"Cat-style" self-defense?

Posted by: Tashigae

"Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/12/07 12:08 AM

A few years ago, my younger brother (23) and I had a habit of regularly going out in town at night to mess around, using the nightly, deserted parts of the city as our own little personal parkour terrain (“parkour” isn’t the right term for what we did but it’s the closest I can get), just trying to find funny and original ways to use everything the place had to offer for acrobatics or informal fitness practice. One thing we both enjoyed, and which my brother was particularly good at, was climbing up lampposts. Not only could he climb up most streetlamps really swift, but unlike me he could even climb them without using his feet, which means he could do it even with poorly suited shoes. We often wondered how worthy that would be as a self-defense method…
Of course, if the mugger has a gun, it’s definitely a bad idea. But in the area, the knife is usually the weapon of choice of most muggers. What do you think of this possibility? A band of gangsters approach, you just make a dash for the closest lamppost and put 20 vertical feet between you and them. From there, if anyone attempts climbing after you, it’s too easy to kick them off the post – and that’s not a height they’d want to fall from. You can safely call the police from here, or shout for anyone in the vicinity to do it for you if you have no cell-phone. They can outnumber you as much as they want, a whole army gathered at the foot of the post won’t make any difference (actually it would even make it funnier). If they want to throw anything at you, the unusual angle will make the throw rather awkward, and they have gravity right against them – which would take quite a lot off the speed and power of the possible hit. And if you’re at the top of the post, you can easily enough secure your position with one hand and have the required mobility to dodge, or block with the soles of your shoes.

So what do you think? Should we all start practicing running up streetlamps as the ultimate self-defense method?
Posted by: crablord

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/12/07 03:28 AM

yes.

lets do that.
Posted by: ThomsonsPier

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/12/07 05:40 AM

Sounds fun. I can't help but wonder what's so difficult about the angle. though. I can throw over a lamppost with little effort, and a number of people throwing stuff in concert will create a wall of pain that's hard to dodge.

Besides, if I'm fit enough to monkey up a lamppost, I'm probably fit enough to run away.
Posted by: JKogas

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/12/07 06:49 AM

Then they decide to knock over the lamppost with up on it.

I can see it now; lamppost climbing for self-defense. I gotta tell you that I don't think many folks are going to start practicing this. Probably for a good reasons. Maybe you shouldn't either. But who knows.



-John
Posted by: jpoor

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/12/07 09:55 AM

How long can you hold on once you're up there?
Posted by: Tashigae

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/12/07 11:38 AM

Very long, once I reach the top. At mid-height would be another story, but we both have some background in climbing and don't feel any particular fatigue when staying there. depending on the type of post, we could even sit on top and stay virtually until we starve.
Posted by: Tashigae

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/12/07 11:48 AM

Quote:

I can throw over a lamppost with little effort, and a number of people throwing stuff in concert will create a wall of pain that's hard to dodge.



I'm sure of that, that wasn't my meaning; sorry for being unclear. What I wanted to say is, if you throw a stone at the ceiling, you can hit it very hard. But nowhere near as hard as you would if throwing at the wall instead, partly beacause of your position ("difficult" would be an overstatement, let's just say "less optimal") and mostly because of gravity. And a throw at the ground would hit even harder, which is why I wouldn't advocate "mole-style" self-defense.
Posted by: crablord

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/13/07 04:07 AM

unless your being attacked by a dog, this idea is retarded.
Posted by: Tashigae

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/13/07 05:50 AM

Crab, I’d be thankful for you not calling my younger brother “retarded”. In addition to his exceptional physical condition and monkey-like abilities, he should get his Master’s degree in biology shortly (for info, mine is in linguistic science). And although he has little martial training, he isn’t without experience since he has been through a self-defense situation where he successfully performed a gun-disarm – something he never learnt – before putting his attacker to the ground. I have confidence in his ability to make the technique we’re talking about work in many cases – although, admittedly, there’s always a risk factor (unknown presence of a gun, for instance).

As for your idea about using it in a dog-attack scenario, I think it’s particularly poor. The point of using a post is that you only have to outrun your pursuers for a short distance – say a hundred meters at worst – as opposed to “virtually through all town”; which would be a good thing for those guys with good speed but not too much stamina. But no matter how good your physical condition, you can’t outrun a dog for more than a few meters. And a dog can jump a lot higher than a man when it really wants to, which means that you remain a perfectly practical target for his bites during the first few meters of your climb (which takes just a few seconds, but a few seconds is more than what a dog needs to get there).

