Guards in self-defense?

[Mister X]

This is a video from Iain Abernethy and I was hoping to get some opinions on it.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9I36exRa3Uc&t=9s

[runcible]

Could you offer us your own opinion, thoughts, observations, and\or concerns on this content; please? I think that'd be a helpful premise from which to start the discussion.

[BWT]

I watched parts of it waiting on a conference call to start.

He acknowledges that there are games specific things in Jiu Jitsu (and other arts) and I felt like he might about to say this was games specific but it wasn’t the succinct. I jumped to the conclusion and there was more extemporaneous thought.

It is thought provoking to discuss, but to me pulling guard is high risk in real fighting. You’re committing to a fight and putting yourself in a bad position where you can’t run away, etc. or move. What if they get around your guard or throw something, etc.

I think it’s committing early to a strategy of fighting where you don’t know if that’s a huge issue.

The rule sets in Jiu Jitsu and other sports will not be adhered to in fighting.

Like slamming is illegal.

Here’s a great reason not to pulled guard actually.

1:47 - guy pulls guard - lands on his head and knocks himself unconscious.

2:52 - guy gets slammed down and could be seriously hurt.

3:00 - same.

3:52 - slight difference - dude attempted guillotine - let’s himself get lifted up off the ground and is then thrown and hits his head and unconscious.

https://youtu.be/2Izi-aYomdU

These videos are easy to find.

My two things - you should not let yourself get lifted off the ground. You should not try to wrap your legs around someone’s waist or something of that nature. Lastly, nothing hits harder than the ground in my limited blue belt experience.

[Totem Polar]

His use of guard is not BJJ’s use of guard, FWIW. He’s using the word in a British pugilistic context. Different animal.

[BWT]

His use of guard is not BJJ’s use of guard, FWIW. He’s using the word in a British pugilistic context. Different animal.

I knew I should’ve watched the whole thing.

[Totem Polar]

I knew I should’ve watched the whole thing.

Maybe. Lots of lecture, not much motion. ;)

[Mark D]

Got to 3 minutes and gave up. I think his argument is that the guards used in puglistic sports don't have much relevance in self defense.

Assuming that is the gist of his argument, it's utter bullshit. Just ask all the people who have been knocked on their ass while their their hands were down by their sides.

There's a reason that we, as self defense practitioners use the fence* while we MUC. It's a guard that is cleverly designed to not look like a guard.

Or I could have completely misinterpreted his argument, in which case, whatever. He should make his arguments more succinctly and his videos more compelling.

*Props to Geoff Thompson, who was one of the first martial artists to codify the defensive use of the fence (https://www.amazon.com/Fence-Geoff-Thompson/dp/1840240849).

[Mister X]

I think Geoff Thompson and Peter Consterdine as well have actually influenced Iain quite a bit, based on what I’ve read.I don’t know the extent of their relationship, but they have trained and I believe even given seminars together.

Iain’s response to a comment under that video…

“I think you are redefining “guards” there. I agree that the fence and covers are useful, but guards (inactive hands held in a position where they are “ready” to work) don’t have a role in the close-range and chaotic world of self-protection.”

[45dotACP]

I think I get the gist of his argument...that before something goes violent it probably isn't appropriate to have your hands in a high guard.

But the idea of "try to clinch your opponent and drag him into strikes" or "always be swarming/blitzing your opponent" or "open your guard and throw as hard as possible because you'll just gas out anyways" is simply one way to engage in violence. It is not the only way.

Maybe it works for Mr. Abernathy, but I have a real hard time believing people who say they have the ONE TRUE WAY (tm) for everyone of every temperament, body type and situation. One must have the ability to judge the situation for what it is and adjust according. To be like water.


There are plenty of dudes who can use a guard to effectively create distance and potshot some dude into unconsciousness. Crazy as it sounds, boxers and kickboxers deal with blitzing attacks like you may see in a defensive encounter too. You either clinch and take it horizontal (no homo) or you use footwork off of a strike, angle out and counter before or during your opponents attempt to follow.

Sent from my SM-A326U using Tapatalk

[Mister X]

Another point he hits on in the video is covering being effective, but most of the other common defensive measures utilized in combat sport not really being all that practical in self-protection due to the close distance and lack of a reactionary gap. That seems to be a pretty common perspective with many Combatives type and similar instructors who want to give people some usable skills very quickly.

One example… https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fvdbjzVXN4g

In general, how relevant and practical are things like parrying, slips, blocking, bobbing, weaving, footwork when defending against punches in the most likely self-defense situations?

