Sunday, September 21, 2008

Women fighing in MMA

When I was sitting in McNichols Arena in November of 1993 with less than three thousand people in a venue that held 18,000 I never thought I was present for the birth of a whole new sport. But since then what was then called "No Holds Barred" or "ultimate fighting" has evolved in what we now know as Mixed-Martial arts and it has indeed taken the world by storm.

Many fans would agree that Chuck Liddell, Quinton Jackson, and Randy Couture are household names. However, true MMA fans realize that the sport isn't limited to the UFC .

Outside of that organization, there are women who fight and receive little recognition for it. Many praises to EliteXC (despite their many other faults) and other, smaller promotions that allow these fine athletes do what they do.

My favorite backpedaling on women in MMA was done while Dana White was on the road doing interviews in the Mall of America in Minneapolis and Canada pre- UFC 87.




While being interviewed in Canada, Dana was asked about women in MMA, and instead of giving the old Dana answer that women were not meant to fight, Dana stated that "there just are not enough women to fight" and he elaborated stating that far more men were available for fights so finding enough fighters to fill out a card was much easier for a fight organization to just handle men.
This of course is a far departure from Dana flatly saying that he did not like to see two women fight using mma.

And truth be told, some of these women have skills beyond what any MMA fan would expect.

Gina Carano (aka "Crush" on American Gladiators...a name that best describes her effect on me) is a female fighter with an immense amount of skill, strength, and heart. Gina is the first American female to win a Muay Thai championship in Thailand, and after beating such worthy opponents as Julie Kedzie and rosie Sexton (No Relation) she is currently undefeated in womens MMA and her fights are every bit as entertaining as those between UFC elites.

Whatever your sex, that's an accomplished mark.

White has been known to say that women are "too pretty" to fight. He's also stated that when two women fight, one is a "pretty girl" and the other looks like "a man."According to White, the "man" always wins—and no one wants to see that.

Well Dana, Gina Carano and Julie Kedzie have met in combat. Which one do you think looks like a man?



Carano (left) and Kedzie (right) would probably love to hear what you have to say...

I am sure if Dana had shown an interest in hiring female fighters, he would have been quite surprised at the number that would turn out for auditions. Possibly not enough for the number of weight classes that the men have but enough to showcase a few matches at each UFC event.
Of course I wouldn't want him to stop there. My idea for a TUF season featuring women fighters competing for a contract and shot a a title in the UFC.

Such a series might possibly draw more viewers than the regular TUF series with men.
The women would surely have spats where the men have fights while living so close together for six weeks, but I doubt there would be any house destruction or drinking binges (too many empty calories for the weight savvy gals) or the peeing on themselves and fecal pranks that the men found so compelling.

Apparently there now is room to hope, although I am sure it will take a long time. It is possible that instead of the EliteXC being accused by Dana of copying his business mdel, Dana will be guilty of copying the EXC'S women's fights which drew so much interest to the CBS programs.

So tell me...how do you feel about women fighting in MMA?


Tuesday, August 26, 2008

Scenario Training: Are You Teaching Your Students to Fail?

(Courtesy of TDA Training)

How do you prepare for an attack outside of the dojo or gym?

While training in class, we’re surrounded by friends in a controlled environment. We’re assured that we won’t be seriously harmed while practicing our techniques against one another. We take precautions, like protective gear and floor mats to help guarantee our safety. While everyone is instructed to ‘control’ their attack in order to prevent injury.

However, on the ‘street,’ its another story; there’s no safety equipment, no rules, no precautions, and our attacker’s full intention is only to harm us. This means that the self-defense techniques that we practice in the comforts of the dojo or gym may look and feel much different when we have to apply them for real.

The difference, of course, is stress. In class, we are allowed, even encouraged, to make mistakes. If a given technique doesn’t work, we may simply restart and try again. Our instructors and fellow students are hopefully supportive and give us advice to help us improve.

In a real situation, there is no second chance. You can’t count on anyone being around to help or support you. If your technique fails, you better have a back-up plan or you’re going to be in serious trouble.

The anxiety of being in this sort of situation causes an adrenal-stress reaction in the body. In order to help you survive the encounter, your body releases adrenaline into your system, causing your heart to pump faster, your lungs to take in more oxygen, your nervous system to feel less pain, your vision to narrow, and any unnecessary body functions (like digestion) to shut down.

