Articles

[David]

The following is a result of 40 years in the martial arts, H2H systems, Defensive Tactics, Firearms and Combatives. I hope you the reader find it interesting enough to read to the end. It is my hope that some or many will understand what I’m trying to say.

Definition of MARTIAL ART (SPORT)

: any of several arts of combat and self-defense (as karate and judo) that are widely practiced as sport.

Definition of MARTIAL DISCIPLINE

: a field of study of, relating to, or suited for war or a warrior

: a rule or system of rules governing conduct or activity

There has always been both a combative and sport element within the martial ‘arts’. The ancient Greeks and Persians had several forms of physical sport such as wrestling and boxing. Generally speaking, there has always been a clear delineation between what was used in the sport venue as opposed to the battle field. What was used by the Gladiators in the coliseum differed from what was used by contestants in ‘Olympic’ games. Looking at the Eastern views (such as Japan), there was a clear delineation between a ‘Jutsu’ (pronounced Jitsu and translated generally as ‘method’) and a ‘Do’ (which translates as a ‘way’) or a ‘Te’ (which translates as ‘hand’). Originally a Jutsu was created and used by the warrior class i.e. Samurai for use in war or law enforcement whereas a ‘Do’ or ‘Te’ was created for civilian use in self-defense situations i.e. defending yourself against a bandit. Again, generally speaking a Jutsu almost always involved extensive use of weapons as the primary focus with empty hand training being secondary. A ‘Do’ or ‘Te’ was almost always the opposite. Empty hand training was emphasized with occasional improvised weapons use (farm implements for example). This was usually due to a national or local ban on civilian owned weaponry. The training was similar in each case from the perspective of wanting the fight to be over as quickly as possible. Therefore the training was more inclined to be lethal first, controlling second but always usable in a serious situation rather than in a sporting context.

As time passed, the clear lines between a Jutsu art and a Do or Te art began to blur. This was a result of cross-training that was brought about by the mixing of ethnic cultures. Training and methodologies was freely passed between China and Okinawa. Additionally, Japan at this time was in a very imperialistic mode and occupied or controlled Okinawa, Korea and parts of China. Therefore the various arts intermingled.

Itosu Ankô was a University Professor in Okinawa circa 1900. Additionally, he was an accomplished master of the Te method known as Shuri Te (named after the city of Shuri in Okinawa). His training directly or indirectly led to the founding of almost all major Ryus (styles) of Karate in Okinawa. It was his desire to incorporate Karate training into the Okinawan school curriculum, not for its combative value but rather as a physical training aid. He took a set of five katas, known as the Pinan Katas, and relabeled the movements interpretations. This had the effect of watering down the combative elements by changing movements to train chokes, breaks, joint destruction, throws etc and replaced them with simple block-punch-kick interpretations. This set up a distinct children’s version and adult’s version of the Pinan katas. In this way, a child could learn the movements, gain the physical benefits of the art but not be trained in the more lethal elements. When the child reached adulthood and was more emotionally prepared to learn the adult version, the movements had already been trained into muscle memory so the original interpretation of the movements could be explained. It is important to note that almost all of these movements were gross motor in nature and application.

One of Itosu Ankô’s most famous students was Gichin Funakoshi who is attributed by most to be the ‘Father of modern Karate’ as well as the founder of Shotokan. He was in large part responsible for Okinawan Te being brought to the attention of the Japanese mainstream. He also brought Karate to the Japanese youth in the same way as was brought to the Okinawan youth. Additionally, he was responsible for the Dan/Kyu system of rank being utilized in Karate (borrowed from Kano Jigoro of Judo), a standardized uniform (the ‘angry white pajamas’) and a formalized curriculum. Koreans of this time period were often considered second class citizens of the Empire. Many did however get the opportunity to learn this Karate and eventually brought it back to their own homeland. Some received formal training and recognition and some picked up training ‘here-and-there’.

