© COPYRIGHT 2010 BY BRADLEY J. STEINER - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Sword and Pen – April 2010 Issue
[Reprinted With Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."
Arthur Shopenhauer (German Philosopher — 1788 - 1860)
HOW well we remember when, just around or about 1970, when we began to advocate a departure from the classical/traditional karate and ju-jutsu type arts to a more practically-based approach to serious self-defense — an approach based heavily upon the WWII systems and methodologies, and utilizing the most basic and fundamental of the martial skills in an attack rather than in a defensive tactical manner:
"That‘s not true martial arts."
"In karate and in ju-jutsu we never attack — we only defend. The opponent always makes the first move! Karate begins and ends with blocking."
"Who are you to think that you‘ve got a better solution to developing martial arts for self-defense than those 'masters‘ who came before all of us — hundreds and even thousands of years ago?"
One individual on the East Coast, a highly ranked "traditionalist" who had apparently never acquired the traditionalist‘s humility (he invariably placed "PhD" after his name — as though his acquisition of this academic credential meant anything, in regard to martial arts — in all of the advertisements for his martial arts publications and teachings) proclaimed, in response to our publication of the name of our newly formed System: “There is no such system as 'Combato'!” (Talk about the arrogance and self-importance — and fraudulence — of so many who obtain academic degrees!)
The above are but a few sample belchings of inanity that were thrown at us — often, without the speaker‘s having even had a single lesson in, or a moment‘s actual exposure to, that which we were doing, or why we were doing it the way that we were!
Today, the "latest thing" is “modern, practical/WWII system based/no-nonsense/real world, etc.” training. In their effort to scramble aboard what has become something like a bandwagon, a lot of "teachers" and "experts" have forsaken their gi‘s, and donned in their place military fatigues ("cammies"). The almost universal inclination of many of these "teachers" today is to drop all of the Asian terminology, and to adopt, instead, a kind of "tough guy" demeanor. Speaking like street-savvy types, many black belts in ju-jutsu, karate, etc. now strive to emulate marine corps DI‘s or Navy SEAL trainers. As they embarrass themselves by doing this, and as they discredit themselves in the eyes of those with anything above a room temperature IQ, the gullible public unfortunately gravitates to these people — learning, as a result, the same ineffective classical/traditional ART, which has been disguised by its packaging and marketing, as was taught previously as ju-jutsu, taekwondo, “kung fu”, and karate, etc. Or, they are given a quick mishmash of dirty tricks and disconnected techniques of sometimes good/sometimes not-so-good self-defense moves, which leave them less prepared to actually handle a violent confrontation than is a seasoned judo player, boxer, or wrestler.
Dear reader, our System, doctrine and techniques have passed through the first two stages described by Shopenhauer. Laughing at that which we espouse, and even ridiculing us, personally, is doubtless still done in some circles. However, we have so solidly established our position through sheer force of truth, reality, and fact, that by attacking us, such detractors as might come out from under the occasional rock here and there (like snakes, to spit their venom) merely succeed in discrediting themselves. Like the jungle witch doctor who scorns a modern surgeon, the person who attacks the concepts that we have proven to be true and necessary for real world close combat and self-defense, only demonstrates that he understands nothing about that which he proclaims to possess knowledge. Those who do it for real, and those who appreciate the importance of learning from that which has been established by those who do it for real, never ridicule the truths that we — and that our ICMAF-Associate Teachers — practice, teach, and promote.
"Violent opposition", regrettably, was experienced by us in the past, and it came largely from those who had at first taken to our work, even spent some time studying with us and learning some of that which we had to teach, and then simply (for reasons of egotism or just plain, run-of-the-mill neurotic disorder in their psyches) decided that they could not bear subordinating themselves to our school of thought and technical doctrine, but needed to "do their own thing". Truly pathetic were those who felt the need to ascribe solely to "Fairbairn, Applegate, O‘Neill, Brown, etc." that which they began to teach — rather than to simply acknowledge that they "borrowed" (ahem) from us.
C‘est la vie.
Lest anyone feel that we are attempting to claim that we are the only person to be offering legitimate, authentic methods and training, we want to emphasize — and emphasize very strongly — that this is not so. Fabulous teachers, like the late John McSweeney ("Father of Irish Karate"), who was a close friend and colleague of ours from the late 1970‘s until his passing, the late Prof. Florendo M. Visitacion (also a friend and colleague), Charles Nelson (one of our beloved teachers), Caesar Bujosa, Robert H. Sigward, John Martone, John Perkins, Jim Harrison, and others — some still with us, some who passed on — were/are each in their own right a justifiably prestigious instructor of practical, realistic and reliable individual close combat, and each has developed dedicated students who — now as teachers, themselves — pass on top quality instruction.