In order to account for this type of reaction, many schools practice “scenario training;” where they try to mimic the conditions of an actual attack. The purpose of this type of training is to create a stressful situation so that the students’ can prepare for their body’s natural reactions to the environment.

The students are often further challenged by surprises during the scenario. The ‘attacker’ may suddenly produce a weapon, move in an unexpected direction, or be joined by an accomplice. The drill forces students to respond to unanticipated circumstances.

While scenario training is an excellent tool for getting people to deal with the realities of combat, it’s also the cause of the #1 training mistake that most instructors make.

The problem is that this type of training is often used too soon, before the student has a solid grasp of the way the techniques should be used.

Many instructors, in their zeal to prepare their students for the ‘real world’ neglect to first provide them with a solid foundation. The students are overloaded by the difficulty of the situation and its potential obstacles.

This is a lot like teaching someone to swim by throwing them into the deep end of a pool. Under the stress of drowning, a person might somehow learn to flail their way over to the edge of the pool, but he or she won’t really understand how to swim.

That person wouldn’t be able to win a swimming competition or save themselves if they fell out of a ship at sea. They simply wouldn’t have the skills necessary to excel at swimming.

Furthermore, this type of training could actually backfire, making the person more afraid of water than they were before the training.

Like swimming, self-defense training is best done by slowly acclimating the students to the environment. In a good swim class, students are given plenty of time to get used to the water. They are taught how to place their face in the water, how to float, and how to swim before they are ever allowed to enter the deep end of the pool.

Self-defense needs to be taught in much the same way.

First, the technique needs to be demonstrated and explained. Students should focus on learning the movement correctly and not yet bother with possible contingencies. Potential problems can be addressed after the technique has been properly learned.

Once the student can accurately perform the technique, it should be rehearsed over and over until it becomes ingrained into the muscle memory. The student must practice until he or she is able to react to an attack without thought.

Focus mitts, bagwork, shadow boxing and kata are all great training drills for improving our ability to use techniques without having to think about what we are doing. In this way, we learn to move naturally, without hesitation.

Light partner drills are also beneficial. They allow students to get used to striking or grabbing an actual person. As the student’s ability begins to improve, the partner may begin slowly increasing resistance against the attack.

It’s important to train carefully. If either partner is injured in the gym, they will be less able to defend themselves on the street. At this point, partners should only allow one another to ‘get a feel’ for the attack without having to struggle.

Next, comes the most enjoyable part of self-defense training. The instructor should now ask, “What could go wrong?”

This is where our training becomes much like a game of chess. The goal is to anticipate the ways our attacker might respond to our techniques and develop ways of countering them.

Together, the instructor and students explore the ways that their technique might be foiled. They then try to prepare for these problems and address different ways for dealing with them.

Since everyone has different strengths and weaknesses, each person needs to develop their own individual strategy for handling these issues. What works well for a short person may become a liability for a taller person. A response that makes sense for a grappler might not be a good idea for someone who prefers striking.

In the end, everyone needs to have at least one or two alternative options in case their technique doesn’t’ work as planned.

In addition, combat principles such as reciprocal action, disorientation, complex torque, pressure point activation, mechanical advantage, or variable pressure can also be used to increase the effectiveness of the technique and help to ensure that it will work when needed.

By combining combat principles with a back-up plan, a redundant strategy is created. Like the brakes on an airplane; if one system fails - another is ready to take its place.

(For example; if my finger jab to the opponent’s eyes fails, I’m still in position to strike the neck, kick the groin, or initiate a take-down. Striking toward the eyes causes disorientation which makes a groin kick possible, while also throwing my opponent off balance and giving me the mechanical advantage needed to enforce a take-down. Each piece of my strategy helps to set up another possible attack.)

Once the students have properly ingrained the movement into their muscle memory and have rehearsed possible contingencies, they may begin practicing scenario training.

They might train outside or in an area designed to resemble the scene of an attack. Training partners can engage them with threatening dialog similar to the tone used by an attacker. Everything in the environment and the manner of the opponents should be staged to recreate the conditions of an actual self-defense situation.

To increase the stress level, the opponents might surprise the defender by changing their attack or pulling out practice weapons.

Armed with the well-trained techniques, the defender should now be able to adjust to the changing circumstances and face the attackers with confidence. If not, the drill should be stopped so that the technique can be relearned or so that the combat strategy can be modified.

It’s okay to return to previous training methods if the student isn’t ready for scenario training. It’s better to review basic skills than it is to have the student endure a negative experience during the drill.