In 1945 Japan was defeated in WWII and as a result China and Korea were liberated and the Japanese mainland occupied by the victorious Allies. This was a bad time as can be imagined in Japan with devastation and economic turmoil. One of the ways to make a living was to teach the occupying forces ‘Karate’. By and large though, the type of ‘Karate’ taught (to the ‘invaders’) was more often than not the children’s version as developed by Itosu and Funakoshi. This children’s version was spiced up with lots of flash and fluff and was then carried back to the various countries of the Allies i.e. the West. The Koreans as well had received training (generally speaking) in the children’s version as most weren’t trusted or respected enough to be taught the adult version. And of course they took this and converted it over to the Korean language. Thus Karate became Kong Soo Do, Tang Soo Do and eventually Taekwondo and Aikijujutsu became Hapkido. One will note that many of the original Korean hyung (forms) are Okinawan kata with a name change.

It was during this time that sport practices crept into formal training. It had to be in order to keep the attention of western students. It needs to be stressed that the eastern way of training differed dramatically before the ‘modern’ era. For example, Uechi Kanbun the founder of Uechi Ryu Karate (Pangainoon) practiced the opening movement of Sanchin Kata for hours on end, day after day for months before proceeding to the next set of movements. Teaching this way in western ‘fast-food’ cultures would result in an empty Dojo/Dojang after the first day of training. So class fillers had to be introduced i.e. sparring, kata to music, glow in the dark weapons etc to hold the attention of the new student base. And of course, in order to keep the student/client base happy, colored belts of every imaginable variation including ‘camo’ were introduced…along with the usual belt testing fee attached of course every couple of months or so. It is interesting to note that the original belt colors were white, brown and black. And in Okinawa it was not uncommon to be training alongside practitioners of advanced black belt status who were wearing a white belt simply because they never got around to buying a black one and didn’t think it would improve their training anyway if they did.
And then came competitions as a source of excitement, motivation and of course revenue. Is sport training and competitions necessarily a bad thing for the martial arts? Well, consider these things;


We often train our students (and particularly children) that ‘Karate is for DEFENSE ONLY’, only to turn around and remind them to bring their gear and entrance fee to the tournament on Saturday. This is teaching a hypocritical position. How can we honestly claim that our training is for defense only and then turn around and throw punches or kicks (or takedowns and throws) for the purpose of getting a ribbon or trophy? The often touted response is, ‘it teaches discipline, balance, good sportsmanship or control’. No, it teaches a contradiction
How we train is how we react under stress. We’ve learned this truism on the bodies of dead soldiers and officers. As I often state, ‘We don’t rise to the occasion, we sink to the level of our training’. If we always train in a controlled environment (Dojo/Dojang), if we are utilizing a referee that enforces mutually agreed upon rules of conduct, if we always face a single, unarmed opponent (rather than a determined attacker bent on causing as much damage as humanly possible in as short a time as possible), if we train with flashy, acrobatic refined motor skills movements (that won’t work under duress), if we have time outs and tap outs and water breaks to get a pep talk and advice from our ‘corner’ then we aren’t training for a real life altercation. We are giving ourselves a false sense of security and preparing for failure.
Real life has one or more determined attackers bent on hurting you. They may very well be armed and not hesitant about using the weapon. It will probably be at a time that is disadvantageous to you and advantageous to him/them. It statistically will be in dim light (do you do any training in dim or no light)? An attack may occur between two parked cars on asphalt, at an ATM, in an elevator or on a stairwell. It might be on a slope or on grass or an oily parking lot (do you always train on dry, level surfaces)? Do you think you’ll be warmed up and stretched out in loose fitting clothing? Does your training require specific types of clothing to be worn or worse, the opponent needs to be in heavy type clothing so the ‘technique’ works? These are all valid real life considerations.