Now to get back on topic, my opinion is that this idea’s best use (if there’s any) would be to escape a mugger (the good thing with a mugger is, since he wants to scare you into complying, if he has a gun he will definitely let you know from the beginning). Once you’re sitting comfortably on the top of a 30 foot lamppost, the mugger looks so small you can hide his whole body from your own view with your foot. If you keep doing that, he can’t throw anything at you that won’t end stopped by the sole of your shoe. And if it’s nighttime (which is most probable for this kind of scenario), your attacker is brightly lit while you merely appear as a dark shape at the top of the post (at least with most types I’ve seen). Apart from the fact that he’s mobile and you’re not, he’s the perfect target if YOU have anything to throw at him (from this height, gravity alone would make the hit painful – any strength you put in it will add speed and force to it), while you’re not a very good one for him.
Posted by: crablord

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/13/07 06:10 AM

sorry for offending you?

but seriously. This is a joke.
Posted by: Leo_E_49

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/13/07 07:43 AM

1. There is no escape from the top of a lamp post. It's like backing yourself into a corner. Sure, maybe you can fend them off... until they start swinging baseball bats/pipes at you or get a friend who has a gun, then you're screwed. (Extreme scenario, I know; but if you're talking about an army of attackers, you've taken this discussion to that extreme) Plenty of other things which can be done, such as grabbing your feet and pulling you off (try it with a friend and a thick crash mat, I wonder what your chances of staying up there are), then you've got a long drop.

A big part of self defense is giving yourself options; finding ways through which you can escape to safety. Climbing yourself into a corner only closes off routes of escape. I question the rationale behind your lamp-post routine.

2. Try this, stand two to three feet apart from a chaser who is holding a marker pen. Run to and climb the nearest lamp-post in an attempt to escape. Every mark the chaser can make on your body is a deep cut, every cut to a major artery or organ area (including the kidneys and gut) is fatal. Congratulations if you make it up a lamp-post without being "cut" fatally.

3.
Quote:

They can outnumber you as much as they want, a whole army gathered at the foot of the post won’t make any difference (actually it would even make it funnier).



Self defense is no laughing matter.

4.
Quote:

A few years ago, my younger brother (23) and I had a habit of regularly going out in town at night to mess around, using the nightly, deserted parts of the city as our own little personal parkour terrain



You want to talk about self defense? How about starting by NOT hanging out in deserted parts of the city at night? Rule number 1: Prevention is better than cure.


I believe that Parkour is a valuable, if risky, tool for self defense if you are well trained by experienced runners and have a background in gymnastics. However, it's worthless without common sense. Nothing trumps awareness and avoidance when it comes to keeping yourself safe.
Posted by: Tashigae

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/13/07 07:54 AM

Quote:

sorry for offending you


No problem Crab, I'm not easily offended and everything's cool. My reply was just intended as a reminder not to post potentially offensive words too hastily; this forum has many members touchier than mysef...

Quote:

but seriously. This is a joke.


It might very well be, I haven't thought it through long enough to decide (and have to little experience), which is why I posted it. Just an idea that came to mind when we realized 1). how swiftly you can climb a post once you've got the hang of it and 2). how incredibly SAFE you feel when you look at the street from the top of a decently high lamppost. I just thought I'd share the idea with some people more expert than myself in the self-defense field, and see what they think. I guess I should try some more realistic scenarii to put it to the test next time I have the chance to see my brother (not anytime soon unfortunately - I'm posting from Beijing), to see at which distances between the post and the original situation that type of escape is applicable (if there's any), then try to throw things at him while he's making a call with his cellphone and see if he can dodge it easily enough, etc. Many lampposts are as high as a standard 3rd floor. From below, unless you have a gun, there's not that much you can do against someone at such height... And if you're in a city, the cops should arrive rather quickly once you've made the call.
Well I don't know, just cogitating aloud (if I may say so).

By the way, I love this oxymoron of yours . I'm definitely going to steal it!
Posted by: MAGon

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/13/07 08:43 AM

Y'know, I scratched my head about this one initially. Then I got to thinking about it and things became clearer.
In fact, one of the prime predators-survivors in North America will initially run for all it's worth if it's attacked by overwhelming odds. But, if it can't get away, the final resort will be to climb as high as it can and hope for the best. I'm referrring to the "treed" cougar/mountain lion. So there's at least one apex predator that instinctively strategizes as you suggest. Considering it's success in nature, it's at least fair to consider what you propose with an open mind.
That said, though, unless you have the cougar's or your brother's natural ability, it's probably of limited utility to most of us. But personally I'll keep it in mind, in case a surprise scenario ever happens in which my usual preocedures wouldn't work. I confess I'd never thought of climbing as a way out of trouble!
Posted by: crablord

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/13/07 08:43 AM

hehe.