“Losing,” in a scenario drill only teaches a student how to get beat up. (Something they don’t need to learn.) This is why it’s important that the student is successful at this drill. The idea is to build confidence.

The goal of this training is for the student to feel as though he or she has already successfully faced many attacks. This way, if someone really attempts to harm them outside the dojo, they will react naturally without becoming overly anxious.

Scenario training is one of the best types of self-defense drills available. However, it’s important that students are adequately prepared.

Trying to train a high-stress scenario is much like attempting to run a marathon without the proper preparation - it will most likely result in injury. (Either physical or psychological.)

Remember, too much, too soon, is never a good way to train.

I hope you find this post useful in your own training,

Respectfully,

John

Newton's Laws Moves Me

Gunfighter Gene Hackman is shot. Right in the head. The beautiful Sharon Stone beat him to the draw in the grand finale scene of the Quick and the Dead western. To accentuate the drama, Hackman flips completely over in the slow motion macabre of a spaghetti western. How many viewers thought that such a flip could actually happen? Or just think bullets can move people around? Do bullets move people? If so, how much? What do we tell our officers, our practitioners and students about this in training?

In 2007, a police officer published a disgusted tirade in police journals trashing Hollywood and these acrobatic misrepresentations of gunfire. He stated that cinema action misrepresents the truth, confuses the public, the media, lawyers, juries and well…even some police administrators about shootings and what does and doesn't happen in a gunfight.


But this irate officer is not alone in voicing his opinion on the subject. There is always a healthy argument running somewhere about it. On one extreme, experts say that bullets hit and move people. On the other end, some argue that bullets do not and cannot move people. Semantics and science are involved here, as well as – some people just like to argue. So we have two groups, the Movers and Non-Movers.


Many of my complainants and my friends who have been shot, and research I have looked up, have repeatedly used interesting phrases and symbols to describe their wounding. Baseball came up a lot.


"It was like getting hit by a baseball."


Or your hear, "…like getting hit with a baseball bat."


Two SAS officers on a CNN special described being shot as "being hit with a sledge hammer."

And the responses do run the whole gamut from being "knocked back, knocked down" to "a slapping feeling." Knocked back or down? What say the Non-Movers about all this?


The Non-Movers quote Newton's Laws of Motions and what I nickname the Newton Impact, on this. Ol' Sir Isaac Newton has some lasting impact on the world with his three laws. His second law states in summary, that for every action in nature there is an equal and opposite reaction. In other words, if object A exerts a force on object B, then object B also exerts an equal and opposite force on object A. When this comes to shooting people, many will tell you that the force – the recoil of a weapon in your hand, or on your shoulder is equal to the force striking your target. In short, if you don't flip over when you shoot the bad guy? The bad guy will not flip over when he is hit. This would mean that if you fired a perfect kill shot, such as one by a successful sniper, 100 times, 100 bodies would drop straight down dead. They would not be the slightest tumble or turn to one side from the impact. President kennedy's head did not move when shot. Nothing. Cold. Ballistic block science. Algebra. The Newton Impact: Equal in the hand/equal on the body.

The Movers: Conversely, the Movers cite other variables than cold science, like the situation, flesh, blood, and psychology – that cause people to move in the split seconds before, during and after actually being shot.


Before: People may well be already moving in a gunfight. Also, people about to be shot at often see the gun up and aiming at them. They physically react to this presented gun by ducking, dodging, diving, spinning to run, etc.


During: The human body contains bone mass, mobile joints and a central nervous system. We yank our hand back from the hot stove. We move our arm from a bee sting. We flinch from an insect on or near our eye. Our nervous system reacts from simple touches, to bug stings or higher levels of pain and impact. When bullets strike this anatomy, live body parts react differently than ballistic clay. Explosive sound alone may make the body move. Since the 1930s there are piles of research on the startle reflex and audible responses from shocking explosions. Dr. Robert Simmons has documented as many as 25 different body responses from audible shock in what he calls his Startle Museum (24 of them are not fighting stances by the way). In these cases the bullet's sound at least, may cause movement.


After: After being hit one or more times, shooting victims often do not die right away and therefore act like wounded humans, continuing to move. Once downed, there may be "after-death" throes.


There is quite a bit of motion involved with the before, during and after of being shot. The threat of the bullet, the impact from the bullet, even the sound of the bullet causes it.
The Hackman Flip -But, since we started out with the Gene Hackman western movie sample, has anyone ever really done a "Hackman flip?" In the 1990s I discovered another Hackman-style Flip.