What is important to appreciate is that "all that glitters is not gold". By this we mean caveat emptor ("let the buyer beware") when shopping for instruction. The mere fact that some instructor proclaims that he is offering effective and reliable close combat and self-defense training does not necessarily mean that he is. Watch out for:
• Schools where clenched fist punching is
emphasized
• Schools where freestyle sparring is encouraged,
or is a "mainstay" in the curriculum
• Schools where grappling/groundfighting is treated as an important element in hand-to-
hand combat and personal defense
• Schools devoting time to the practice of classical
or traditional kata training
• Schools where an attempt is made to "balance out" the ground-grappling methodology with
percussionary (striking) skills
• Schools where there is an emphasis upon throwing — especially throwing that is elaborate or complex, where “sacrifice” type throws or competition type throws are
stressed
• Schools that stress blocking, learning an enormous quantity of "self-defense" techniques that
attempt to address virtually every specific type and variant of attack
• Schools that neglect to emphasize counters to armed attacks, multiple assailants, and attacks from behind
• Schools in which the idea is advanced and encouraged that competitive excellence is the
way to combative competence
• Schools in which any high, spinning, turning, or jumping type kicks are taught
• Schools in which enormous emphasis is not given to MENTAL CONDITIONING, GOOD COMBAT TACTICS, RELIABLE PERSONAL SECURITY MEASURES, and all forms of psychological interactive elements pertaining to interpersonal confrontations and encounters
• Schools where the teacher lacks a rather lengthy and objective track record of teaching, advocating, practicing, training in, advancing, writing about or otherwise promoting serious, realistic close combat and self-defense
• Schools in which weapons (ie MODERN weapons) are not taught or advocated
• Schools in which the absurd myth of "not needing strength" and "size is unimportant", etc., are taught or believed. Run from any hand-to-hand combat teacher who does not advocate sensible weight training!
• Schools in which control grips, holds, pinning, or immobilization skills receive any emphasis, save peripherally, for law enforcement use only
• Schools that do not emphasize attacking combinations and tremendous followup, but that suggest that handling an attacker can be quickly and "neatly" managed.
We could go on, but that‘s a pretty comprehensive list of WHAT TO AVOID, if anyone needs suggestions and help in locating instruction in reliable close combat and self-defense that is professionally taught.
And let us say this: IN NO SENSE ARE WE DOWNGRADING OR ATTACKING ANY COMPETITIVE, SPORTING, CLASSICAL, TRADITIONAL, ESTHETIC, OR OTHER SCHOOL, TEACHER, OR MARTIAL ART SYSTEM. We are simply discussing combat and self-defense, and while it is certainly not our position that our (or any) school or system or approach is "better" per se than any other, we ARE MOST DEFINITELY SAYING THAT THERE ARE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THEM, AND THAT THE DIFFERENCES MATTER!
It is just not true that you can have your cake and eat it, too. Decide what you‘re looking for. A sport? A classical art? Or a combat system? All are worthy and excellent studies, and all offer enormous benefits to those who earnestly apply themselves to the study; but each approach is different and unique; and neither advertising nor wishful thinking can change that fact.
When, in the late 1960‘s, we began to write and to teach that combat and sport or traditional arts were diametrically opposite, we were ridiculed and laughed at. Opposition of a nearly hysterical kind arose — until the truth prevailed. Now, since the "martial arts world" has finally come at least partially to its senses and acknowledged what the facts have always demonstrated to those who paid attention to them, we see upstarts and others of questionable merit maintaining that they “have always” been teaching (or studying) “real world combatives”.
Just using the right terms and referencing names like "Applegate", "Fairbairn", and "O‘Neill", etc. does not convert sport or traditional methods into real world, no-nonsense combat doctrine.
If you want to train in a classical/traditional art, go to a seasoned, experienced master of that venue. There are many, many excellent schools in just about every major urban area on the planet. If your goal is competitive excellence, then study with long standing champions and experienced competition experts. And, if your purpose is becoming proficient in hand-to-hand unarmed and armed combat and reliable self-defense, then come to us — or to one of our Associates who has been in and at this for a lifetime. If you ever actually need that which you study in a self-defense program, you will need it very, very badly, indeed!
Bradley J. Steiner
No comments:
Post a Comment