Professional, serious training examines the failures of the real world and corrects the training methodology. It is true that officers have died because they were picking up empty brass and putting them in their pockets during a gun fight rather than reloading their firearm. Why? Because they had an anal-retentive range instructor that wanted a clean gun range so the officers in training picked up there spent brass, tucked them away in their pockets and THEN reloaded the firearm. We don’t train officers that way anymore. Forget the empties and get the damn gun reloaded and get back into the fight. Yet some martial artists think they can train one way in the Dojo/Dojang and then react differently in a real fight. Real world data doesn’t support that conclusion.

It is true that an officer once disarmed a bad guy during a robbery…and then handed the gun back to the bad guy! Why? Because in training he and his fellow officers took turns being the ‘bad guy’. The officer would disarm the ‘bad guy’ (a rubber gun) and then hand it back to him so he could do it again. Under duress…he did the same thing. We no longer train that way. Yet some martial artists think they can train one way in the Dojo/Dojang and then react differently in a real fight. Real world data doesn’t support that conclusion.

It is true that many well-known ‘world champions’ teach or have taught ‘combatives’ to military and police personnel. It is also equally true that they’ve had to modify their curriculum away from what the local MMA club teaches…because what the local MMA club teaches didn’t work on the battle field or in the street. Taking an attacker down and going for a kamora/cross-body mount/figure four leg lock/triangle choke etc doesn’t work very well on armed bad guys and/or bad guys with friends. Being tied up on the ground is ranks at the top of the list of places not to be in a real fight. Yet some martial artists think they can train one way in the Dojo/Dojang and then react differently in a real fight. Real world data doesn’t support that conclusion. They compare their favorite MMA fighter on T.V. with real life. Has anyone ever read in the news about their favorite T.V. martial artist/actor or MMA star getting their clock cleaned in a fight? Or worse, killed. I have.

Back when I had a regular school I had an eye-opener. My friend and fellow Deputy had a daughter that was a 2nd Dan in Olympic Taekwondo. And she was GOOD! She had trophies bigger than her. She had so many they were thinking about adding a room to the house just to house them. Yes, she was THAT good. He brought her to me for some good ole fashion self-defense training. I was demonstrating a balance displacement technique that I normally show yellow belt level students. Her eyes got as big as dinner plates as she nervously stated, ‘we have to actually put our hands on someone’? She was a legite 2nd Dan in her art yet had never once actually gone hands on with someone. It was all flashy kicks, glow-in-the-dark weapons and musical kata. As a 2nd Dan, she had no clue how to defend herself.

About the same time my partner brought in his friend who was a 2nd Dan in an Okinawan Karate style. After watching the yellow belt class he candidly stated that he would be hesitant to put his black belts against any one of our yellow belts. That isn’t a pat-on-the-back boast for me or saying I’m special. But it does demonstrate the difference in training methodology, application and expectation.

Many believe that years of training are necessary in order to defend themselves or ‘master’ the art. On this I’ll call B.S. This is not a correct statement and is not backed up by real world data. For example; the edged weapon defense developed by Darren Laur and promoted by Peter Boatman is very probably the best system of edged weapon defense, bar none, in the world. It is certainly the best documented in actual LEO edged weapon encounters.

Fact: Prior to the implementation of this program, officers in Great Britain were injured in 87% of the edged weapon encounters.

Fact: After implementation, the injury rate dropped to 17%.

Fact: This program is taught to line officers in a single 8 hour course and focuses on gross motor skill responses.

Fact: Refresher training was annually but increased to 18 months since it was demonstrated to be effective long after the initial training and was retained in long term memory.

