© COPYRIGHT 2010 BY BRADLEY J. STEINER - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Sword and Pen – May 2010 Issue
[Reprinted With Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
WHILE it is unlikely that too many individuals would disagree that violent predators are different in their orientations and lifestyles than the decent human beings who unfortunately find themselves obliged to deal with them, many self-defense and weaponry teachers fail to appreciate exactly what the advantages are that these monsters possess, and precisely why they are — in the relatively small numbers that they exist — so formidable as adversaries in today’s society.
We suggest that understanding this is an important matter for both teachers and students of all aspects of self-defense.
Some insist that violent offenders are all psychopaths, and dismiss them as being a threat because they "have no conscience". In some instances this is true. However, some will be surprised to learn that many violent predators are not psychopaths. Many psychopaths are not in fact dangerous in a violent way. And while it is true that a lack of conscience is one aspect of the psychopathic syndrome, it is also true that the style of conscienceless predation that true psychopaths practice is more often than not of an economic and psychological style. They manipulate, steal from, use, and exploit people without mercy and without limit — but they do not always physically attack them.
Some psychopaths are deadly dangerous. But not all. Thus, the psychopath’s absence of a conscience does not and cannot universally explain why violent offenders possess such an advantage (most often) over their victims.
Some point to the toughness of violent offenders. "They grow up on the street. They are used to fighting. They reach puberty with the experience of more physical violence in their past than most seasoned street cops possess after patrolling some of America’s most dangerous urban areas for 20 years."
In some cases that is true. However, if we look, for example, at the freaks who followed Charles Manson and committed atrocious murders under his direction, we find backgrounds, among others, as choir boy possessed by one of the killers amongst the Manson scum. And then look at Manson, himself! A small, puny little mentally aberrant misfit-nut who probably never was in any physical fight (certainly none that he ever won!) in his entire, miserable life. He encouraged others to kill, but he himself was nothing resembling a physical killer or fighter.
Ted Bundy (who was a psychopath) had no background of physical violence and fighting. He did pursue Satan’s calling (i.e. the practice of law), but he was not in his early or even later years a physically experienced street fighter. He was ferociously violent, to be sure; but you will find no history of back alley slug fests if you explore Ted Bundy’s upbringing. He targeted victims whom he overcame by subterfuge and the element of surprise, which enabled him to use violence against them effectively — as, sadly, he did.
Our studies, which span nearly 50 years, indicate to us that violent offenders come in all forms: psychopaths, psychotics, normal neurotics, and statistically otherwise "normal" people who simply possess poor impulse control. There is not the slightest excuse or justification for ANY form of violent offense, please note. Thus we are simply making an observation about what “types” of people perpetrate unjustifiable violence against their fellows; we are certainly not in any sense attempting to be an apologist for these troublemakers.
We believe that the psychological advantages possessed by a violent offender over his victim may be summarized as:
• VIOLENT OFFENDERS ENJOY HURTING, TORMENTING, ABUSING, TERRORIZING, AND — SOMETIMES — EVEN KILLING THEIR VICTIMS
• VIOLENT OFFENDERS (NO MATTER WHAT THEIR PROTESTATIONS AFTER HAVING BEEN APPREHENDED FOR THEIR CRIME[S] AND BEING CALLED TO ACCOUNT FOR THEIR BEHAVIOR) DO NOT CARE ONE BIT ABOUT OTHERS’ WELL BEING, OR OTHERS’ RIGHTS, PROPERTY, PERSON, DIGNITY, ETC. VIOLENT TYPES ARE SELF-CENTERED IN THE EXTREME
• VIOLENT OFFENDERS FEEL AND BELIEVE (INSIDE THEIR OWN HEADS — NOT NECESSARILY EXPRESSED TO OTHERS) THAT, WHEN THEY TAKE THE ACTIONS THAT THEY TAKE TO HARM THEIR VICTIMS, THEY ARE GOING TO “ENJOY” THE THRILL OF “GETTING AWAY WITH IT” — AND IN GETTING AWAY WITH IT, THEY HAVE NOT, IN THEIR HEADS, DONE ANYTHING PARTICULARLY “WRONG”.
