Some guys criticize other men for not rescuing a stranger getting attacked, but the fact is that YOU can end up being the one who gets maimed or killed. Having a Superman Complex can be a deadly thing.
Whether a person should get involved or not depends on the situation.
Some guy saved a kid at the beach who was pulled out by a rip current and nearly drowned himself. When he brought the kid to the beach, the angry parents took the kid away without any thank you or acknowledgement to the rescuer, who was coughing up seawater. And no, the rescuer was not a lifeguard.
The first half of this brief video is realistic. The second half looks like it was done to pacify the guy acting as the defender (who looks to be a BJJ or MMA practitioner). In the second half, the "attacker" just lies down passively for the defender to beat on.
If you're going to be realistic with the attacker on top, then be realistic with the attacker on the bottom. Many years ago, a local MMA practitioner got stabbed to death in a parking lot fight outside of a bar, after taking his opponent down and mounting him. If you're grappling a man who has a knife, the danger ain't over just because you happen to be on top.
I know it's only a video short and we're only seeing a fraction of what they were doing, but still...
Jim
Last edited by James Y on Wed Aug 07, 2024 4:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Some guys criticize other men for not rescuing a stranger getting attacked, but the fact is that YOU can end up being the one who gets maimed or killed. Having a Superman Complex can be a deadly thing.
Whether a person should get involved or not depends on the situation.
Some guy saved a kid at the beach who was pulled out by a rip current and nearly drowned himself. When he brought the kid to the beach, the angry parents took the kid away without any thank you or acknowledgement to the rescuer, who was coughing up seawater. And no, the rescuer was not a lifeguard.
Jim
I don't know how 20 and 30 year olds deal with the level of violence in society and am so happy to be out of Chicago.
It must be crimping their social lives I know it would myself if I was 20 to 40. People think nothing of maiming you now.
I Support: VFW; USO; Navy SEAL Foundation, SEAL Jason Redman; America’s Warrior Partnership; Second Amendment Foundation(SAF); Gun Owners of America(GOA); Firearms Policy Coalition(FPC); Knife Rights; The Dog Aging Institute; Longevity Biotech Fellowship;
I'm quite curious at this point, is there any reliable source of information that covers Fairbairn's general fighting system that he taught, or is there not really a good documented source of his principles. When looking for inspiration from men with experience in real fights he is on the short list for sure. I'd really like to do some more research on him and his fighting tactics.
I could be wrong, I may have the info in my head mixed up, but Carl Cestari was a follower of the techniques used by Applegate and Fairbairn, and there are some videos of both on YouTube Carl Cestari(quite a few videos) and Fairbairn(far less videos). There are books on Rex Applegate and Fairbairn at Amazon.
Somebody who might know more of the history of these two people is @Michael Janich
Any idea about the differences between Fairbairn's various hand to hand combat books? From what I understand many are either the same book or information published under different names, often because they apparently went in and out of print, or are mostly the same.
Is there one that basically covers it all, or two? Or three? Lol. Hopefully it's just one or two.
Thanks,
Nick
I'm quite curious at this point, is there any reliable source of information that covers Fairbairn's general fighting system that he taught, or is there not really a good documented source of his principles. When looking for inspiration from men with experience in real fights he is on the short list for sure. I'd really like to do some more research on him and his fighting tactics.
I could be wrong, I may have the info in my head mixed up, but Carl Cestari was a follower of the techniques used by Applegate and Fairbairn, and there are some videos of both on YouTube Carl Cestari(quite a few videos) and Fairbairn(far less videos). There are books on Rex Applegate and Fairbairn at Amazon.
Somebody who might know more of the history of these two people is @Michael Janich
Any idea about the differences between Fairbairn's various hand to hand combat books? From what I understand many are either the same book or information published under different names, often because they apparently went in and out of print, or are mostly the same.
Is there one that basically covers it all, or two? Or three? Lol. Hopefully it's just one or two.
