling but references the UFC, MMA and allegations of cowardice towards him by 'them'. He looks like he has a chip on his shoulder because he feels that these 'MMA warriors' don't appreciate how 'tough' he is because of what he has done/witnessed etc.

When not to use grappling
Do NOT attempt to use grappling if faced by Megatron this is the LAST thing you want to do you WILL get killed!

pearsquasher

That is too say, he never envisions a shoving match between a couple of young-fellas, over a bag of chips.

Does anyone seriously think that this sort of situation warrants the use of techniques that could actually injure somebody? Thats a walk-away scenario not a defend-yourself-at-all-costs one.

It pretty obvious that MacYoung is focused on life-threatening or high risk enocounters NOT school yard antics.

He also makes the assumption that the attacker will be a skilled street fighter, who knows and employs dirty tricks, is backed up by similar, and who is more than likely carrying a weapon of some kind, with the sole intention of inflicting permanent damage.

When you do sports martial arts, you can happly leave those assumptions alone and concentrate on other things like technical skill. But when you're training to deal with actual assault you had better make those assumptions the very first thing on your mind and act accordingly.

A while back I read that a bouncer restrained a young man who had a knife concealed in his sock and got stabbed in the thigh. I believe he was seriously injured. Had the bouncer assumed a hidden weapon and trained with that in mind he would probably have restrained the guy differently or not at all.

Young men carry knives... Bouncers should train to assume that they do and so, when it comes to restraint, how accessable a knife is should be built in. Its going to make your grappling skills a whole lot different and harder probably.

Raging_Ninja

pearsquasher wrote: »

Does anyone seriously think that this sort of situation warrants the use of techniques that could actually injure somebody? Thats a walk-away scenario not a defend-yourself-at-all-costs one.

Its how the majority of fights I've seen start while I was working in bars. Usually starts out with one or both shouting/trading insults, then moves to shoving, then somebody throws a punch. Occasionally they skip the shoving.

A while back I read that a bouncer restrained a young man who had a knife concealed in his sock and got stabbed in the thigh. I believe he was seriously injured. Had the bouncer assumed a hidden weapon and trained with that in mind he would probably have restrained the guy differently or not at all.

Young men carry knives... Bouncers should train to assume that they do and so, when it comes to restraint, how accessable a knife is should be built in. Its going to make your grappling skills a whole lot different and harder probably.

Great. Tell you what, get a job as a doorman and when the time comes for you to eject a customer, do so under the assumption that he is armed with a weapon. Then see how long it takes for you to (a) get fired and/or (b) wind up in court.

In this country, you have to justify the fact that you used force, and then you have to show that the amount of force you used was reasonable under the circumstances.

Explaining to a judge that you broke some guy's arm/beat him into unconsciousness because he *might* have had a weapon hidden in his sock (which in fairness is improbably in itself) will see either heavily fined or with a prison sentence.

Finally

Young men carry knives...

Wow. What kind of scumhole are you from?

pearsquasher

Great. Tell you what, get a job as a doorman and when the time comes for you to eject a customer, do so under the assumption that he is armed with a weapon. Then see how long it takes for you to (a) get fired and/or (b) wind up in court.

Show me where I advocated using violence on somebody that you think might have a weapon?

I have a freind who deals with drug addicts and general scum in his job in social services. He has to assume these people will just lunge at him with weapons. That makes him LESS likely to get physical with them, not more. He practices MA too but not a sports one. That's what I meant.

Dave Joyce

Its how the majority of fights I've seen start while I was working in bars. Usually starts out with one or both shouting/trading insults, then moves to shoving, then somebody throws a punch. Occasionally they skip the shoving.

Well I'd presume Pearquasher means that MOST reasonable thinking people can walk away from that kind of schoolboy crap and is not to what he is referring.

Great. Tell you what, get a job as a doorman and when the time comes for you to eject a customer, do so under the assumption that he is armed with a weapon. Then see how long it takes for you to (a) get fired and/or (b) wind up in court.

In this country, you have to justify the fact that you used force, and then you have to show that the amount of force you used was reasonable under the circumstances.

Explaining to a judge that you broke some guy's arm/beat him into unconsciousness because he *might* have had a weapon hidden in his sock (which in fairness is improbably in itself) will see either heavily fined or with a prison sentence.

Well Jaysus, talk about JUMPING in with BOTH feet :rolleyes: It IS possible to NOT BEAT the Bejaysus outta someone and STILL have enough awareness/preparedness to assume they COULD be carrying and react appropriately....in other words PREVENT them from deploying the weapon so you don't have to beat the dog poo outta them. Mind you, I suppose this is a given IF you train for that kind of situation.

What kind of scumhole are you from?

Wow:rolleyes:, what kind of Utopia are YOU from???

HammerHeadGym

pearsquasher wrote: »

...It pretty obvious that MacYoung is focused on life-threatening or high risk enocounters NOT school yard antics.