Fact: My own agency (and those that use the system) have refresher training from 1-2 years since it has been demonstrated to be effective long after initial training which was less than 8 hours in duration.
Another example would be WWII combatives as developed by Fairbairn and O'Neill and taught to the FSSF, SAS and other special forces units. The training was anywhere from 8-24 hours. Based on gross motor skills. This system was effective in personal H2H combat and the results were usually lethal. According to a CIA report, WWII combatives as taught was found to be retained in long term memory and usable DECADES after the initial training with a high rate of success.
Long hours of training may make one feel good about what they train in...but it isn't necessary for self-defense IF what you train in is actually geared towards self-defense. As mentioned, it is gross motor skills that are easily learned and retained in long term memory. Knowledge of the O.O.D.A. loop, flinch response and adrenaline induced factors. Most 'modern' martial arts don't train in these things and don't even know what they are.

Perhaps we need a new term? The term ‘martial art’ doesn’t effectively mean what it should mean. It is too broad of a brush stroke. Perhaps ‘martial art’ should mean ‘martial sport’ and a new term like ‘martial discipline’ be used to denote a martial system focusing strictly and only on self-defense. That way we have two unique venues to offer people. For those that ‘do karate’ on Mondays and Thursday (and bowling on Tuesdays and Fridays) who want to ‘get in shape’ and/or win a trophy while learning really cool, flashy ‘moves’ while paying gobs of money for pretty belts can go the martial art/sport route. While those that prefer to train for personal protection using proven gross motor skills that are retainable in long term memory under a variety of settings can go the martial discipline/system route.

Am I being unnecessarily harsh in my comments? Well….no, I don’t think so. It isn’t going to make me popular, but then that really isn’t my goal. My goal is to reach someone and give them a light-bulb moment…a reality check if you will which results in their training improving to a whole new level.

Remember, we NEVER quit and we ALWAYS win.

[David]

Self-Defense Training Methodology

There has been much discussion on the differences between self-defense training methodology vs. sport training methodology. It isn't necessarily a this vs. that since an individual is free to pursue either as the focus of their personal training. The purpose of this thread is to go into the differences in training methodology. It isnt' to say one is better or superior to the other as each has a different focus and a different goal. So from the very beginning I want to make it clear that this isnt' an 'us' vs. 'them' thread. It isn't a we're great and you suck thread. It is only to discuss the SD training methodology in and of itself and how it differs from the sport model.

For the sport-only instructor/practitioner that has only the focus or goal of sport competition, this thread will probably be of little value. And there is nothing wrong with being a sport only instructor/practitiner as long as that goal is clearly stated up front.

For the sport only instructor/practitioner that wants to take a look at some SD options for possible inclusion into the training, this thread may hold some value for you.

For the SD only instructor/practitioner this would be a good thread to 'talk shop'. Comments and discussion can be found HERE.

For the purposes of this thread we can define self-defense as the strategies, principles, tactics and techniques to defend oneself and/or loved ones from and attack which can cause bodily harm, great bodily harm and/or death.

To begin with, most types of sport training/competitions revolve around some/most/all of the following considerations (be they TKD specific or a more general MMA).

• Has a referee that enforces rules that both parties are required to abide by for the match.

• The match is in a well-lit, dry, level, soft venue.

• The opponent is unarmed.

• The opponent is alone with no chance others will join in.

• Some sort of safety gear is usually involved i.e. cup, mouth piece, gloves etc.

• The opponent isn't trying to kill, maim or severely injure you.

• You get a break in-between rounds to catch your breath, get a drink, get some advice or a pep talk.

• If you've had enough, you can call a time out or tap out or simply quit and walk away.

• There is often an incentive or reward for competing and/or winning such as rank advancement, a prize or maybe cash.

As a comparison, self-defense training is for situations;

• Situational awareness i.e. be aware of your surroundings.

• Factors such as avoidance, evasion, escape and de-escalation need to be taken into consideration and trained for where appropriate.

• Where there is no referee enforcing rules.

• You are likely alone and/or at some sort of a place or position of disadvantage.

• There are no rules.

• There are no breaks, water, advice or anything to assist you.

• The assault can occur in a parking lot, elevator, side street, your car, your bedroom, in the woods etc. It will likely occur in dim light conditions in any type of weather.

• The attacker may be armed, and should be assumed to be armed.