Thanks,
Nick
I bought this book on Amazon a few years back. Its title says it all; it contains all of Fairbairn's published books. There is repeated information in some of them. Some are intended for military use, and others are intended for civilians. I wanted all of them in one volume, regardless if information was repeated or not.
https://www.naval-military-press.com/
1 COLONEL A.J.D.BIDDLE’S DO OR DIE A Manual On Individual Combat-Illustrated Edition 1944 - Softback
1 - DO OR DIE A Supplementary Manual on Individual Combat × 1 - Softback
1 - WE Fairbairn’s Complete Compendium of Lethal, Unarmed, Hand-to-Hand Combat Methods and Fighting In Colour - Softback
1 - Abwehr Englischer Gangster Methoden Defense of English Gangsters Methods - Silent Killing - Full English Translation - Softback × 1
1 - HAND TO HAND COMBAT - Softback × 1
1 - HAND-TO-HAND COMBAT Bureau of Aeronautics U.S Navy 1943 - Softback × 1
1 - DEAL THE FIRST DEADLY BLOW - Softback × 1
I Support: VFW; USO; Navy SEAL Foundation, SEAL Jason Redman; America’s Warrior Partnership; Second Amendment Foundation(SAF); Gun Owners of America(GOA); Firearms Policy Coalition(FPC); Knife Rights; The Dog Aging Institute; Longevity Biotech Fellowship;
I also believe that when doing the edge-of-hand strikes to the neck areas, on contact with the target, the blow should penetrate and "stick" on the target for a split second. I don't believe in just flicking it out and back in one motion, like (for example) many Kenpo practitioners do. I liken the "sticking" to throwing a piece of bologna flat against the wall, and it sticks then comes off. You want to be fully committed, as if you intend to decapitate him, or at least "cut" halfway into his neck with your hand. Of course, your hand won't "cut" into his neck; that's a visual, an intent, that gives your blow greater power and commitment. When you use an axe to chop small trees or limbs, you're not going to snap the axe out and back in one motion, as if it's bouncing off. You're going to drive it in. Same principle.
Interesting that, like in Fairbairn's method, he doesn't use an "inward" edge-of-hand strike. By inward, I mean using (for example) your right hand to "chop" the left side of the opponent's neck, with your palm facing partly upwards. In many instances, this inward strike can be quicker and easier to use, more deceptive, and with far less need for a wind-up. I think that both inward and outward (as well as downward chopping strikes) are important to develop.
I'm quite curious at this point, is there any reliable source of information that covers Fairbairn's general fighting system that he taught, or is there not really a good documented source of his principles. When looking for inspiration from men with experience in real fights he is on the short list for sure. I'd really like to do some more research on him and his fighting tactics.
I could be wrong, I may have the info in my head mixed up, but Carl Cestari was a follower of the techniques used by Applegate and Fairbairn, and there are some videos of both on YouTube Carl Cestari(quite a few videos) and Fairbairn(far less videos). There are books on Rex Applegate and Fairbairn at Amazon.
Somebody who might know more of the history of these two people is @Michael Janich
Any idea about the differences between Fairbairn's various hand to hand combat books? From what I understand many are either the same book or information published under different names, often because they apparently went in and out of print, or are mostly the same.
Is there one that basically covers it all, or two? Or three? Lol. Hopefully it's just one or two.
Thanks,
Nick
I bought this book on Amazon a few years back. Its title says it all; it contains all of Fairbairn's published books. There is repeated information in some of them. Some are intended for military use, and others are intended for civilians. I wanted all of them in one volume, regardless if information was repeated or not.
Jim
Jim,
Thanks so much for that info. In looking at that publishers descriptions of each volume it seems "Defendu" was Fairbairn's first book and became Scientific Self Defense at a later publishing because there was confusion that "Defendu" was an already existng Asian martial art and they wanted to differentiate that it was something new Fairbairn had come up with. Even though Defendu was the name HE came up with, apparently to differentiate it as a it's own, new "art". Guess that wasn't working, lol.
"All In Fighting" is basically the "military version" of "Get Tough". Because it incudes about 16 extra pages on bayonet fighting and sighting your rifle. But other than that is the same material.
If memory serves "Get Tough" was published for the civilian market during WWII as they of course anticipating a probable German invasion of England and civilians were going to have to fight them in the streets unarmed. Since even then England had enough gun control that not many owned guns, especially in London I would presume.