I was reading a Vietnam War memoir and a soldier talked about a fellow troop of his being shot in the helmet. The troop told him "it knocked the life out of me," and that he "saw his toes flip up in front of his face" then he blacked out. The author saw his friend flip almost upside down and the helmet was destroyed, virtually split in half. The guy immediately recovered and appeared unhurt. (but, the writer mentions the man died back in the states years later from a brain aneurysm?)


I Read this from the non-fiction book. Code Name: Copperhead. My True-Life Exploits As a Special Forces Soldier, by Sergeant Major Joe R. Garner, U.S. Army (RET.) "In Ban Me Thuot, a friend who had been wounded told me, 'Joe, you just cannot believe the impact that the AK-47 has. I got shot in the leg and it knocked me head over heels. My rifle went ten feet from me. The NVA came up, and if it hadn't been for one of the other men killing him, I was unarmed and the NVA would have killed me.'"


These are two Newtonian, equal-force, flipping, head-scratchers! Did both these shooters flip too when they shot these flippers? What say ye, Mr Newton? More interesting is that these two shots are complete surprise shots without warning. So the bodies were not in dodge or dive mode.


But, aside from the dramatic and unusual Hackman flips, is there more science and math than this the simplistic equal-equal force, Newton Impact equation that explains these bodily reactions to bullets? Dr. Sean Ross of New Mexico is a government scientist who works on various weapons projects for the U.S. Military. He reports:
"Newton's laws of motion do apply here, but Newton's 2nd law applies to forces - force isn't what knocks a person down unless the force is crushing. Momentum transfer is what knocks something down. The correct way to analyze this is using the time integral of Newton's 3rd law F=mA, namely I=delta P, the "impulse momentum" theorem. The Impulse is the integral of the force over time, F=-delta T. That impulse is equal to the change in momentum imparted to the body."


Okay! Got that? The 3rd law explains and allows more than the 2nd law. Even if you don't get this now, before you use "Newton Impact" line again to defend your non-moving, equal/equal argument, you should school yourself on the 3rd law, else the experts will cluck-cluck and chastise you as uneducated and ill-informed. Don't just regurgitate what some old gun magazine article or some range instructor...had regurgitated to him...and so on.


Which leads me to The Law of Violent Impact, the 7th Rule:


"No one can guarantee what a punch, a kick, a stab or a gunshot will do to you."





And another truth I hold to be self-evident? The 1st Rule!
"Who wouldn't flip over Sharon Stone in leather chaps?"


Sunday, June 29, 2008

Boxing for Self-defense and MMA






There are differences between the boxing ring, MMA, and self-defense applications of boxing. Let's look at them.


Boxing is one of my base arts because (no particular order):

  • It has a "flow." Intrinsic to this art and "sweet science," is a smooth integration of offence and defense, with built in combinations coming from the position one technique ends in flowing into another technique, and so on

  • Boxing training teaches one to take a hit and deliver one back, because you can practice all the legal techniques safely with some control and do no harm to your partner

  • It smoothly integrates with other systems and styles, as seen in muay Thai, American Full-Contact, and MMA (including all hybrid sport styles), and has even changed point fighting
    It's effective - boxing techniques generate the most power out of hand techniques, with the possible exception of the spinning backfist


  • Every martial artist must learn to defend against boxing punches, so most instructors who teach self-defense or "reality" fighting have to know it to some degree

Today we will address how Western boxing has been integrated into MMA competition, and contrast it with its uses in self-defense training.

Boxing in MMA: Boxing seems to form the basis for standup striking with the hands for all MMA fighters that I've seen. Its basic punches (jab, straight/cross, hook, and uppercuts), plus elbows have formed the basis for the upper-body arsenal. I like it, it's effective, and most striking KOs in MMA seem to come from boxing techniques. With the addition of the little 4-Oz. MMA gloves, gone are the open-hand strikes that were a mainstay in the early days. Striking is now encouraged by the rules, and even the better grapplers must know it, know how to defend it, and are using it to create openings for takedowns. Where I have a problem with MMA fighters use of boxing is in two areas:

  1. The jab is almost a forgotten punch. The jab is designed to lead, stop-hit (intercept and counter) a curved strike, as a range-finder, and disrupt an opponent's offensive rhythm. It's been replaced by rear-hand leads haymakers and overhands, which look cool, but are an open invitation to get countered. More jabbing would get fighters in to do damage safely. I may never have stepped into a cage, but I've watched and participated in fighting of one form or another for over thirty years, and I can tell you that more jabbing will make most of these fighters and fights better.
  2. The open or "peek-a-boo"-style guard is nearly universal. When you are standing up and away from your opponent, use a guard that puts your hands in the way of straight punches; force your opponent to work for an opening by keeping something in the way. The peek-a-boo works for boxers because they also use constant side-to-side movement of the head (see an early Mike Tyson for a good example), and dip to avoid straight shots. MMA fighters have to worry about leg kicks, surprise head kicks, but also blasting straight punches. Keeping the hands up and out in front will take care of that. When you get inside, that open guard position is perfect for stopping hooks and elbows.