[Mister X]

but Thompson presents it more as a fluid, alive, active, adaptive concept for lack of a better description, rather than some default guard. That’s my take at least.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=T6OJnZG3joA

[Mark D]

but Thompson presents it more as a fluid, alive, active, adaptive concept for lack of a better description, rather than some default guard. That’s my take at least.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=T6OJnZG3joA

Thanks - that's a great video. I didn't realize that some of Geoff's work on was youtube. After watching that one, I found a full hour vid of his fence methodology. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETLWajTDzvE

Side note - I think it's easy to look back at this stuff and think it's basic and obvious, but in the late 80's and 90's, it was pretty revolutionary for a lot of martial artists.

[Mark D]

Another point he hits on in the video is covering being effective, but most of the other common defensive measures utilized in combat sport not really being all that practical in self-protection due to the close distance and lack of a reactionary gap. That seems to be a pretty common perspective with many Combatives type and similar instructors who want to give people some usable skills very quickly.

One example… https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fvdbjzVXN4g

In general, how relevant and practical are things like parrying, slips, blocking, bobbing, weaving, footwork when defending against punches in the most likely self-defense situations?

I agree whole heartedly with this video, with two minor caveats.

1. I have used a traditional karate rising block three times against folks swinging impact weapons in an overhand strike. The rising block worked great, every time. Saved me from serious injury. For almost any other incoming strikes , I much prefer to cover up, use an elbow shield, etc.

2. Based on personal experience, I think some knowledge of footwork is handy when fighting in open spaces. Parking lots come to mind.

I don't recall ever seeing someone slip, parry, or bob and weave successfully in a self defense situation. I'm sure it's been done, but I think it's pretty rare and takes a high level of skill.

[Mister X]

Thanks - that's a great video. I didn't realize that some of Geoff's work on was youtube. After watching that one, I found a full hour vid of his fence methodology. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETLWajTDzvE

Side note - I think it's easy to look back at this stuff and think it's basic and obvious, but in the late 80's and 90's, it was pretty revolutionary for a lot of martial artists.

I’m not sure The Fence could still be considered revolutionary today. I’ve come across quite a few articles and videos and everyone seems to have their own take on it.

Here’s one by the late Paul Gomez…

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=k8lVBmJj9ow

His viewpoint seems to be more of the fence being a relatively specific default posture(essentially a passive guard), making a lot of the same points and similar to what I see Tony Blauer doing, which doesn’t appear to me to align very well with how Geoff Thompson defines the fence. Not that there isn’t validity in those methods, because I think there most definitely is, it’s just different and I actually see more commonality between Iain Abernethy’s perspective on The Fence and Thompsons than with many of the others. I might be missing something.

No one person possesses infallible knowledge on all things, so I’ve never been a big fan of having go-to gurus. and there’s not really much new under the sun, just rediscovery’s and different ways of presenting it. I do get a bit uncomfortable when instructors start taking in absolutes, and Iain does seem to do that a fair bit in the OP video in my opinion. It’s a business like any other, and Instructors are always trying to find a unique niche and sell you on their methods and people are reassured by confidence and certainty.

Some related material I was watching earlier you might find interesting…

From Active self-protection…

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RjClyjQVi_o

From Ryan Hoover…

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cZpWka_pa6U

From Fight Science…

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NqCj10Zjaxw

[Mister X]

but Thompson presents it more as a fluid, alive, active, adaptive concept for lack of a better description, rather than some default guard. That’s my take at least.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=T6OJnZG3joA

Cecil Burch just wondering why this was edited. Thanks.

[Cecil Burch]

Cecil Burch just wondering why this was edited. Thanks.

Because I’m a moron.

I MEANT to reply, but instead of hitting reply with quote, I clicked edit post. All on me and there was nothing wrong with your post. I’m just a dumbass

[Mister X]

Because I’m a moron.

I MEANT to reply, but instead of hitting reply with quote, I clicked edit post. All on me and there was nothing wrong with your post. I’m just a dumbass

No problem, I thought maybe I had violated the rules somehow.

The original post was…

“Here’s a clip from Geoff Thompson about the fence. I see a lot of common ground with some of the points Iain made. I’ve seen several videos presenting the fence as some static, default position, but Thompson presents it more as a fluid, alive adaptive concept for lack of a better description, rather than some default guard. That’s my take at least.”

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=T6OJnZG3joA

Would love to get your thoughts about it.

[Cecil Burch]

No problem, I thought maybe I had violated the rules somehow.

The original post was…

“Here’s a clip from Geoff Thompson about the fence. I see a lot of common ground with some of the points Iain made. I’ve seen several videos presenting the fence as some static, default position, but Thompson presents it more as a fluid, alive adaptive concept for lack of a better description, rather than some default guard. That’s my take at least.”

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=T6OJnZG3joA

Would love to get your thoughts about it.