There was actually a pretty well known drive, partially or completely undertaken by the NRA, including posters, to collect guns in the US to donate to England for both their military, who had left quite a lot of ordinance at Dunkirk. AND to arm the general population. More so the civilians as their military wouldn't do well with a hodge podge of various firearms in various calibers from the US. And maybe their "Home Guard". I don't recall seeing any photos of a British Servicemen with a random rifle or shotgun but usually the generally issued weapons. So I think they were relatively well equipped.
What did the Brits do with all those guns we gave them, having come SO close to invasion and subjugation and perhaps annihilation? Learn their lesson and realize an armed citizenry is beneficial in many ways?
No. they took the guns back. i believe they were destroyed. i never heard much about them them being returned to the US.
SMH.
I could be wrong, I may have the info in my head mixed up, but Carl Cestari was a follower of the techniques used by Applegate and Fairbairn, and there are some videos of both on YouTube Carl Cestari(quite a few videos) and Fairbairn(far less videos). There are books on Rex Applegate and Fairbairn at Amazon.
Somebody who might know more of the history of these two people is @Michael Janich
Any idea about the differences between Fairbairn's various hand to hand combat books? From what I understand many are either the same book or information published under different names, often because they apparently went in and out of print, or are mostly the same.
Is there one that basically covers it all, or two? Or three? Lol. Hopefully it's just one or two.
Thanks,
Nick
I bought this book on Amazon a few years back. Its title says it all; it contains all of Fairbairn's published books. There is repeated information in some of them. Some are intended for military use, and others are intended for civilians. I wanted all of them in one volume, regardless if information was repeated or not.
Jim
Jim,
Thanks so much for that info. In looking at that publishers descriptions of each volume it seems "Defendu" was Fairbairn's first book and became Scientific Self Defense at a later publishing because there was confusion that "Defendu" was an already existng Asian martial art and they wanted to differentiate that it was something new Fairbairn had come up with. Even though Defendu was the name HE came up with, apparently to differentiate it as a it's own, new "art". Guess that wasn't working, lol.
"All In Fighting" is basically the "military version" of "Get Tough". Because it incudes about 16 extra pages on bayonet fighting and sighting your rifle. But other than that is the same material.
If memory serves "Get Tough" was published for the civilian market during WWII as they of course anticipating a probable German invasion of England and civilians were going to have to fight them in the streets unarmed. Since even then England had enough gun control that not many owned guns, especially in London I would presume.
There was actually a pretty well known drive, partially or completely undertaken by the NRA, including posters, to collect guns in the US to donate to England for both their military, who had left quite a lot of ordinance at Dunkirk. AND to arm the general population. More so the civilians as their military wouldn't do well with a hodge podge of various firearms in various calibers from the US. And maybe their "Home Guard". I don't recall seeing any photos of a British Servicemen with a random rifle or shotgun but usually the generally issued weapons. So I think they were relatively well equipped.
What did the Brits do with all those guns we gave them, having come SO close to invasion and subjugation and perhaps annihilation? Learn their lesson and realize an armed citizenry is beneficial in many ways?
No. they took the guns back. i believe they were destroyed. i never heard much about them them being returned to the US.
SMH.
Thanks, Co Pilot. I couldn't have summed it up better.
Fairbairn's Defendu was his own simplified combative method. He had studied Jujutsu/Judo, some Western boxing, some French Savate, and some Chinese arts, namely Baguazhang. He took some of the things he found practical and simplified them so they could be learned quickly, and easily retained, by non-martial artists. It's significant that he de-emphasized closed-fisted punching. Having had more than 600 documented street fights as a LEO in early 20th-century Shanghai, he knew what worked and what didn't for him, and for those he trained on the police force.
One thing I don't care for is that in Fairbairn's edge-of-hand chop, he emphasized keeping the thumb straight out and away from the rest of the hand, and with the fingers perfectly straight. IMO, there is a risk (however small) of the thumb or finger(s) catching on something, or maybe even being grabbed, and getting injured. I see no inherent advantages to doing it that way. I've always preferred to keep the thumb bent and tucked in close, and the fingers pressed together and very slightly bent. I would never say that Fairbairn was wrong, only stating my preference in how I do it, and why I do it this way.