Its an ok idea I guess, but think about it, if you slip your screwed, if you cant get up in time your screwed, your screwed anyway if your a normal person because you aren't a monkey, and if they throw things at you your screwed.

Running is a better option
Posted by: Tashigae

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/13/07 10:57 AM

Quote:

Sure, maybe you can fend them off... until they start swinging baseball bats/pipes at you


If they're able to climb up a perfectly smooth 30 feet lamppost while carrying a basball bat/pipe, they're damn fit gymnasts and I have no chance to escape from such a person to reach the post in the first place.

Quote:

or get a friend who has a gun, then you're screwed.


Agreed (as stated in my previous posts).

Quote:

Plenty of other things which can be done, such as grabbing your feet and pulling you off (try it with a friend and a thick crash mat, I wonder what your chances of staying up there are), then you've got a long drop.


I actually have put this part to the test rather extensively, and with the kind most lampposts I've tried to climb belong to, the odds to successfully pull off someone who's secured the top, for someone who isn't there yet, are zero or close enough. I used to often do some "vertical sparring", which is what I call an exercise in which both sparring partners are holding onto a climbing wall and try to make each other fall whithout falling themselves. In almost all cases, the victory went to the one who could secure the spot providing the best grip. It's almost impossible to fend off the wall someone with a decent grip, if yourself only have poor grips to hold onto.

Once a good climber has reached the top of a lamppost, he's as good as glued to it, while anywhere below offers nothing to hold onto. And it's just too easy for him to fend off any other monkey-wannabe who'd be foolish enough to attempt to climb after him.

Quote:

A big part of self defense is giving yourself options; finding ways through which you can escape to safety. Climbing yourself into a corner only closes off routes of escape. I question the rationale behind your lamp-post routine.


I agree to that principle. Keep in mind I don't even claim my idea to be a good idea (I honestly don't know), because I don't think I would count on it myself at the current state of my training level. It's just that, an idea. Which is here to be examined. And to answer your question, the rationale behind it is to get as quickly as possible to a relatively safe place from where to dial 911/999/18/etc...

Quote:

Try this, stand two to three feet apart from a chaser who is holding a marker pen. Run to and climb the nearest lamp-post in an attempt to escape. Every mark the chaser can make on your body is a deep cut, every cut to a major artery or organ area (including the kidneys and gut) is fatal. Congratulations if you make it up a lamp-post without being "cut" fatally.


I've tried this exercise occasionally (although not with the lamppost idea in mind), and I know it's not easy. However, I know at least two guys, fitter and better trained than myself, whom I'm pretty sure I couldn't "cut" before they get there. I definitely agree that this trick can't be pulled off by your average guy, not even your average FIT guy. Ability to do it comes with training, and my question is precisely "is this little trick worth training for?".

Quote:

Self defense is no laughing matter.


If your meaning is that self-defense is a serious matter, I naturally agree. If you mean that its seriousness grants it some kind of sacred nature putting it beyond the mere right to talk about it in a humourous manner, I disagree. I never totally discard the possibility of humour no matter what the subject is, and such a position can sometimes make you see solutions that you almost certainly wouldn't have found otherwise.
Sorry but I just chuckled at the thought of a band of thugs gathered at the foot of a lamppost, wondering what to do while their intended victim would call the police and smile at them; and I still see nothing wrong with that.

Quote:

You want to talk about self defense? How about starting by NOT hanging out in deserted parts of the city at night? Rule number 1: Prevention is better than cure.

I believe that Parkour is a valuable, if risky, tool for self defense if you are well trained by experienced runners and have a background in gymnastics. However, it's worthless without common sense. Nothing trumps awareness and avoidance when it comes to keeping yourself safe.


Thanks for the advice, but you needn't worry for me: I know the city I live in well enough, and I know where to hang out and where not to hang out.

Awareness is indeed the number one tool of successful self-defense, and we don't lack it when we go for one of our little training session.

As for avoidance, I probably agree but it depends how far you stretch the meaning of this word.
I'm not rich and my home-sweet-home's surface is approximately 12 m2 (that's right). I hardly have room enough to do pushups, so training techniques - let alone forms - is out of the question. I have no solution but to use the nightly, deserted sports terrains (or any other part of town fit for the exercise at hand) as my training ground. If by "avoidance" you mean I shouldn't do that lest I might make an umpleasant encounter, I disagree. I definitely refuse to alter the course of my agenda out of fear of what MIGHT happen. Now if by avoidance you simply mean that SHOULD such umpleasant encounter arise (which happened) I shouldn't look for trouble and just try to ignore any provocation as much as possible (which I did), I agree.

