If You Only Had One Range

[Tant01]

Defensive tactics, eh...

Edged weapons "range" can start for me about ten feet away.

Long before he can kick or punch or close the gap...

As it says edged weapon ie anything with a sharp egde assuming we are at close quater and my opponent does not come with explosives strapped to his arse, edged weapons would be my chioce. based upon the other available ranges kicking punching trapping & grappling I would take the blade.
Enter with a kick your cut
Enter with a punch your cut
close the distance to trap your cut
shoot for a takedown your stabbed

Blendid

www.wcmaacdemy.com

[Blendid]

Edged Weapons

As it says edged weapon ie anything with a sharp egde assuming we are at close quater and my opponent does not come with explosives strapped to his arse, edged weapons would be my chioce. based upon the other available ranges kicking punching trapping & grappling I would take the blade.
Enter with a kick your cut
Enter with a punch your cut
close the distance to trap your cut
shoot for a takedown your stabbed

Blendid

https://www.wcmaacdemy.com

[fire cobra]

With out a shadow of a doubt it would be weapons range, for it is the one great equlizer in a confrontatrion, if you put an edged weapon into the hands of a practitioner that knows how to use it it does not matter the size of the opponent or art they practice the edged weapon will always come out on top it only take one slash or thrust to end the fight.

Blendid

World Class Martial Arts Academy: Home Page

Weapons range bro? which weapon? staff? sword? bolo? Kermbit,Gun?,Hand grenade? all weapons with different ranges.

[Blendid]

Edged weapon

With out a shadow of a doubt it would be weapons range, for it is the one great equlizer in a confrontatrion, if you put an edged weapon into the hands of a practitioner that knows how to use it it does not matter the size of the opponent or art they practice the edged weapon will always come out on top it only takes one slash or thrust to end the fight.

Blendid

World Class Martial Arts Academy: Home Page

[Bullseye]

Difficult question.

I would have to go with boxing/punching range simply because most fights end to start from conversation distance. Therefore it makes sense to specialise in the range which is most suitable for this distance. The down side is that everyone will expect you to punch in a confrontation, and everyone can punch. Not saying everyone on "the street" has proper technique, but as we know, even a technically crappy haymaker has the potential to take teeth or consciousness if it lands.

I think that clinch is a nasty range because most people don't know how to operate in it correctly. The instinctive reaction against the "Thai plum" is usually wrong, and gives the "clincher" plenty of time to work some knees on the "clinchee."

Grappling is also devasting one on one when the other party is clueless on the ground. Unless he/she is a physical monster capable of powering out of whatever you try to apply. DISCLAIMER: I know everyone already knows this.

So I think grappling and clinching are great ranges to go to, due to the reletive inexperience that untrained (and even trained) fighters have with them. The obvious downsides being that they require close proximity with an adversary, and grappling in particular could well be suicidal.

I haven't touched on weapons, because over in here tropical, sunny Europe, only criminals are allowed to have them. If I use a gun or knife, I will be up the creek without a paddle when Johnny law gets hold of me.

So punching ranges it is then.

[Tant01]

Good points Bodhi, I agree with all the strengths of Clinch Range.

What I was defining as Weapons range is the distance, space and time to draw and use a weapon of choice, be that edged, blunt or ballistic. For many I appreciate that puts it right to the top of the list, but some people have no experience/training in weapons or no legal right to carry them. So I wanted to leave it open for all.


Anyway, good points again, thanks.

When I was talking about "weapon range" I was trying to imply that the range itself determines the weapon. If you're close enough to head butt the guy then THAT'S your weapon, your elbows, knees and techniques for toppling are all good weapons in the so called clinch range. (Weapon range)

Good points Bodhi, I agree with all the strengths of Clinch Range.

What I was defining as Weapons range is the distance, space and time to draw and use a weapon of choice, be that edged, blunt or ballistic. For many I appreciate that puts it right to the top of the list, but some people have no experience/training in weapons or no legal right to carry them. So I wanted to leave it open for all.