What do you all think of chains and chain weapons for sd? I know some laws oppose specific chain weapons and some may have the baggage of being looked at as an outlaw biker weapon. But also are they potentially dangerous to the user?
I haven't tried or looked into using a chain yet, but me and my brother have been experimenting with a few different flail type weapons, most noteably Nunchaku. Nunchuks are actually easier to control than I expected, although I don't have a enough practice to say I would be confident using them in a fight at this point. They are conveniently designed though for control. Because is is made of two rigid sticks, with a limited length of rope in the middle, most attacks when they come back around to your body are easy to absorb by letting the nunchucks wrap around and squeeze your body instead of getting whacked. You have to understand the fundementals of the nunchaku before they make any sense, but after that I have been surprised at what I have been able to learn.
In contrast I did some experimenting with a washer tied to the end of paracord. Some of the concepts are similar, but it is very hard to control and always wants to hit you when it comes around because there is no stiff component to the rope to help arrest it's movement around your body. This left me with almost not safe motions that I could come up with for an attack, except for an overhead swing that will smack into the ground and kill it's own momentum. Based on this test I would be afraid that a chain might be similarly difficult. However, I have not done research on what techniques you might use, so I can't really say. I didn't start off thinking that Nunchaku could be a viable option either, but I am considering there virtues at this point.
The only flexible weapon I can think of that I would trust I could use effectively under stress would be a sap. And those are very illegal, at least where I am, and probably in most states and countries.
A chain? I don't know.
Some self-defense instructors recommend using a belt with a heavy belt buckle on it as a weapon to maintain distance, especially if faced with a knife. But I don't know how effective that would be against a determined, enraged attacker. I suppose better than nothing, if you've really trained at using it against an erratically moving target.
When I lived in Taiwan, I knew a young local, bespectacled guy who had custom made himself a pair of stainless steel nunchaku. The sticks were hollow steel, connected with a chain. He carried them concealed in his waistband. Practicing nunchaku was the only martial art he did, because he had been born with a hip problem that made it difficult for him to properly execute hand strikes, kicking, etc. But he had the best nunchaku skills I've ever seen. And he actually practiced hitting solid and moving targets with it. The hollow steel sticks had slight dents and scratches all over them, signs of honest wear and tear.
Although he could do all the fast, fancy twirls and catches, the only strike he practiced for actual self-defense was the straight, snappy, out-and-back forward flick. He was a virtuoso with that one move. Supposedly, he used that flick to disarm a thief who came at him with a knife, then dispatched him with a second flick to his head. Both strikes in rapid succession. I believed the story, because I'd heard it from different reliable sources. He was so good at the nunchaku because it was the only thing he practiced, and he had trained hard at it. I'm sure there was a good reason why he didn't emphasize circular swings for SD, but kept his arsenal extremely simple and basic (i.e., one move).
How Many Techniques Should a Martial Arts School Teach?
If, as he says, the average martial arts student today practices only 2 hours a week, that's insane to me. When I was training in martial arts schools, we had single classes that were longer than that. I trained at home and at the school(s). So I often trained (including conditioning) up to 5 hours a day. Of course, I was younger and with far fewer responsibilities back then. I guess the quality of martial arts students has declined an awful lot since 'the old days'.
I used to be good at many things, BUT there were always a relatively small collection of skills that I actually used. A certain number in sparring and competition, and even fewer techniques (and different techniques from those used in sparring and competing) used strictly for self-defense. It's better to know a lot about a little than a little about a lot.
However, I disagree with his opinion that kata (or taolu, or forms) are a complete waste of time. Although I only do very little forms work anymore, I still feel it has value in developing and maintaining physical discipline and mental focus, just in a different way from modern combatives, or sport MMA training. And forms allow you to train your body to move into and out of unusual postures smoothly and easily. This also helps as one starts getting older. It's certainly less of a waste of time than the time spent sitting on the couch stuffing one's face with beer and Cheetos. Over the past few years, my own training has been emphasizing almost purely application-based stuff, intended strictly for SD. But I should probably get back into including more forms practice, if even a little bit each day. As long as you also train practically, IME, forms training does not negatively affect your ability in any way. I believe it benefits the brain and the body as a martial artist ages, if your art or arts include forms, or their equivalents.