If the above sounds crazy or incomprehensible to you, then that’s probably because you are not (and have never been) a physical troublemaker, bully, violent criminal, or egotistical scumbag.
Assuming that you have digested the points thus far given, let us now point out the physical and tactical advantages possessed by the violent offender:
• VIOLENT OFFENDERS DO NOT HESITATE TO ACT IN A DESTRUCTIVE, MURDEROUS MANNER, THE MOMENT THEY DECIDE THAT THEY WISH TO ATTACK ANYONE. THEIR DESIRE TO INJURE AND TO HARM REMOVES, AS IT WERE, ALL ELEMENTS OF DOUBT, OR BLOCKS TO WHATEVER DEGREE OF FORCE AND VIOLENCE THEY FEEL LIKE UNLEASHING
• VIOLENT OFFENDERS SEE THEIR VICTIMS AS TARGETS — OR AS “OBJECTS” — MERELY THERE AS A MEANS ENABLING THEM TO GRATIFY THEIR DESIRE TO DO HARM, NOT AS “HUMAN BEINGS, TOO” WHO DO NOT DESERVE TO BE MAIMED, TORTURED, OR KILLED. THUS VIOLENT OFFENDERS WILL DO ANYTHING THEY FEEL LIKE DOING AT THE TIME TO THEIR VICTIMS
• VIOLENT OFFENDERS — DESPITE THE FACT THAT NOT ALL OF THEM EVIDENCE THIS IN ALL OF THEIR PERSONAL DEALINGS AT OTHER TIMES, AND WITH OTHER PEOPLE — DO NOT ACTUALLY BELIEVE OR CONSIDER THAT WHAT THEY ARE DOING WHEN THEY INJURE OR KILL IS PER SE “WRONG”. RATHER, IT IS JUSTIFIED (TO THEMSELVES) BECAUSE THEY “FEEL LIKE DOING IT” AND BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE THAT THEY WILL GET AWAY WITH IT, AND NEVER BE HELD TO ACCOUNT FOR THEIR EVIL (SO “ONLY THEY WILL KNOW” THAT WHICH THEY DID). THUS VIOLENT OFFENDERS ARE REMORSELESS AND UNRESTRAINED WHEN THEY ACT. STABBING, SHOOTING, STOMPING HELPLESS PEOPLE IS PAR FOR THEIR COURSE.
Twisted stuff? You bet. Welcome to the real world. Our species has never been a very impressive phenomenon during its history on this planet. Every epoch, nation, culture, and time in human history has been polluted by a disgraceful potpourri of despicable conduct unleashed by some "people" against others.
The situation will not change, simply because people will not change. The worst of our species (which is no small number) are either career predators, or have not the slightest compunction about “part-time” predation, when and where the impulse hits them!
Violent offenders do possess advantages over most of their victims — because of their psychological and physical/tactical willingness and readiness to do harm.
Now let’s look at how decent people — like YOU — can overcome their advantages and, when necessary, defeat and destroy them. There’s no "nice" or "pleasant" or "refined" or "sanitized" or "artsy" way to accomplish this. However, if you are willing to join the real world and accept that which reality demands of you in order to to accomplish the necessary goal of victory over predatory scum, YOU CAN DO IT.
First, drop all thoughts of violent types being "human" or being "people, too", and of them deserving anything less than the most merciless, viciously ferocious treatment imaginable, when they undertake to attack their intended victims.
The trend here in America began back in the 1960’s (that civilization-destroying "love" or "hippie" era) to begin thinking, not in terms of right and wrong, or good and evil, but in terms of GRAY. People were enjoined not to condemn those who did evil, and not to reward and praise those who did good; but rather to "see the good in everyone and to realize that no one is completely good or evil".
