Thanks for taking time to reply Leo.

A good point, it definitely is a hard sell. I think that it's a very personal decision. As I said, I train MA for sport, not self defense, but I still think that there is value for the purposes of self defense.

What is a very personal decision? To hard sell? Either you believe that the risk is there and fair enough. Or you overstate the risk which I believe is unethical and deceitful.
I don't generally consider 'why' someone trains to be that personal a decision. I wouldn't consider any reason for training better or worse.
But the decision how someone trains can clearly be a better or worse one.

I'm not sure why this fact would make you uncomfortable. I do not think it's misleading, joint locks take very little effort to apply. They hurt a lot when partially applied and result in fracture and dislocation when hyper-extended....Denying the risks involved with such techniques would be irresponsible and misleading, such techniques should be treated with care

I dislike the "it takes very little force...." arguement because the following statement is equally true

"It is exceptionally difficult to render someone unconscious or break their limbs"

and I would add especially if you are at a size/gender/aggression/alcohol consumption disadvantage.

I would like to know what other feel about such statements and their use to 'sell' self defence.

In training their is a need to understand how fragile the body can be especially when drilling to perfect technique etc. In training the statement holds true.

For SD it is misleading.

They are vague because I don't want to name individuals who I train with. At least 10 women have successfully thrown me over the course of my 3 years training a grappling MA. I think that if they can throw someone of my weight and height who is resisting, they have better chances of being able to physically defend themselves if they need to.

The vagueness I was referring to is in regard to 'facts' such as 'only a small amount of force is required', 'I've been thrown by a woman', 'Something is better than nothing' and 'apply force effectively, reducing the importance of physical size and strength' and so on.

These are the statements which are put out and lend to the MYTHS of self defence. Most are true and all are misleading.

I understand why these are used. I understand "Slightly increase your chances of overcoming a larger, aggressive attacker" will not be the title of a best selling SD DVD series. But we should be able to talk honestly on a MA forum.

Where are you asking this about? Surely you don't expect us to know this information worldwide.

My Dojo doesn't teach Judo as self defense, we only train sport Judo. There is a Jujitsu class which covers some of that sort of thing but I'm not involved with Jujitsu any more.

Well I would like you to do your research before replying. (Joke)
The question was ment to be rhetorical (though I didn't make that clear). I suspect 99% of MA's think they do a good job with self defence. This is at least in part to the notion that 'something is better than nothing' (which is very possibly untrue)

Your Judo club could be an exception.
Is the Jujitsu class part of the Judo club? Same instructors etc?

The RBSD school free course sounds like a great thing from what you describe. I don't see too much of that. I think that would be a good thing if more common.

It (give students realistic expectations of ability) can be done....

Interesting. How do you think realistic expectations can be given? Especially to say a small woman?


note. I feel like I am victimising small women, just an easy example.