• The attacker may have friends more than willing to jump in.

• There is no safety gear, but likely a plethora of person-unfriendly objects like broken glass, traffic, walls etc.

• The attacker is looking to cause as much damage to you as humanly possible in the shortest amount of time possible.

• To quit is to die (or something possibly worse i.e. rape, love one killed etc)

• The goal is survival, the method is whatever it takes and is appropriate to the situation.

When looking at the difference in training methodologies, consider for the student and scenario;

• Do they always 'go for the knock-out', for points, for a submission? Is so, they've limited there response options.

• Do they have the option and/or opportunity to avoid or evade the potential conflice. Or escape or practice an verbal de-escalation skills?

• Do they have the option of using an improvised weapon?

• Does there opponent have the option of pulling a weapon (planned or improvised)?

• Does there opponent have the option of having his buddies jump in to help?

• Is the student required to observe certain rules?

• Do your students always train inside the Dojang? Are opportunities provided to train inside a vehicle, stairs, elevator, hallway, small room, on grass, on asphalt, on a sloping or wet or slippery surface?

• Do your students always where their uniform? Are they familar with what it would be like to be wearing tight clothing, foot wear, shorts and a T-shirt, a dress etc? Tt is one thing to be warmed up and stretched out and wearing loose clothing in the Dojang. It is quite another to try it in a dress in high heels, a pair of tight jeans, with a handful of groceries, a duty belt etc when you're not warmed up and stretched out.

• Have they ever trained in dim light conditions?

• Have they trained with visual/auditory distractions?

Do we always use a closed fist when striking at the head while wearing gloves and padded helmets? A blow to the head with a fist in a SD situation may not be the wisest tactic. The chance of injuring the hand on someone’s head is fairly substantial even with a well-placed strike. That is why boxer as an example tape their hands and wear gloves. I'll say it again; the chance of injuring your hand on someone's head/face is fairly substantial. If this occurs, depending on the severity of the injury, it could very well limit your options for further SD. Anyone here ever try to manipulate a weapon with broken knuckles? Or a cell phone, or car keys? I've broken a knuckle before and my range of motion in that hand was limited for an extended period of time. Given that manual dexterity is already limited while under duress, you've just made it even harder by busting a knuckle or two, or spraining your wrist on someone's face. And there is no way to know ahead of time whether or not he'll actually be knocked out.This also doesn't touch on the possibility of blood borne pathogens the bad guy may be carrying. And now you've put yourself in a position of cutting your knuckles on his teeth or 'bleeding' him from the mouth or nose.

Is the student (or the instructor) well versed in the state statutes of force and deadly force? In consideration like bodily harm, great bodily harm and/or death? Subject factors? What a reasonable person would do in the same situation? Are you required to retreat in your state? Does your state have a 'Castle Doctrine'? An instructor doesn't need to be an attorney, but providing the resources for the student to check into it and touching on some of the topics during class time.Is the student (or the instructor) well versed in the O.O.D.A. loop? Fight or flight? Flinch resonse? Adrenaline responses such as tunnel vision, auditory exclusion, loss of manual dexterity in the extremities? Considerations can include;

• Even powerful strikes in non-lethal areas can fail.

• A situation which starts out at less-than-lethal levels can quickly escalate.

• A proper joint lock, at the appropriate time, 'can' immobilize even an EDP (emotionally disturbed person) even if strikes fail and if properly applied.

• Be as patient as possible for the situation, look for openings.

• The attack will probably take place at the most advantageous time to the attacker and the least advantageous to us. We may be tired, sick, distracted etc yet still be forced into a situation.

• Some of these predators come in packs which backs them bold. And even being physically big isn't always a deterrent.

Physical conditioning is also helpful during training, or at least encouraging it. Being physically fit can help us in several areas of a SD situation. It can also help if an injury has been sustained.

That is hopefully a good start for consideration/discussion. Be safe.