I like that you mention that forms are usefull, Jim.
I am a young man, but I have some difficult health problems that can make frequent training and exercise much more difficult to maintain than someone who is healthy. Me and my older brother are learning some mobility drills from Systema that are very low impact, but still help develop flexability, some strength, and awareness of your body. Perhaps most importantly it is easy enough to do every day, which means I can actually practice enough to gain some benefit without hurting my overall health. I think these drills have some similarity in benefit to forms.
Any idea about the differences between Fairbairn's various hand to hand combat books? From what I understand many are either the same book or information published under different names, often because they apparently went in and out of print, or are mostly the same.
Is there one that basically covers it all, or two? Or three? Lol. Hopefully it's just one or two.
Thanks,
Nick
I bought this book on Amazon a few years back. Its title says it all; it contains all of Fairbairn's published books. There is repeated information in some of them. Some are intended for military use, and others are intended for civilians. I wanted all of them in one volume, regardless if information was repeated or not.
Jim
Jim,
Thanks so much for that info. In looking at that publishers descriptions of each volume it seems "Defendu" was Fairbairn's first book and became Scientific Self Defense at a later publishing because there was confusion that "Defendu" was an already existng Asian martial art and they wanted to differentiate that it was something new Fairbairn had come up with. Even though Defendu was the name HE came up with, apparently to differentiate it as a it's own, new "art". Guess that wasn't working, lol.
"All In Fighting" is basically the "military version" of "Get Tough". Because it incudes about 16 extra pages on bayonet fighting and sighting your rifle. But other than that is the same material.
If memory serves "Get Tough" was published for the civilian market during WWII as they of course anticipating a probable German invasion of England and civilians were going to have to fight them in the streets unarmed. Since even then England had enough gun control that not many owned guns, especially in London I would presume.
There was actually a pretty well known drive, partially or completely undertaken by the NRA, including posters, to collect guns in the US to donate to England for both their military, who had left quite a lot of ordinance at Dunkirk. AND to arm the general population. More so the civilians as their military wouldn't do well with a hodge podge of various firearms in various calibers from the US. And maybe their "Home Guard". I don't recall seeing any photos of a British Servicemen with a random rifle or shotgun but usually the generally issued weapons. So I think they were relatively well equipped.
What did the Brits do with all those guns we gave them, having come SO close to invasion and subjugation and perhaps annihilation? Learn their lesson and realize an armed citizenry is beneficial in many ways?
No. they took the guns back. i believe they were destroyed. i never heard much about them them being returned to the US.
SMH.
Thanks, Co Pilot. I couldn't have summed it up better.
Fairbairn's Defendu was his own simplified combative method. He had studied Jujutsu/Judo, some Western boxing, some French Savate, and some Chinese arts, namely Baguazhang. He took some of the things he found practical and simplified them so they could be learned quickly, and easily retained, by non-martial artists. It's significant that he de-emphasized closed-fisted punching. Having had more than 600 documented street fights as a LEO in early 20th-century Shanghai, he knew what worked and what didn't for him, and for those he trained on the police force.
One thing I don't care for is that in Fairbairn's edge-of-hand chop, he emphasized keeping the thumb straight out and away from the rest of the hand, and with the fingers perfectly straight. IMO, there is a risk (however small) of the thumb or finger(s) catching on something, or maybe even being grabbed, and getting injured. I see no inherent advantages to doing it that way. I've always preferred to keep the thumb bent and tucked in close, and the fingers pressed together and very slightly bent. I would never say that Fairbairn was wrong, only stating my preference in how I do it, and why I do it this way.
Jim
You're welcome, no problem.