That right there is the problem with the original video. No guard in combat sports is static. They all are alive and fluid. No boxer stays in an arbitrary guard position throughout a fight. It shows that Abernathy either is ignoring reality, or has not put the time in to understand what he is critiquing.

[Mister X]

That right there is the problem with the original video. No guard in combat sports is static. They all are alive and fluid. No boxer stays in an arbitrary guard position throughout a fight. It shows that Abernathy either is ignoring reality, or has not put the time in to understand what he is critiquing.

Iain primarily uses the word “passive”, contrasting it with the hands being “active”. I used static in reference to some other videos I watched, maybe not the best choice of words. Two MMA Fighters squaring off at long range, the hands are held up in passive guards. A boxer throwing multiple consecutive jabs, the jabbing hand is considered currently active, while the rear hand at the chin is momentarily considered passive. A hockey player grabbing the jersey with one hand and hitting with the other, both hands would be considered active. At least that’s my interpretation of what he’s saying.

He’s making a distinction between fighting/combat sports/sparring and self-protection/self-defense, with an assertion that a guard is extremely relevant to the former, but not so much the latter in a specific context. I think that perspective is valid if self-defense scenarios would unfold how it seems he assumes they pretty much all will and according to what he believes is the most effective way to deal with them. The issue is both of those points are debatable. My opinion is that he would be right some of the time, but not all of the time.

[Cecil Burch]

Iain primarily uses the word “passive”, contrasting it with the hands being “active”. I used static in reference to some other videos I watched, maybe not the best choice of words. Two MMA Fighters squaring off at long range, the hands are held up in passive guards. A boxer throwing multiple consecutive jabs, the jabbing hand is considered currently active, while the rear hand at the chin is momentarily considered passive. A hockey player grabbing the jersey with one hand and hitting with the other, both hands would be considered active. At least that’s my interpretation of what he’s saying.

He’s making a distinction between fighting/combat sports/sparring and self-protection/self-defense, with an assertion that a guard is extremely relevant to the former, but not so much the latter in a specific context. I think that perspective is valid if self-defense scenarios would unfold how it seems he assumes they pretty much all will and according to what he believes is the most effective way to deal with them. The issue is both of those points are debatable. My opinion is that he would be right some of the time, but not all of the time.


He is playing semantic games that have no relevance to the situation. There is no passive hands in combat sports. Period. There is constant adjustment and movement, all based on the movements and actions of the other fighter. Exac.ty what happens in a self-defense encounter. There are literally tons of videos of actual real world scenarios where there is ongoing action and depending on the training of the participants their hands and arms are "in a guard" of some kind and a momentary pause in actual movement of the hands. Does that suddenly make them combat sports fights? No, it means that not all fights are three seconds long.

Here is what a non-sports guy does not get. A boxer/Thai boxer/MMA fighter would all like to end a fight immediately. It raely happens because they are matched with a peer who is aware of what is going on. In that case, when you cannot finish a dude right away, you better have the ability to stay conscious and stay mobile. Too many combatives guys operate on the notion that their shit is so good and they are so bad ass that every move they do with worl in exactly the way they think it will and they almsot never have a realistic back up plan. Every combat sports athlete on the other hand knows the fight could go on, so it is a good idea to have a way to not get KTFO.

Trying to minimize a highly evolved skill set and argue it is not applicable is foolish. And it astonsihes me that in our current day with the knowledge we have after 25 years of MMA, and videos of real world encounters that people still want to believe that there are shortcuts to functioanl fighting performance.

[Mister X]

There’s always been an apparent disconnect between different areas of focus. Someone takes a particular martial art, then one night the instructor has the class work on “self-defense”,and the material has very little commonality with what is normally taught. In many instances, MMA or other combat sports athletes aren’t really all that different.

Here’s a clip with GSP talking with Lex Fridman about self-defense in which George is presenting a perspective more similar to what you’d find in a typical karate dojo on self-defense night, rather than an MMA gym...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3MoiMCWhGuw

It’s common in many BJJ schools as well. Even with the early Gracie VHS tapes, the self-defense was considered completely separate, with relatively limited overlap between it and the other tapes in the series. I asked Royce about it specifically, but can’t remember his answer after this many years. I do recall asking about the lack of takedown defense, which his reply was “why would the shark mind being dragged into the water”. I found that to be a very odd response in the context of self-defense. The Gracie’s still make the distinction, but the divide is much smaller.

I think there are significant differences between self-defense and other areas of focus, but it can be difficult to make a clear distinction about what that actually means as well as sorting out what’s relevant and what’s likely not. MMA has no doubt taught us many lessons for self-defense, and I jumped on that bandwagon very early on, but people seem to frequently conflate street duels with self-defense. There’s a Venn diagram I see quite often showing partial compared with compete overlap of these different areas, which I think is more accurate.