Unbeaten

[Guest]

I don't believe that Geoff Thompson had 300 "fights" and won them all. He's probably knocked out loads of drunks, and probably had lots of fights too. If he has had 300 "fights" then he must have been a Grade A Arse-hole in his bouncing days. I think much of it is down to having a book to sell......

The martial arts are full of claims that get ridiculously magnified - that's how legends are made in the first place.

I remember a post one the old GT forum where a certain camoflagued tactical cap wearing military wannabe was extolling the skills of Terry O'Neil. He went on about how Terry could take loads of people out at once using classic Karate kicks to the head etc. Now I've never met Terry O'Neil, and I certainly would not want to fight him. But I reckon the claims that his camoflagued mate were making were massively exaggerated.

As regards the Cammo Clown himself he said words to the effect of "I didn't rely on high kicks much myself... I only got about 40 knockouts with them......" What a day dreaming bullshitting nonsense spouting buffoon.

Bri,

You know as much as I know, neither of us were there. However in my brief tenure on the door it was not unusual for trouble to kick of 5 or 6 times in a night. If you work 5 nights a week for 11 years, its really not that hard for me to believe in 300 fights. I can't vouch for Mr Thompson's attitude on the door, but his attitude on the occasions I have met him has been superb.

As for Terry O'Neil, no - you wouldn't want to fight him. Yes, he has taken people out with high kicks, I'm not saying they were classical Karate kicks, they were Terry O'Neil kicks - and THAT is the difference. I say again, these people are one-offs.

As for the cammo guy, yeah you are probably right.

[Bullseye]

Hi Bri,

Very interesting points.

To clarify, I originally posted this question as I used to be quite inspired by these records of 3oo fights and so on. It sounded like an unbelievable number, but made me want to train harder.

As I've gotton older, I have become more sceptical, more likely to question things. I don't believe I could win hundreds of fights in a row without losing (at the very least). I don't believe that these guys who claim these records are so much more than me. Sure they are all much better martial artists/fighters and so on. They could all kick my (gorgeously curvacious) arse. BUT, I don't believe that they are so much better than the rest of us mere mortals that they can achieve basically near mythical streetfighting feats.

Human beings all have pretty much the same limitations. We all bleed, we all feel pain, any normal person feels fear. We can all have an off day, be taken by surprise, or meet someone better than us.

I used to accept these claims of hundreds ,or in some cases ,thousands of fights without question. Now however, I think it is probably false advertising in most cases. This is dishonest.

I haven't gone into the ethics of it all, because that's not what we are discussing here.

[Thai Bri]

I certainly don't knwo of any sports person not losing in 300 contests. So why would a street fighter acheive it?

I'm just old and cynical too. But I love doughnuts...........

[Bullseye]

Bri,

When you were talking about the "cammo clown," were you referring to one of the old QandA resident experts? A long time friend of O'Neil who did doorwork with him?

[sly fox]

People will always make claims to big themselves up to get more 'bums on seats'... i trained in an organisation for a few years and saw that they were advertising about having taken the art into the world to test in realistic situations such as close protection... what this consisted of was an instructor there does indeed work as a bodyguard but I also know that he works on a low key job and has never had to hit anyone...

one thing you read a lot, particularly in the states is 'has trained law enforcement or military'..

In the uk bouncing is different to the states, in the states a lot of the jobs done by security personel seem to be done by police officers...

Theres also a difference in the UK between old school bouncers and newer ones, and also where they worked... I worked in a bar for a year some 15 years ago on the door, certainly I had a good few incidents of people being mouthy, but it was a reasonably quiet bar and I never hit anyone, I never had to.... these days you cant just lay people out left and right and not lose your license, in the old days there were no licenses

The area and place you work in greatly affects how many fights you get in.. as was said earlier some doormen get in tons of scraps each night they work.... these days door work tends to be better planned and people clamp down faster and it doesnt tend to be so much down to a couple of guys to sort out all the problems... a well run club has people in sectors who stop trouble before it starts so you dont have to get into massive brawls and a decent response team who multi-team a person who needs removing

Another danger of the 1000s of fights individuals, and there really are people like that is that they are physically gifted individuals (i know a few), and the techniques they use arent often transferable to be as high percentage to your average individual.... someone may have knocked out 100 drunk wobbly characters with their patented left hook, but that doesnt mean that left hook when used by a 'normal' individual will be as high percentage... in fact for someone who doesnt have the timing, strength and aptitude some of the techniques taught are far from high percentage...

[Bullseye]

Hi,

Which techniques in particular are you thinking of? Since the advent of Geoff Thompson, the fence, the line up and the subsequent knockout have become almost cliche in RBSD circles. Are you saying you doubt the line up followed by a boxing technique as being effective for the majority of the population?

If we take well known guys who teach RBSD, do you regard these guys in particular as exceptional individuals? Do you believe their publicised fight records?

I don't know any of the guys who make these claims, but they are either inhumanly good, superhumanly lucky, or lying. In my opinion.