Just staying home all day with all doors locked would probably be the summum of "avoidance". I'm not too tempted. For me, avoidance simply means that when my path takes me in a situation which has the potential to turn into a dangerous one, I should try to prevent it from doing so, as opposed to let it degenerate and then face - or flee - a danger that should never have been allowed to exist in the first place.
Since I'm not too sure of what your meaning was, you tell me if we're in disagreement or not .

Anyway, thanks for the constructive comment. Your post is exactly the kind of contribution I was hoping for when I threw in that little idea. Keep'em coming everyone!
Posted by: Leo_E_49

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/13/07 11:15 AM

I think you've got a good grasp of what avoidance means. If you see something coming which could mean trouble, get out of there if you can. It also means taking necessary precautions to minimise the risk of danger, for example, taking a longer route through a safer part of town to avoid the risk of a more dangerous part of town. It doesn't mean paranoia or boxing yourself in your house for eternity. Sensible precautions, an understanding of body language and effective communication skills, a keen eye for dangerous situations developing, etc are all important for awareness and avoidance.

Skill in avoidance is like experience driving a car. With more experience driving, you learn to look ahead and see a situation developing, rather than having to deal with danger as it arrives. This kind of foresight can save your life. I spend time reading on subjects such as NLP, body language and psychology (you can probably find books about these in your local library) and I also spend time working on my people skills, such as monitoring my own body language from time to time and just getting out and being friendly and talking to people.

As to your explainations, don't underestimate human creativity. I'm sure that if your attackers want to harm you and they can still see you, they'll find a way to do it. This was my actual point. The moment you climb up that lamp post, you put control of the situation into their hands. You put your faith in their stupidity and ineptitude, rather than taking control of the situation yourself. What happens if they aren't stupid or inept and come up with a way to attack you or pull you down? Then you're in trouble. I personally would rather take control of the situation myself and make them follow my rules of engagement, then I can put them at a disadvantage, however small.

I like to think of self defense as a kind of poker game (a very serious, dangerous poker game) in which you can cheat without the other players knowing. You can stack the cards in your favour, but everyone else gets a chance to do the same. What matters is that you've got better chances in your hand than they do. Attackers tend to have control of a situation from the outset, they choose the time and place they'll attack and they're familiar with their surroundings. They'll probably have friends or weapons. If they didn't think they'd win, they wouldn't risk attacking you. You can also stack the cards in your favour by training effectively, being aware and prepared to defend yourself, understanding the concept of body language and confrontational behaviour and being fit enough to escape.

This is why running is a good tactic for self defense. You can reduce their advantage by taking them away from their "home ground" and put them in unexpected territory where they do not have control. You might run into a police car or a group of pedestrians or down to an area where they can easily lose sight of you. Another important realisation is that if an attacker can't see you, they can't harm you. This is true no matter what weapon they are carrying. Lose them and you're much safer.
Posted by: Neko456

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/13/07 01:31 PM

I guess we could try sqeezing our head through fencing also as a method of defense, now thats cool as sh%^ almost like they disappeared. You got the 1st part right running but really climbing up a light pole works for animals attackers but not for man.

Thats how man has killed stronger and faster large cats and Bears for eons, its called treeing the prey or predator if its a man killer. End result is a capture or dead animal.

But what makes the Fox or Coyote known to be wise is that it runs and out distance it chaser, sometimes when it tries to be too cute it hinds and gets caught.

Anyway I use think of myself as a streetfighter running was one of my best tactics and still is (along woith being one of the best exercise) anytime you feel this is a bad situation RUN!! And teach your woman how to run (a Sinbad joke).

I question if a cougar that can easily kill a man in one swat isn't safe treed, what would make you. A nice scenario but no thanks, I think you got it half right be a Fox or a coyote, a cats good they run like lighting until they start thinking and get treed.

Rules of survival KISS. IMHO.
Posted by: ButterflyPalm

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/14/07 02:42 AM

Quote:

Besides, if I'm fit enough to monkey up a lamppost, I'm probably fit enough to run away.



You forgot that Tashigae (and presumably his brother) is French and they tend to do things in style. Just FYI, lamp posts in France are made of cast iron and roughly painted and so easier to monkey up.

In any case I think dogs (French or otherwise) have better use for lamp posts than humans, or at least some of the humans.
Posted by: ThomsonsPier

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/14/07 05:48 AM

Quote:

In any case I think dogs (French or otherwise) have better use for lamp posts than humans, or at least some of the humans.



Ah, yes. I forgot to take account of the hygiene implications of this self defence method.