Boxing for Self-Defense: There are quite a few differences between boxing in a ring or octagon, and for self-defense. What you may learn from actually hitting someone in the head with no gloves on is that you won't hit as hard without gloves, due to fear of injury, and that the fear of injuring your hands is well-founded. When adapting boxing for self-defense you need to:

  1. Modify all techniques aimed at the hard parts of the head to be palm or hammerfists to avoid injury. Much has been written on this (by me, and many, many others), but hitting something hard with your fist isn't smart. In a real fight for your life it could be suicidal as your hand may be disabled, and the pain may distract you long enough to get killed. The jab should morph into an eye jab or lead-hand palm to the nose, chin or forehead. Open hand strikes (like a hook, but with an open hand) should replace hooks and overhands.
  2. Boxing techniques to the body are excellent, except the body jab, straight, or cross. To perform any of those properly, you have to get your shoulder level with the target. That will put your head in perfect position to accept a knee to the face. Stick to uppercuts to the groin, bladder, solar plexus and kidneys. Hooks are the same, but may also be used to the side of the neck with great effectiveness.
  3. Defensively, slipping and parrying, are great, but ducking is a no-no. It will get you flattened by a knee. Add in bumping with the shoulders and hips, and checking or grabbing with your hands. Traps are also possible now.

Friday, April 18, 2008

Are Kata/Poomse Important? (This should get some comments lol)

Seems like every time I bring this up on a discussion board I get a flurry of responses...usually negative. Keep in mind that I don't consider myself an expert at kata, though I consider myself good at their performance, I also don't claim to know all the bunkai (application) of the kata I "know."

What forms are good for:

  1. Preservation of classical or "traditional" technique.
    I once had a prospective student come into my school and ask whether we taught traditional martial arts. I smiled and said, "depends on who's tradition you're talking about!" Tradition is subjective, but the commonly accepted techniques in an art or style are contained in its kata or poomse (for you TKD wonks). At each level, what your style considers important is contained in the forms. If not, then they are probably just ways of marking progress and making sure you wait long enough between belts to show progress-in other words, meaningless.
  2. An excellent workout.
    If performed properly, forms are a great workout! After I finish a form in thirty seconds and I am sweating, breathing hard, and my thighs are shaking, I know a good workout. I get sore muscles in almost every part of my body from kata because I fire off all my muscles as I complete each technique, then relax between. Most excellent!
  3. Teaching concentration and memorization.
    To perform kata properly, you must focus on every technique, as well as the pattern, plus put the "intention" on every block, punch, kick, and strike. You also focus your vision as if you are actually in combat. Great for memorization. I love this aspect.
  4. Demonstrates and preserves the beauty of the martial arts.
    I think there's nothing more awesome than a well-performed kata. At a tournament I saw on TV, there was a black belt competitor who looked about 50 years old, and was an Okinowan stylist, I think. He was so precise and focused with every technique, with every stance, that I was in awe of his basics. I enjoyed his performance much higher than the 2o-ish competitors that did backflips and cartwheels and multiple high-kicks. Just me, but I want "martial" in my martial arts.
  5. Forms provide steady income for schools.
    Forms give martial arts schools a reason to give private lessons, extra classes, and the variety of belts (some schools/systems have as many as twelve belts before black). Forms give you a justification to have so many. Right or wrong, it's income.
  6. Forms break up the monotony of training.
    In defense of the income point, not everyone is a good fighter right away. Forms keep your interest.