Unjustifiable violence directed against the innocent is EVIL — plain and simple. The initiation of violence is an extreme and very dangerous form of human wrongdoing and, as such, cannot and should not be dismissed simply because there may "be some good in the violent person". Possibly so. But when the violent individual proceeds to physically violate an innocent individual, whatever “good” may be said to be part of his character ceases — for the time being — to be at all relevant. The victim of such a monster has, and ought to be expected to have, not the slightest concern for ANYTHING about his tormentor, save taking whatever action may be necessary to stop him.
Get this straight in your own mind: Anyone who undertakes unjustifiable violence against you is not a “human being”; he is a TARGET — AN OUT OF CONTROL WILD ANIMAL — THAT MUST BE DESTROYED, THE SOONER, THE BETTER.
Second, and this is extremely important and relevant for the so-called "martial arts" student or teacher, today: EXCISE FROM YOUR THINKING FOREVER THE “SPORTING” OR “COMPETITIVE” VIEW OF PHYSICAL COMBAT. Fighting sports have nothing to do with physical encounters in which a person must defend himself. And while it is sometimes true that those who participate seriously and regularly in match fighting and other competition events may be able to apply that which they do in an emergency, their competitive skills are only coincidentally related to that which is required in close combat. And self-defense is CLOSE COMBAT, make no mistake about this, and do not permit yourself to water the concept down! Remember that human predators enjoy tormenting and damaging their victims. They are not “sportsmen”. Sporting techniques (ie skills that win matches and contests) are not the right ones to train in for hand-to-hand combat and self-protection.
You must acquire the WAR VIEW of self-defense. That is: The individual or individuals who attack you have initiated war against you. And just like a nation that has been attacked and that finds itself obliged to rally its people and its resources, and retaliate by going to war against the attacking foe, and ultimately destroy that foe, so you too must "go to war" when attacked. Abandon thoughts of fair play, ethics, considerations of mercy, forbearance, or what-have-you. YOU MUST WIN! And to win in real combat you must be meaner, tougher, more aggressive, more ruthless, and more relentlessly merciless than your attacker.
There is more than a technical danger in pursuing sport-oriented and competition modes of martial art if your purpose is self-defense (or, if in the military, hand-to-hand combat). There is the psychological danger that you will actually come to see and to feel man-to-man battle to be some kind of a "contest" — a contest in the sporting sense. That is: you are not driven to DESTROY the attacker, but merely to "defeat" him. This is the proper attitude that all good competitors must adopt, and it is quite appropriate when in a sporting contest; but it is suicidal in a real attack. Remember what the attacker's mindset is! He wants to injure you — perhaps to kill you. He takes pleasure in this. He sees you as "game"; almost exactly as a hunter sees the animal that he is stalking in the wilds; to be killed and consumed. He does not take a sporting or recreational view of the encounter in which he intends to maim, cripple, torture, or kill you.
Third, stop wasting training time on acrobatics, competition skills, or classical/traditional "art". Get the real deal, and get going! You want simple, basic, destructive, reliable maiming and — when and if legally and morally justifiable — killing skills. Home invasions, muggings, gang attacks, rapes, kidnappings, carjackings, and other acts of horrific, terroristic violence cannot be dealt with by resorting to anything less than utterly reliable combat techniques. Do not give the monster who endangers your life and well being the benefit of attempting to employ skills against him that fail to place his life and well being in immediate, serious jeopardy!
Police officers and security guards may have need for controlling and restraining skills. That’s fine. But private citizens have only two responsibilities, and neither one entails "arresting" others:
1. Never start trouble or agree to fight with anyone. Always strive to the outside limit of your capability to avoid trouble.
2. Defend yourself (or whoever you may be with, who depends upon you for protection) if no other option is left to you but to act against an aggressor.
It is ridiculous to practice restraining and submission techniques (all intended for sport and possibly adaptable to law enforcement needs, under less than extreme circumstances) if you wish to be able to stop a real world attacker.