It IS significant he deemphasizes closed fist punching in favor of the palm heel and axe hand. he obviously learned the hard way, probably first hand, pun unavoidable, what all of us do if you throw a few punches that land, you're going to hurt your fingers/hand. Perhaps to a serious degree. One which could take that hand/"weapon" out of the fight. Fractures to the ring and pinky fingers are so commonly sustained when punches are thrown they're called a "boxers fracture" in the medical field.
I think he was right and this is a good idea. The only problem with it is most of us revert back to closed fist punches instinctually/reflexively in fights, even if we haven't practiced ANY strikes, seemingly because we've literally seen probably thousand's of punches thrown that way in movies, and boxing was, until recently with MMA's popularity, the main very widely know/seen form of fighting. So like most things you have to "train OUT" of doing it. A LOT of training out. And many of us don't.
As far as his emphasis on the straight thumb and fingers and rigid hand I think Kelly McCann actually explained it in the video of him demonstrating the axe hand you posted just a few posts back. Great vid btw, thanks. It apparently lends more rigidity to the area above your hand, the wrist and forearm, thus giving a harder striking service. You can feel the difference if you do with your thumb and fingers what Kelly says in that portion of the vid. I do agree with you on the higher chance of injury, especially the thumb hooking on something. OUCH. Tough call for me on which way is best.
Last edited by Co Pilot on Sun Aug 18, 2024 2:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
How Many Techniques Should a Martial Arts School Teach?
If, as he says, the average martial arts student today practices only 2 hours a week, that's insane to me. When I was training in martial arts schools, we had single classes that were longer than that. I trained at home and at the school(s). So I often trained (including conditioning) up to 5 hours a day. Of course, I was younger and with far fewer responsibilities back then. I guess the quality of martial arts students has declined an awful lot since 'the old days'.
I used to be good at many things, BUT there were always a relatively small collection of skills that I actually used. A certain number in sparring and competition, and even fewer techniques (and different techniques from those used in sparring and competing) used strictly for self-defense. It's better to know a lot about a little than a little about a lot.
However, I disagree with his opinion that kata (or taolu, or forms) are a complete waste of time. Although I only do very little forms work anymore, I still feel it has value in developing and maintaining physical discipline and mental focus, just in a different way from modern combatives, or sport MMA training. And forms allow you to train your body to move into and out of unusual postures smoothly and easily. This also helps as one starts getting older. It's certainly less of a waste of time than the time spent sitting on the couch stuffing one's face with beer and Cheetos. Over the past few years, my own training has been emphasizing almost purely application-based stuff, intended strictly for SD. But I should probably get back into including more forms practice, if even a little bit each day. As long as you also train practically, IME, forms training does not negatively affect your ability in any way. I believe it benefits the brain and the body as a martial artist ages, if your art or arts include forms, or their equivalents.
Jim
Jim,
DEFINITELY agree " it's better to know a lot about a little than a little about a lot"' Perhaps even worse is to know a LOT about a LOT. Too many choices slow down the decision making process in general, Hick's Law, and also you're probably never going to feel truly comfortable with a large variety of techniques that you will actually use them in a fight.
In training with Ken Hackathorn, a top level defensive firearms instructor, he said "the mind won't go where the body has either never been, or hasn't been enough, in a fight".
In studying Pikiti Tersia Kali with Tuhon Bill McGrath, he told us I'm going to teach you the art because that's what you're here for, I want to preserve it and it's beauty, and it all has some use. But in a real fight you'll probably revert to what you you're best at, or have mastered. Which will probably be a 1 and 2 strike, maybe a 5. But 64?!? i don't think so. Lol.
Bill was all about reality. We trained in street clothes and shoes. We called him Bill. VERY informal. Zero ego. And no ego's were tolerated.
I believe both these masters of their respective Martial Arts had reached the same conclusion separately and sere saying the same exact thing.
I'd like to take the moment to say was I EXTREMELY fortunate to train with both of them, Hackathorn for two classes, and Bill for several years. I was also fortunate to call Bill a friend that whole time and socialized with him. Great guy. Both total gentlemen as well as Master's in their fields and great teachers.
Nick
Last edited by Co Pilot on Sun Aug 18, 2024 2:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
