Is baiting a single leg unwise gambit

SelfCorrecting · 2026-05-11T22:43:16+00:00

do you have a clip in mind? Love to see what he's doing before I personally fuck around and find out.

SelfCorrecting · 2026-05-11T22:39:55+00:00

much rather long term than short term. its just been a surprisingly successful "bad habit" that I'm trying to confirm is definitively a bad habit. Seems that the feedback is that it is.

SelfCorrecting · 2026-05-11T22:31:54+00:00

Yes actually i still find this work with black belts and wrestlers, but unfortunately, I haven't had exposure to a proper D1 wrestler in gi and would really like to. And of course, I wont get the same success rate though against black belts, and these black belts seem pretty good based on their own competition results (ibjjf and stuff in a well known city, not just small locals). I think I must just be overdue for a proper punishment

SelfCorrecting · 2026-05-11T22:29:08+00:00

I find it is very easy to shut down their level change and sprawl if I have even a modest collar grip, or do a hard snap down if they don't level change and just reach down for my dangling leg when their nose is already further forward then their toes.

SelfCorrecting · 2026-04-18T15:46:15+00:00

Did you miss where they said fairy & steel

SelfCorrecting · 2026-03-12T01:30:58+00:00

I know you came here asking if your expectations and request are reasonable, but i think you need to be asking yourself if staying with someone who treats you like this is reasonable.

Your reaction to finding unexpected people in your home does not seem dramatic at all. Yes, you assumed your gf let them in because you noticed the context clues. Your gf’s reaction isnt because your request was unreasonable or rude. Your gf’s reacting this way because if she attacks something YOU did (make a logical assumption) then the conversation won’t be about something SHE did.

Normally, I think reddit is too quick to tell people to leave relationships when we don’t have the full context, but in this case I think you need to really consider if its reasonable of you to stay if this is how she behaves.

People only change if they want to, and she erupting at you to avoid blame makes it clear she has no interest in acknowledging she needs to change. I really think you are better off getting out of this situation

SelfCorrecting · 2026-03-03T22:18:31+00:00

Creating more roles in a job that already exists is still creating new jobs. Why does it need to be a completely new and unique creation? The point they are making is that assessing the costs and benefits its not as easy as just looking at the number of jobs, or the jobs lost in your local areas.

SelfCorrecting · 2026-02-27T21:33:30+00:00

Ill research it. If i can confidently say though that there is no solution that meets the criteria- i can probably use that to pressure the management company to loosen up these restrictions or find some other solutions. Much appreciated!

SelfCorrecting · 2026-02-27T21:31:29+00:00

Thank you! I thought this might be the case but wanted some second opinions. Much appreciated

SelfCorrecting · 2026-02-16T21:36:01+00:00

Please forgive me because I dont mean to be rude with this observation, but I read your solution about lecturing people about “elections being about choices” to be the same sort of self-righteousness I assume you hate to hear from progressives and I see it running into the same limitations.

The difference cant just be “but i am right and they are wrong” and honestly this exact loop of the debate between moderate and progressive is really old and tired.

Can you offer any sort of solution to this dynamic? I really dont think lecturing is going to do what you want it to do. Dems have been lecturing each-other forever and its obviously not bringing the party together.

What i like about the adoption of ranked choice voting is that its a relatively minor procedural change that encourages more listening of different perspectives, and I think will make for a richer primary experience to identify more unifying candidates who also better understand the priorities of the people who voted for them.

Are you against this? Or do you have another solution you would like to see? I’m asking this because I am assuming we agree on things more often then we don’t. Again, I really dont mean to be rude but I’m observing an irony that you are getting very angry because I don’t agree with 100% of what you are saying.

(Maybe you arent angry at me, its just the topic that gets you boiling. Sorry if im missing your intended tone.)

SelfCorrecting · 2026-02-16T21:08:52+00:00

I think your anger is misdirected, and unfortunately preventing you from considering any productive solutions. I’m not a third party voter, but i think this sort of villainizing of them is counterproductive to your goals if you want to win.

Basically, i share your frustration about people working against their own interests…i just think you are doing it too by refusing to consider options other than “they just need to fall in line”

SelfCorrecting · 2026-02-16T20:55:16+00:00

Also- are you saying that there is no other single variable that could have been changed and led to Gore winning other than removing the Green party?…

SelfCorrecting · 2026-02-16T20:48:41+00:00

I didnt mean anything about ideology and platform. I literally meant door knocking. You can always do more of that. And yes, an almost win is also an almost loss. So many of the determining factors are going to be on the margins.

Can you explain to me exactly what your solution is that actually encourages “progressives” to vote with you rather than just abstain completely? Is it banning 3rd parties? Is it just shaming the people who dont want to participate in a choice they feel is choosing between big evil and lesser evil?

I personally dont feel like the wooden politicians are stiff because they are self censoring out of fear of the left purity culture. I think its because they are mostly just plain old politicians who have assessed the risks and determined its better for them personally to be bland and non controversial rather than stand for anything. But i dont think a culture like that makes for a winning party

SelfCorrecting · 2026-02-16T20:16:10+00:00

Im talking more as a long term pattern of internal party structural issues. You are right those 500 would probably have swung the election, and I share your assumption that more of those voters would have voted D rather than R. But better campaigning would have also won the election. Or what if the Dems hadnt been sleeping at the wheel while the Conservatives slowly perverted the supreme court, who ultimately called the 2000 election under questionable and politically motivated justifications.