Drill, and drill, and drill, and drill some more in ferocious and destructive wartime skills, if you want to possess a reliable system of self-protection. Open hand blows; low kicks; biting; eye gouging and clawing; elbow and knee smashing; head butting; simple and vicious counterattacking moves that are fluid, flexible, and adaptable to numerous predicaments; a couple of destructive throws or takedowns, lots of combinations of followup attacking actions that devastate an assailant, etc.
Fourth, cultivate REAL WORLD TACTICAL SKILLS. Forget about "squaring off", getting into a "fighting stance", etc. Master dirty and foul tactics. Take the enemy by surprise. Be deceitful, deceptive, and mercilessly vicious when you take the opponent off guard. Use anything at hand to assist your defense! Go right for the jugular! That is, do not tippy-toe into a gradual escalation of force. EXPLODE ALL OVER THE ATTACKER AND GET HIS EYES, HIS THROAT, OR BREAK HIS KNEE OR CRUSH HIS STERNUM! Move in! Keep on attacking! Press the offensive and never allow your would-be tormentor to get set or to recover!
Remember: There is no round two, and you’re not going to have a rematch! Get that extralegal violator RIGHT NOW!
Extreme, remorseless, relentless, unyielding, viciously destructive, and fierce OFFENSE wins. Take the war to the enemy! Get him! He asked for it. He started it. YOUR LIFE AND YOUR WELL BEING IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN HIS.
There are no time clocks, referees, limitations on how many may attack a single defender, weight classes, rules regarding weapons, prohibitions against attacks from behind, safe mats or cleared, polished wooden floors in a real attack. No "appointment" is made for a mugging or home invasion, or kidnapping, or beating, or rape. or for any emergency. When the critical moment comes it will be unanticipated, and everything will be at stake.
A realistic assessment of the facts indicates that, in certain ways, violent offenders usually have certain advantages — even when attacking "martial arts trained people" (some might say, "especially when attacking martial arts trained people"!). Let’s change that, shall we?
Stack the deck in your favor. The world does not need human predators. Life is arduous and demanding enough without having to worry about our own species preying upon us. Turn this around. Follow the steps and suggestions that we have given you, and YOU, not the predatory filth that attacks you, will have the critical advantage in a real world self-defense emergency.
NOTE: THERE ARE A NUMBER OF ARTICLES ON OUR OTHER SITE, WWW.SEATTLECOMBATIVES.COM THAT WILL ASSIST YOU IN UNDERSTANDING AND CULTIVATING THE ATTITUDE AND TACTICAL ORIENTATION — AS WELL AS THE TECHNIQUES — THAT YOU NEED!
Bradley J. Steiner
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Sunday, May 16, 2010
The Reality of Close Combat And Self-Defense Vs. The Popular Fantasies And Fads
© 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
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
Saturday, May 8, 2010
Kicking In Combat
© COPYRIGHT 2010 BY BRADLEY J. STEINER - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Sword and Pen – April 2010 Issue
[Reprinted With Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
KICKING is a powerful and reliable means of self-defense. No system or course in self-defense or close combat may be said to be complete unless the effective methods of kicking are taught and emphasized to the student.
Too many in the martial arts advocate kicking methods that look beautiful and that are certainly impressive athletic feats when mastered, but that are at best impractical and at worst extremely dangerous for the kicker, when attempted in hand-to-hand combat.
The combative value of a kick is not to be measured by its eye appeal. In close combat one is not posing for the cover of a martial arts magazine, or for a movie poster.