Anyway, good points again, thanks.

[bodhisattva]

clinch vs. ground vs. boxing

All,

Just wanted to get some training discussions going. A question I have always been interested in. If you could only train and function in one of the above ranges of combat, which one would you choose? Note that you can only train in and perform in that specific range, no crosstraining, pick one and stick with it.

Please offer your thoughts, and your rationale as to why you picked that option.

Thanks

MW

If I had to pick ONE range, I'd pick the Clinch - hitting, throwing and takedowns.

The clinch decides whether the battle stays up or hits the ground.

It has striking and it has throws and it has takedowns.

It controls your opponents arms in case he is a better striker than you are - you can take some "oomph" out of his punch by controlling his shoulders.

It leads to quick knockouts - knees, elbows, headbutts and then also hooks and uppercuts..

It has loads of "dirty tricks" - gouges, biting, stomping..

It can keep a groundfighter from getting you down..

It can keep a boxer from hitting you as much (boxers that work the clinch are an exception to this.. of course..)

It has several submissions (standing triangle choke, guillotine, etc.)

Lots of pathways to the man's back

The throws alone can finish a fight if the guy breaks a clavicle, hurts a shoulder, lands on his face / neck, breaks an arm catching himself as he lands, lands crooked or stupid or some other way you wouldn't think a guy could actually land, but still does it anyway in total defiance of physics and grace..

We've all seen it.. guy goes "splat" and, wincing, you are thinking "Could you have fallen any WORSE?..."

Oh yeah, and another good reason - IF it DOES go to the GROUND - I can at least arrive in a dominant position..

--

that's my pick. Clinch.

--

And I'm not sure what range "Weapons" range is these days. It's an old JKD term, I know. But after dog brothers showed us all the filipino stick grappling in the clinch and on the ground, it gets kind of confusing deciding where "weapons" range is..

As well as when you consider hand guns and the open minds most of us here have about hand guns.

I mean, if you bring hand guns in, the only sane answer would be "weapons" range - because as we all know - Gun beats steel-toed shoe.

Just some thoughts on the current view of "ranges" in JKD and MMA fighting.

[Liberty]

All,

Just wanted to get some training discussions going. A question I have always been interested in. If you could only train and function in one of the above ranges of combat, which one would you choose? Note that you can only train in and perform in that specific range, no crosstraining, pick one and stick with it.

Please offer your thoughts, and your rationale as to why you picked that option.

Thanks

MW

Hey Michael, how's it going? Happy belated New Year....

Anyway, I'd have to saying Boxing Range. Though I continue to train in the various ranges, nothing beats knocking a guy out and then standing there, looking down at him! Or simply messing with his mind with some nice sharp jabs and footwork! Or being clocked by the guy and feeling that rush of adrenalin as you grin and get back in there....Boxing is also the easiest to train in to effeciency as it's a very compact art and has some great science behind it. It looks good, too. It's also great against kickers, very few can effectively trap it, and, to some degree, it can work against grapplers, as well. It's a great self-defence art. It's not the be-all, but you did say one range. Best of all, one of my great passions is helping others less fortunate to learn how to defend themselves quickly: boxing is easy to teach to others in need of efficient self-defence in a short time.

[Tant01]

If...

.....If JKD is about truth in combat, then it must include an understanding of firearms - at least if you live someplace where firearms can be used. And once you understand firearms, it doesn't take long to realize they are terribly effective. By virtue of the JKD ideal of "using what is useful," guess what conclusions you can now draw about your training?

I think this tendency for people to fall in love with the idea of "duelling" is responsible for a lot of the attitudes that mischaracterize people this way. You seem to have this idea that fighting is somehow an honorable thing, and that there's some kind of code of behavior or fair play involved. Playing by those rules is how martial artists get shot by bad guys who don't care about the rules.