What they are not good for:

  1. Kata techniques aren't used in self-defense.
    I have never seen anyone fight like they perform a kata. I don't think I ever will. Kata are an exaggeration of the technique which one might use in fighting, but, as you perform the way you train. Some who are excellent at forms may dispute this contention, but I challenge them to send me a tape showing the forms in action. Granted, a few techniques will be used (knifehands, reverse punches, etc.), but they are all modified for real-world practicality. A good fighter doesn't chamber the pulling hand on the hip, unless he wants to get tagged in the head.
  2. Kata performance is not an efficient means of preparing for sparring, fighting, or self-defense.
    If it was, Lennox Lewis, Tyson, and all other fighters with millions on the line would be doing them, wouldn't they. Oh, they're boxers? How about martial artists? Did you see a Chuck Norris, Bill Wallace, Joe Lewis, Nasty Anderson, or Arlene Limas (dating myself, eh?) doing forms to prepare for competition? No, of course not. Enough said.

Kata aren't the most efficient way to prepare for unarmed combat, but are a great way to carry on the techniques of the past in your respective arts. I will continue to do them into the future because I love them, but I'll be training for battle in another way.

12 Step Self Defense Program

A while ago I was introduced to the "12 Step Self Defense Program" by a great martial artist named Hock Hocheim. I've since hijacked it and modified it to my needs as an instructor and tend to use it whenever I teach a seminar...be it a Womens Self-Defense class or a seminar designed to train nightclub doormen. Here it is and I hope you might like to comment and discuss. Please note that this is written as if it was a class outline and talks about what areas each step should open up for discussion.

Step 1: W.W.W.W.H.W?
Who? What? Where? When? How? and Why?
These are the classic cop questions when taking a crime report and investigating crimes. The questions must be used here in all the following 11 steps of the program. In Step 1 we explain it. Crime and combat is situational and that is why there are really very few universal answers for people to use when in jam. For a quick exercise, imagine a common mugging and answer the"W" questions. You will have dissected the victim, the location, and the criminal and how he attacks you.

Another big subject here. The WHO of who attacks you? Here I talk about the common and uncommon, organized or disorganized criminal. I highly reccomend reading Dr J. Reid Maloy's Violence Risk and Threat Assessment.

Step 2: The Recon
To prepare yourself, where do you travel? This works for the professional or the civilian. A "pro" like a soldier, guard, or cop has more travel plans to worry about than a civilian But, either a pro or a civilian, how can these routes and stops of your life be dangerous. List the high percentage problem events with the high percentage problem people. Educate yourself and prepare for them. (big glitch here is that many people -and martial instructors- THINK they know these answers).

Think like a criminal. How will criminals recon victims?



Step 3: The Stance
Communications experts say that some 90% of communication is non-verbal. This means your face, your clothes, your physical appearance., how you hold your hands and arms, etc. This covers three areas to me:

Area a) mental - what stance do you take in your mind about confrontations? Area b) physical - how will you actually "stand" when confronted;

* try to keep some distance

* keep the body slightly bladed
for quick, athletic response

* move about slowly and advantageously
(the very word "stance," hypnotizes you
into thinking you have to stand still.)


Area c) martial arts gobblygook review, advise and consent. Many martial arts systems obsess about stances, turning them into anal retentive, black and white still photographs of perfect group, statue form. This is best used for organized group training sessions, not fighting strategies. When actual fights are full-color, hi-def motion. The so-called fighting stance is really about balance and power in motion. There is no "football-scoring stance."


4) The Talk
Given the many "Ws" variety in Step 1 and many places of Step 2's "life recon", what in general are you prepared to say and to whom? What will say (scream, whisper, or yell to you) Collect verbal ideas from seminar participants here.


5) The Fear
Fear is a two-way street yours and his. And here I like to mention:



*Issues on mind set

* A quick, user-friendly, non-techno-jargon
speech on the bio-mechanics of fear

* preconceived notions and the common
misunderstandings and misuse of
adrenaline issues in fighting. Trainers
can often further scare the student
with negatives about adrenaline.
Many are still using a 1980s model
and subsequent scare tactic
marketing plans to lure students
into various training programs.

* repetition training issues

* crisis rehearsal issues

* fortune favors the prepared


Step 6: The Four Targets
For a long time now I have mentioned my "college" speech on this, "You graduate the college of self defense by majoring in eyes, throat, groin, top of the feet...with a minor in fingers."

Major: By eyes, I mean the shooter's triangle around the eyes.
Major: By throat I mean the entire circumference of the neck
Major: By groin...I mean his nuts
Major: By top of the feet I mean around there on the feet - the shoe laces - and the ankles

Minor: By fingers, I mean cranking and breaking those suckers.

These are great self defense, close-quarter targets.