Thats the point I was making. When Marc Mac Young says 'self defence' he means life or death situations. I was attempting to clear the terminology up for those unfamiliar with his work.

pearsquasher wrote: »

...when you're training to deal with actual assault you had better make those assumptions the very first thing on your mind and act accordingly.

I've been a doorman for 15 years. In that time Ive had about a half dozen blades used against me (including broken bottles, needles etc) That's one weapon attack every 2 and a half years approximately. My training should reflect that proportion of frequency I think. My time is far better employed dealing with punches and stand up grappling as most fights go down like that.

pearsquasher wrote: »

...Had the bouncer assumed a hidden weapon and trained with that in mind he would probably have restrained the guy differently or not at all.

I restrain about a dozen guys a week, 99% of whom I release as soon as they've calmed down. I've trained in a broad cross section of reality based self defence systems, and in the last few years have moved over to combat sports.
But a bouncer who restrains a combatant and doesn't pin his arms, doesn't know his job. It's got nothing to do with what he's learning.
To be honest, the sports stuff stands me in much better stead than the 'reality' stuff ever did. I was always pretty sure I was safe with the old one. I don't remember the last time I was even remotely worried since learning combat sports.

pearsquasher wrote: »

Young men carry knives..

No they don't! Not in any frequncy, anyway. Like I said, my job is to deliberately put myself in front of the gougers, and even then I see one every 2 and a half years.

pearsquasher wrote: »

Bouncers should train to assume that they do and so, when it comes to restraint, how accessable a knife is should be built in. Its going to make your grappling skills a whole lot different and harder probably.

Now that is a good point. But forget weapons for a second, If you attempt to restrain someone for the purpose of arrest or ejection from a premesis, keeping flailing arms in check is your priorit here. Knife or not, if I leave an arm loose you can hit me with it, so I don't leave it loose.

ON a last note, I think where Marc MacYoung falls down is the assumption that your opponent is skilled. At the most, once a year I come accross someone who can 'have a fight' or has a reputation. And by and large they can't. I have encountered so few skilled fighters on the door it's unbelievable. If I didn't know how to fight myself of course, it might be a different matter, but a year in a halfway decent combat sports club, should make 99% of people safe in 99% of situations.

pearsquasher

I'm not blind to the fact that lethal assault is very rare. I'm not training to deal with lethal assault on a daily basis.. I'm actually interested in the physicality and mentality that takes place in dealing with this extreme. I have the luxury of not really having to use it daily although I have done a few times, once with hidden a blade. I would have lost a kidney if my art hadn't built into it the appreciation of hidden weapons.

My interest is biomechanical and tactical/strategic. It's an amazingly interesting puzzle to work on movement that takes into account multiples/weapons/lethal force. So when I read articles by somebody who works with, trains, and has lived with this sort of reality AND it completely meshes with my interest, I take note.

I'm not likely to encounter ultraviolence, but my students might. (2 of them do weekly). I send them to MacYoungs website regularly and they know from day one that I'm there to show what's possible, whether likely or not and that I'm not a MacYoung with years of high-risk experience. The dojo is just a lab and while our lab doesn't pretend to be the street it does have a set of conditions that you don't get in the sports arena and that changes the outlook of all the participants. It so happens that MacYoung's outlook seems uncannily similar.

HammerHeadGym

pearsquasher wrote: »

... although I have done a few times, once with hidden a blade. I would have lost a kidney if my art hadn't built into it the appreciation of hidden weapons...

This was the point I was making regarding bouncers knowing their job. It is the fault of the guy who trained the bouncer in, rather than the coach who thaught him to wrestle though. I think anyway.

pearsquasher wrote: »

...My interest is biomechanical and tactical/strategic. It's an amazingly interesting puzzle to work on movement that takes into account multiples/weapons/lethal force. So when I read articles by somebody who works with, trains, and has lived with this sort of reality AND it completely meshes with my interest, I take note...

What got me back into martial arts after a 5 year absence actually. I just feel Mr. Mac Youngs opinions are a little dated. Actually dated isn't the right word here. Let me have a thinka bout it and I'll get back to you.

pearsquasher wrote: »

...I send them to MacYoungs website regularly and they know from day one that I'm there to show what's possible, whether likely or not and that I'm not a MacYoung with years of high-risk experience....

I personnally like his site, for the most part. I do fear however that he goes a little off the deep end when it comes to worse case scenario type stuff. If i was to write a god's honest thruth book about bouncing, 60% of it would be how to stick your chest out and shout someone down, and 35% would be how to trip a guy up and pin him with your knees until he gasses himself out.

pearsquasher wrote: »

...The dojo is just a lab and while our lab doesn't pretend to be the street it does have a set of conditions that you don't get in the sports arena and that changes the outlook of all the participants.

Totally agree. Someone who wants to learn self defence definitely needs to have that sort of thing explained in a non-sport envinronment. (weapons, buddies, verbal disarms, distractions, diffusions etc.) The mentality of the 2 arenas is totally different, in my opinion. Although I do feel the techniques are practiced more thouroughly and efficiantly in a combat sports environment. I guess it really depends on how much violence you realistically expect to face in your day to day life.