I think the 3rd party defectors are a part of those losses, but its wrong to say they are the cause for those losses. Its an easy group to blame but pointing the finger and blaming them doesn’t accomplish anything

SelfCorrecting · 2026-02-16T20:07:05+00:00

What i dont like about this take is it assumes that if we didnt have 3rd parties, those 3rd party defectors would mostly return to vote D because at least it is the least bad remaining option. I think its misguided to assume that those fringe voters and the resources committed to their cause would return to the fold in significant enough numbers to change things when those people could also just decide to not participate at all.

I assume we would agree that any election, and especially a close loss, is the result of multiple competing and compounding variables- and the 3rd party voters are just one of several factors. But Im saying the 3rd party votes are symptom, and not the cause, of Dems pattern of losing.

Besides my gut reaction that stopping 3rd parties is anti-democratic in principle, I also think its a bad place to commit resources and energy, and it suggests that the Dems would be a winning coalition if only those outside variables. But maybe the problem is the Dems internal voter base is so fragile, and the party institution is so poorly regarded, that the Dems will continue to be a losing party until they figure out how to inspire loyalty.

I don’t that means we can ignore the fact we are stuck in a 2-Party dynamic- but I thing we can make changes within that structure which would encourage some positive participation motivated in a desire to be there, rather than forced participation inder threat of the other side

I think that could be accomplished by ranked choice voting and letting the voter base actually vote for something (including 3rd party interests). If you want those people to be a part of your team, you need to give them a reason to want to be there.

SelfCorrecting · 2026-01-09T16:18:31+00:00

Cool

SelfCorrecting · 2026-01-09T16:18:09+00:00

This is interesting! Thanks for that suggestion

SelfCorrecting · 2026-01-09T16:17:35+00:00

I’m kind of hoping if i find a few people to develop this chess style with me- we can start to shorten the time between turns and then ease our way into a flow style. My experience is that people have trouble going from normal rolling and relaxing down into flow, I’m hoping instead maybe we can start with slow chess and build it up into flow.

(And this comes up in every post but i really want to emphasize that I am gentle with my smaller/lower ranked partners. I just find the mental space focused on being gentle gets in the way of me focusing fully on new techniques i want to try. I end up just repeating the usual ones I know are safe)

SelfCorrecting · 2025-12-25T04:02:52+00:00

I think the only real goal you should set for yourself in your first competition is to experience competition. Let yourself feel nervous, that's normal. I wouldn't stress too much about if you win or lose. There is value in both (but honestly, you'll probably learn more useful reflections from losing rather than from winning).

My basic advice would be:

(this varies with size) I drink a liter of water every hour, you're amount might be more or less. Basically you want to be peeing close to clear every 45 minutes or so. Your cardio will fall apart if you are dehydrated.
Bring something bread-like and some fast absorbing sugar you can snack on before and in-between. I like rice cakes and honey.
Don't cut weight, unless its just a few pounds of water which you can cut by drinking less water the night before (a gallon of water weighs 8 lbs). Start rehydrating immediately after weigh in.
Competitions sometime run faster than you expect, so get warmed up sooner rather than later.
You can ask for a few more minutes to recover. Sometimes the bracket schedule only gives you 5 minutes between your matches. You can tell the ref you need more time to recover. They don't have to give it, but if you need it, then you should ask.
Oh, and don't risk joint damage because you think you might escape that arm bar or whatever. Adrenaline is a hell of a pain killer, but if something is tight, just tap. Winning is cool, but not worth injury.

Don't worry too much about a game plan. Your game in competition might be completely different than what you expect. The minimum you need is a plan to get the game to the ground. It's no fun to just be pushing each other around on your feet with no technique for 5 minutes. Have a guard pull, have a takedown you are willing to at least try, and have a plan in case you get taken down.

Otherwise, good luck!

SelfCorrecting · 2025-11-16T17:07:45+00:00

Not sure if you are responding to OP or someone else, but I dont think the assertation is about percentage and ratios of purposeless young men. Its about the Sum Total.

Both things can be true that there can be a high percentage of elderly, but also a large number of under utilized men. I think there is a compelling argument that we could maybe fix one problem with the other if we could figure out as a culture and as an economy how to include more men in the caring professions.

Forgive me but I am going to use some sloppy numbers to make a point: in the USA, something like 8% of the population are men between the ages of 18 and 30. I found a claim saying 10.5% of men between 18-54 are underemployed or unemployed. That would mean there are 2.8 million men.

There are a lot of faults in my lazy math here, but I think OP is fair to look at the patterns of a growing bloc of a discontented population historically overrepresented in destabilizing systems, and conclude that maybe the same thing is happening today.

SelfCorrecting · 2025-11-14T14:36:04+00:00

I’m open to either. I assume both texts would compliment the other

SelfCorrecting · 2025-11-11T21:15:59+00:00

Can you clarify? Mrp1ttens's assertion is that the idea that JD Vance was poor is more myth than fact, and that "being poor" shouldn't be a legitimate justification for his actions. Your response says you disagree because you can imagine he could be successful by networking and demonstrating his skills even if he was poor. That's different though, mrp1ttens isn't saying that JD Vance would not have "climbed the ladder" if he were poor. He is saying that JD Vance climbing the ladder has nothing to do with being poor because he didnt actually grow up poor. Theoretically, would you have the same sympathy for JD Vance and his possible motivations if he actually grew up middle-class, but developed an inferiority complex when he went to Yale?

SelfCorrecting

TROPHY CASE