[sly fox]

nah i didnt mean the fence, etc... i was talking more about when you go on a seminar with these guys and they advoctae specific strikes which are their favourites and then you think sh*t I could never knock someone out with the power I generate from that...

the fence and stuff is good... a well known rbsd guy did tell me though that he hadnt had much luck with the chest height fence, that it worked well with drunk guys in bars but that other people tend to push in when you touch them on the chest and its better to have your hands at head height and look through the fingers as people wont push their faces against your hands, and the chest one tended to escalate things

some rbsd guys in the uk were advocating the use of a steel pen for example.... i asked an rbsd guy I was training with what he thought about that (i trust this guys opinion), and he said well he used one one, made a bloody mess of the guy, lost the pen and knocked the guy out with a cross, then got me to try to hold one striking the pads, i hit lighter so as not to lose the pen which shot out the back of my hand and indeed reckoned that i prefered to hit with a fist..

there are some guys out there I reckon who have had a ton of fights, like john skillen for example...he was a street fighter, was beating up doormen so was offered a job, then worked a rough club... his brother peter says john had at least four fights a night (peter was the dj in that club) and john worked that door for well over a decade nearly every night of the week... now john is a naturally super tough guy... hes naturally skilled and strong and has a high work ethic... he was a boxer, a national judo team member when he took up judo

I also know a guy who claims tons of real world experience and taught a well known regiment, and a guy from that regiment didnt have a clue who the guy was and had never heard of him...

so i reckon there are guys who have had that many fights but the guys they fight are mainly drnken average joes wobbling around, and dont forget often theres more than one door man dealing with the incident and the definition of a fight is the guy swinging a wild missing punch, getting restrained and dragged outside... not a stand up fight with a very strong tough skilled opponent.... but sometimes they fight someone who is tough and they tend to tell those tales...

so i guess what im saying is i do think there are guys that have had that many fights.... anyone can lose a fight to anyone especially if someone is going to any lengths... a knife in the back when you're not looking being a good example...

I like you am sceptical of many of the claims

i reckon how most people win these fights is pre-emptive striking and getting in first... i know there are super tough monsters out there, I used to work in prison and there were guys in there that scared the s&*t out of me... some guys win by resorting to using tools

i reckon most of the guys that have had 100s of fights have lost some somewhere along the line, or run away to fight another day..

[sly fox]

so summed up i reckon a few are inhumaley good..... some are liars....and some got their asses handed to them on a platter along the way a few times

[Bullseye]

Hi,

Thanks for your replies. I think that losing is the thing that is most absent in these discussions. I can accept a person having loads of fights if they are in John Skillen's position (as per your example), but I find it strange when no one admits to losing a fight here and there.

I don't think there's any shame in losing personally. It's not to be desired of course, but I think if more instructors talked about this aspect as well, their instruction would be more well rounded, and relevant to reality.

Ditto for running away. If it's a choice bewteen running away or getting killed, running is surely the better politic.I personally wouldn't lose respect for anyone, including a well known instructor, if they told me they had run or swallowed at some point. We are all only human and it can happen to the best of us.

[sly fox]

totally agree with you mate, talking about losses and when things went wrong is a great way to teach what to avoid.. mistakes and failures are often far better ways to teach than successes.. i trained as a psychologist and my lecturers would give these perfect case examples and then id see patients and think the people i saw were far more complex cases and i couldnt apply the stuff.... the guy i learnt the most from gave his worst mistakes and where things went wrong and how he responded to that...i learnt more from him than all the others... i know its not self defence but im a firm believer in the concept from learning from where stuff doesnt go right...

[Bullseye]

I also think it would be more inspirational as well. I mentioned Vunak in the topic started, and if it's true that he fought, won AND lost, i find this very motivating.

Why? Well, if I got my arse kicked tomorrow, I'd feel pretty bad. I train, and I'd surely question myself and my training, and do a lot of armchair quarterbacking on myself.

This isn't rational, as we have established anyone can lose on any given day. But I think my reaction would be human nature.

I think it's pretty good if people can look at someone with a rep as a fighter, and know that they lost as well as one. It's an example that it's NOT the end of the world (unless the other guy kills you, then it's the end of your world, but I digress).

Some instructors, and I mean well known ones, are too caught up in portraying a perfect image. I don't mean Geoff Thompson, he seems extremely down to earth. Just want to clarify this as I have mentioned him a few times.

[Thai Bri]

Bri,

When you were talking about the "cammo clown," were you referring to one of the old QandA resident experts? A long time friend of O'Neil who did doorwork with him?

That's the cookie.

I trained with him for a while. They know how to train until they puke..... but it is also very inefficient training. No impact generation, and a reliance on blows that only work when in an "in fight" situation if the other guy has no arms. Funnily enough they always deminstrate, with the "bad guy" having his arms down by his side.

And the pseudo psychology is just plain ridiculous. All this "accessing a state" and "de-anchoring" nonsense - hilarious.

[Bullseye]

Seriously??????????????

I thought he was one of the most revered experts in the country. Geoff Thompson says he reveres him!

Wow, I never thought anyone would criticise this guy ever.

Bri, as you have trained with Geoff Thompson, and presumably other well known instructors, would you mind giving a brief overview on whose teachings you rate and why?

To be clear, I'm not asking you to slag anyone off. You have alot of experience, and I'd welcome your opinion as someone who has met some of the bigger names in RBSD. I never have, and so everything I know has been through books, magazines, the net ect. So I kind of have to take stuff at face value.

I'd be interested to know who you rate as the "real deal," and why?

[Thai Bri]

This would be better done in a pm. It is on it's way......

[sly fox]

This would be better done in a pm. It is on it's way......

haha... spoilsport ... can you at least post the guys who you felt had something really good to offer