It could be worse than that... If ignorance is the enemy you could be shot by "accident" or by virtue of being in the (exact) wrong place at the wrong moment.

Bullets are nothing but a dumb projectile. They go where they go.

I always get a cautionary "feeling" when I shoot things at (point blank) short range. Yes I use eye protection, for what it's worth(?)

Anything less than 10 or 15 feet away has a greater chance of deflecting fragments of stuff straight back at you.

It doesn't happen often but it does happen. PEOPLE don't always follow the rules, by ignorance or by design.

Lets face it, PEOPLE do stupid things with guns ALL the time.

I'm just saying...

Education about the weapons can't hurt...

[Happy Cat]

Ya, the high ground is slipery. There is just something about all that Kali slashing that I don't like. Maybe I am a Martial arts prude. Just don't slash in my direction.

You carry a gun. Does that make you a want to be killer? No, you are just aware that prevention is better than cure, or that extreme situations may call from extreme measures. That's all we are discussing, so watch that slippy high ground there.

[Happy Cat]

At some point, some of these posts sound like they are being written by actual or want to be killers. In my humble opinion that is not what JKD is about.

Bruce and James Lee were not killers and they did not generaly practice the arts in order to Kill. Kali was designed for tribal fighting. If you can adapt it for the street (as in self defense), great. But if you want to kill people on the street, perhaps some counseling would be a good idea

[Tant01]

Weapons range is just vague enough to work for me. If my weapon is effective at 800 meters or if my weapon is a strangulation technique...

:-) LOL

[bodhisattva]

If you don't have the skill to deliver the technique, the technique is pretty much useless.

What would be the point in over specializing in knife tactics before someone even has the skill or ability to control a man in the clinch or to strangle him on the ground?

I mean, if I were some TV black ops soldier in a movie who sneaks up behind sentries and kills them with a blade - SURE!

But as a guy training to be as well rounded and strong as he can be in ALL ranges, why on earth would I focus in and specialize on all of the subtleties of knifing people? Why would I need that level of specialization there? Why would I let my clinch suffer or my ground game suffer or my striking game suffer so I could learn 300 subtleties of knifing, instead of just 20 or so?

--

A good example - I like to train with sticks, and I like sparring with them.

And I consider that enough. I don't, then, go learn to use swords, as well. I know my stick knowledge, should I (UNLIKELY!) find myself defending myself with a sword - will be *enough*

So I don't overspecialize, and learn the adjustments to stick fighting that applies only to swords. Why over specialize on the minutiae?

Unless you intend to be a "ninja" or something stupid like that, boxing/clinch/grappling give enough info to make someone awfully scary with a knife in their hands. No need to bother the Sayoc master - let him teach the men that truly need to use a knife as a tool in human flesh (for whatever reason a man would need to do that.) I am not looking for his instruction as I'd just be a waste of his time. I'm not sticking people with knives, ever, in my future.

And if I am sticking someone with a knife in the future, he's probably screwed, even if I don't have the knife masters training. He probably doesn't wake up early on Saturday monring just to train boxing, clinch and ground as his favorite hobby, he probably hasn't ever fought with a stick in a live setting, and he probably doesn' t know that I do all of those things.

And if he has received the training from some knife master, and he carves me up into tiny bits of steak and kabob's me on a grill, I'll make certain he passes on a small note to you, Mike that says "Dang, dude, you were right. My flashlight didn't work, my steel boots were too cold and I was standing on ice, the guy was a knife master and I was just this dork with boxing and clinch and ground and no gun."

And then you guys can show your knife collections off to each other and trade your favorite code words that mean "I'm going to fight."

--

And, Yes, Mike. Definitely! That is totally what I was saying. I believe! in the invincibility of fitness.

And you're right, hanging out with athletes is probably a bad idea. What was I thinking? They gots my heads all screwed up believing in dumb concepts like "health" and "exercise" and "performance" and "nutrition."

What was I thinking! I should return to the basement and buy a bong, instead!