Step 7: The Four Stops
When angry parties do charge you, it is not uncommon that they "stop" at four points upon each other.

Stopping Point 1) At the hands. Since many people push or reach up to grab you, their hands are up. Your hands are likely to be up to respond. This often leads to parties held at hands length, sometimes with their fingers entwined. Please remember that I am not talking about a UFC fight here, but the real world folks. Watch the TV news and you will eventually see the Taiwan parliament, or the West Palm Beach City Council, or any other people in a fight and see members caught at times, at finger length. I often teach finger locks and catches at this range not un similar to aiki-jutsu and aikido.

Stopping Point 2) At the forearms, basically limb grabs. People either crash at bang forearms or grab each other's forearms. I often teach grab releases and...the Block, Pass and in Drill (the great forearm-to-forearm drill - which can be as alive or as dead as you want to make it) for response options here.

Stopping Point 3) Shoulder stops and chokes. I show basic old-school self defense here. Many common fights and crimes with citizens, police, criminals and today's modern military start with the ubiquitous shove to the shoulders . I teach an entire, mixed weapon module called The Shove Module, here in this progression.

Stopping Point 4) Bear hugs and arm wraps. I show what some might call JuJitsu here...grappling. I show old-school, basic self defense here.



Step 8: The Big Four Takedowns
In the opening of this century, several criminal justice departments of major USA colleges, along with the famous law enforcement street survival institute Calibre Press put together a list of "the 4 ways we hit the ground." How are we taken down. While I am sure the basic order of them might be debatable, I do think was can all agree that we are taken down by these four categories quite a bit:

1) Tripped down
2) Punched down (at times I use the words struck down, but the study said "punched.")
3) Pulled down
4) Tackled down


1) We trip. Probably the most common. In the real fight, many stumble over ourselves, furniture, curbs, etc. Here I introduce "grounds awareness" ideas, footwork and balance training.

2) We are punched down. The experts list this as second. Maybe? Maybe not? But the subsequent order of successful punches do make sense, as the majority of "street assault" attacks are perpetrated by untrained people do not know how to execute a sports jab or cross:

a) Sucker punches / strikes reviews
b) Roundhouse haymakers
c) jabs and crosses


And here we must do much work. Sucker strike recognition and responses, then the basic blocks and strikes of street strikes and punching. Issues of broken hands. Then, the "advanced" work of dealing with jab/cross/hook/uppercut/overhand sports striking and what they mean to survival. At times I use the words struck down, but the study said "punched"

3) We are "pulled down." That is to say we do a takedown and the guy hangs on to you with enough mojo to yank you down with him. He is on one knee or the ground and he pulls you down. (yes, they list this as third!) More balance, awareness and footwork.

4) We are tackled. Listed as last? I beg to differ. And they mean not sport tackles either. Crazy wild man leaps and so forth. Here I teach basic takedowns and basic countering

The order is not that important to me as the overall idea of the "big four takedowns." GREAT teaching concept. Perhaps we can use them as just a list of four things, but these are the four big ways the bad guys take us down.




Step 9: The Ground
If we are prone to hit the ground, whether on purpose or by accident, we had better learn to fight and survive there, and in a mixed weapon world. Here is where I teach the street survival material with a dash of very practical submission fighting for arrest, control, restrain and contain material.
This includes:


- Kneeling vs standing
- Kneeling vs kneeling
- Kneeling vs the downed
- Downed vs groups
- Top vs bottom
- Bottom vs top
- Side vs side
- Ground striking module
- Ground kicking module
- Ground maneuvering module
- Basic ground escapes
- Basic, practical submissions for capturing criminals and soldiers
- Fighting with uniform duty gear on
- Climate and terrain awareness




Step 10) The Weapon
Stats say that 40% of the people civilians and police police fight are armed with concealed or brandished firearms, impact and edged weapons. In the military, pretty much 100% of the people you fight have firearms. Observatinal skills (find the heat) and disarms/jamming tecniques are addressed here.

11) The Group
Stats say that 40% of the time civilians and police police fight two or more people. In the military, pretty much 100% you fight two or more people. Addressing defense againt mulitple opponents is addressed here.

12) The Aftermath
You have to be constantly asking yourself, what happens next? Okay, if I do this, what happens next? If I beat the overzealous, panhandler flat with my commando and World War II Combatives course? What happens to me next? The police arrest me? What?

The basic, final answer should be this: "I am home safe and the police will not arrest me."