I don't know, maybe it would be useful as a last resort.
Posted by: groundfighter

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/14/07 08:46 AM

Quote:

(for info, mine is in linguistic science). And although he has little martial training, he isn’t without experience since he has been through a self-defense situation where he successfully performed a gun-disarm – something he never learnt – before putting his attacker to the ground.


Linguistic science? I must not have a complete understanding of what linguistic science is. I was under the impression that you could not begin a sentence with the word "and," that a dash was not a puncutation, and that "learnt" was (at last check) NOT a word (re:learned.) Not to mention the fact that I had no idea you could say "he never learnt" as opposed to "he hadn't learned."
I want to thank that "linguisitic scientist" For clearing this misunderstanding up for me.
J
Posted by: jpoor

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/14/07 03:52 PM

Quote:

Once you’re sitting comfortably on the top of a 30 foot lamppost, the mugger looks so small you can hide his whole body from your own view with your foot. If you keep doing that, he can’t throw anything at you that won’t end stopped by the sole of your shoe.



This akin to the child's peek-a-boo game where the child believes "If I can't see you, you can't see me." It also fails to consider anything but a direct trajectory with no curve.

In order to get out of range and keep your feet from being grabbed, you would need a heck of a head start.

Not saying it's a bad idea, but not very practical in a lot of situations.
Posted by: Tashigae

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/14/07 08:29 PM

Quote:

I was under the impression that you could not begin a sentence with the word "and," that a dash was not a puncutation, and that "learnt" was (at last check) NOT a word (re:learned.) Not to mention the fact that I had no idea you could say "he never learnt" as opposed to "he hadn't learned."


Sorry for the mistakes, keep in mind that I'm not writing in my mother-tongue here, and that all those things you point out ARE allowed in mine. Besides, I learnt Enlish in no small part by trading letters with English-speaking friends and chatting on similar forums, of which not all members are necessarily native English-speakers either, and not all those who are use an impeccable Queen's English. As for "learnt", I must admit I was surprised because I'm positive I learnt it as an irregular verb from one of my very first English teachers back at high school. Could it be due to a difference between British English and American English? I honestly don't know, maybe J.Poor, who's a fellow linguist AND a native English speaker, could clear that for us.
Thanks for notifying me of it anyway, and don't hesitate to do so again in the future.

Regards.
Posted by: Tashigae

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/14/07 09:10 PM

Strange, it looks like my "edit" function isn't working... Anyway, I just wanted to add that I was taught the word "learned" too, but as an adjective only. I also wanted to correct the "Enlish" typo...
Posted by: jpoor

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 06/15/07 06:51 AM

Quote:

Linguistic science? I must not have a complete understanding of what linguistic science is. I was under the impression that you could not begin a sentence with the word "and," that a dash was not a puncutation, and that "learnt" was (at last check) NOT a word (re:learned.) Not to mention the fact that I had no idea you could say "he never learnt" as opposed to "he hadn't learned."
I want to thank that "linguisitic scientist" For clearing this misunderstanding up for me. J




That was pretty much uncalled for. But since you did it: "Learnt" is actually a Brittish variant and since many of the non-american-english speakers learned Brittish English, "Learnt" is perfectly acceptable. Give folks who are brave enough to learn and even communicate with others in a second or third language the credit they deserve. Sheesh!

I'd like to see how good your grammar is in Russian, Thai, or Chinese.

Oh, and linguistic science is a lot more than grammar of a specific language. Try not to comment on things about which you are ignorant.

Now, back to the show.
Posted by: Brash

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 07/02/07 09:02 AM

Am I the only one who thought, "Oh look, he's up a lamp post. Someone gimme a rock."? This really isn't a good idea.
Posted by: martialarthur

Re: "Cat-style" self-defense? - 07/08/07 08:09 AM

Quote:

Quote:

(for info, mine is in linguistic science). And although he has little martial training, he isn’t without experience since he has been through a self-defense situation where he successfully performed a gun-disarm – something he never learnt – before putting his attacker to the ground.


Linguistic science? I must not have a complete understanding of what linguistic science is. I was under the impression that you could not begin a sentence with the word "and," that a dash was not a puncutation, and that "learnt" was (at last check) NOT a word (re:learned.) Not to mention the fact that I had no idea you could say "he never learnt" as opposed to "he hadn't learned."
I want to thank that "linguisitic scientist" For clearing this misunderstanding up for me.
J



See, this place educational too

And I too was taught not to begin a sentence with a conjunction, but nowadays it is considered grammatically correct.

Dashes used to replace parenthesises is an acceptable - but not often seen - form of punctuation.

Learnt is the past participle of the verb to learn not the past tense and is used correctly in the sentence.