This area is where I bring up legal issues, what and what not to say to responding police and how to do it. What actually happens in the criminal justice system? Given my training, education and experience I am qualified to expound on these subjects.

Also we cover some other after-the-immediate-fact things to do. Check yourself out for injuries. Proper authortiy notification, etc.

"My name is John, and I will never stop working on my 12 Step Program.
Thank you and good night"

Homosexuality in the Martial Arts

A few months ago I posted the following on my myspace blog in an attempt to generate a discourse and to see where some of my fellow martial artists stand on this issue:

"I overheard this in a conversation recently, a judo guy was saying how he was very uncomfortable with going to train at his college's judo club after an openly gay man joined. he said he was afarid the gay guy is in it for the wrong reason (the club is apparently 90% male).

As fellow martial artists, what are your thoughts on this? How would you feel if a fellow MA student or Instructor was revealed to be homosexual?"


I was surprised, shocked...sometimes disappointed but very pleased with the repsonses (especially the number of them). A generalized answer I tended to recieve was "I would have a problem with it, especially when practicing (insert name of grappling art here)". To the rather juvenile "That would freak me out!." My response is...That's your problem not theirs. So you need to get over it. Automatically assuming that a gay person is there to pick up on a member of the same sex is the same as assuming men only go to schools that also train women so they might get to feel some boobie during sparring or randori. May happen from time to time but that tends to be exception rather than the norm.

Here are some quotes of reponses I have recieved. I have not edited them for content or grammer...or spelling. Quotes are in Italics and my less-than-humble-opinion is in red.

"Personally I'd rather train with an openly gay man than closet cases. (Don't worry I'm not naming any names) Well as long as he does not come to sparring class wearing a dress" Unless you have to wear one of those Hakima things.

"while i have not (to my knowledge) grappled with a gay man (Bet you have) i don't think it would be a problem for me. as long as he wants to train and does not have other motives what's the big deal? hell i grapple with girls and i am able to control mself perfectly fine, why would a gay guy be any different? also i am rather sure that as much as we would all like to belive otherwise most of us are not greek gods who inspire lust and prolly are in no way attractive to your average gay man." Speak for yourself...I'd be more offended if they didn't. I'm one sexy bitch.

This is one of my personal favorites. "I've heard this debate time and time again. My opinion has always been, "Grow up and get the fuck over it". Chances are more than pretty good that you have already trained with a gay person...and you ain't caught the gay yet. I've had gay students, assisstants and instructors. At no time was I afraid the scary gay person."

"Personally, I don't care if he's gay... as long as I don't SEE it
physically in class. If it makes any of the men uncomfortable, I
would make an effort to pair him with a female partner.
If he is "flaming" and that causes disruptions in the class, that's a
different story. I have to question what I would do.
As we all know.. there are many more gays and pedofiles out there
than we are aware of... most are careful to hide their desires..
THOSE are the ones I'm afraid of."
This guy is just an idiot. Gay does not equal pedophile. I wonder why this guy is affraid of closeted gays but he refused to respond to my queries?

We don't have problems teaching gays (if we have one ) in our Karate & Aikido class, but for Judo and BJJ its off-limit for the 3rd sex. It's not that we discriminate them, (Actually thats exactly what you're doing) it's just that the game has too much body contact and students tends to isolate themselves with the 3rd sex and we don't want isolations in our class. So to avoid problems like these it's better that we set some few rules...not offense..." I'm waiting for a translation for that last part. And an answer to the question I replied with "So do you allow males and females to train together in your grappling classes?"

"I also know that when you
teach BBJ, and other close quater self defense systems, and a student
finds out another is gay, and it gets around, you start to loose
students.
(Not necesarily) So, it goes back to the don't ask, don't tell.
Now for those who do not llike that I am sorry, but to me if a
teacher decideds not to teach gays, that is their choice."
Just like it is my choice to avoid their school, not spend money with their sponsers etc.


Pretty broad responses. I actually had to deal with this issue when I owned a school. One of my studentswas openly gay (he did't flaunt it but he's somewhat effeminate...3 guesses why he wanted self dense training). Another of my students came to me insisting that I throw out student A, citing everything from student's safety to religion. Students A had never caused me any problems and was possibly one of the most promising students I had. Student B was being disruptive, rude and abrasive to everyone...including me. After several warnings and discussions with him... had no choice but to remove Student B from my school.

I realize my veiw may differ from others and on the whole I respect others views but I can never seem to get behind the persecution of a group of people based on something that really isn't anyones business.



(ducking and covering)