Consider a few of the important facts that must be considered when developing kicks and kicking strategies for actual, real world applications in violent encounters:
• One will not necessarily be "in training", with any elaborate or acrobatic capacities on tap, so to speak. One may not even be warmed up, or stretched out, or limbered when called upon to lash out with a kick against a violent offender
• One may be in one‘s 80‘s when attacked — and one‘s assailant(s) may be in his/their teen years or early 20‘s
• One will not be attacked on a polished wooden, cleared floor, or on a mat in a well-lit, safe area that is free of such natural impediments as rain or snow or debris that is strewn about
• One will almost certainly be attired normally. This may include heavy outerwear, shoes or boots, and the weather may be very cold, causing muscular stiffness in addition to one‘s lack of opportunity to "warm up"
• There may well be two or more attackers
• One may, if one is on active military or law enforcement duty, be encumbered by a lot of equipment and gear
• One‘s attacker will not be standing still, but will likely be moving — and moving aggressively
None of the above is even remotely conducive to any flashy or fancy kicks — whether high or low area!
Over the years we have come to the conclusion that for realistic combat readiness and personal protection one ought to master the basic front kick, side kick, knee attack, snap kick, and back stomping kick. With a question mark we will also add: Maybe the O‟Neill version of the roundhouse type kicking movement — referred to by O‟Neill as the “pivot kick”. We personally do not like the pivot kick much, but we defer to Pat O‘Neill‘s great reputation and experience, and we therefore leave it up to each student — individually — to decide if he wishes to make this kick part of his repertoire, after we teach it to him. If he doesn‘t like it, he can drop it.
In reality all kicks derive from only two: the FRONT KICK and the SIDE KICK. The "snap kick" is a front kick in which the inside edge of the foot smashes into the knee, shin, foot arch target, as opposed to the ball of the foot or the crook of the foot (both of whose impact points normally strike the testicles).
O‘Neill‘s pivot kick is nothing but a front kick delivered at a slight inward angle, arching into the groin/bladder area.
The knee attack is the first part of the basic front kick.
The back stomping kick is a side kick delivered to the rear, rather than to the literal side.
Simple stuff.
Our rules, then, for training to use kicking in combat are:
KEEP THE KICKS SIMPLE (The few that we have listed are more than enough)
KEEP THE KICKS LOW (Highest target, for knee attacks and front kicks, is the testicles. Side, back, and snap kicks go to the knees, shins, insteps)
KEEP THE KICKS DIRECT (This last point refers to avoiding any turning, spinning, jumping or angling type kicks (like the traditional roundhouse or crescent kick, etc.).
Developing the kicks:
Practice barefoot: Certainly you‘ll probably be wearing shoes or boots; but what if you aren‘t?
Practice with normal footwear and attire: Get the feel of how it will be when you are clothed normally and you use your kicks for real.
Practice on irregular terrain: You will not need your kicks in the training hall. In order to be able to kick on uneven, irregular ground, get out on uneven, irregular ground and practice your kicks there.
Kick things: Heavy bags, dummies, trees, brick walls. Always wear sneakers when kicking substantially unyielding targets (i.e. trees, etc.) but make sure that you build power, confidence, and absolute inner knowledge that your kicks pack destructive force.
Build up the legs and hips: Nothing can take the place of practicing your kicking techniques in order to develop and perfect them. However, since the leg muscles and the hips are instrumental in generating the crushing, forceful power that combat kicks ideally ought to impart, it makes good sense to work on exercises that build these muscles. The best exercise of all is heavy squats. Stair climbing, dead lifting, and the old "straddle lift" exercise are all excellent for developing superior leg strength. Leg presses are also good, but this exercise requires a leg press machine, and not all of you have access to one of these.
Good, reliable kicking techniques are very easy to learn. Once learned, however, they must be developed through assiduous repetition and hard work in training. Speed, power, balance, and accuracy must all be constantly improved and polished. Remember, the legs are not utilized for much by the majority of people, except the act of locomotion. We therefore recommend that training sessions be conducted with a greater number of repetitions allotted for the practice of kicking methods than that which one utilizes when practicing hand and arm techniques. We personally favor a schedule of 30 kicks each side (per combat kick that is practiced) each practice session. We feel that ten repetitions each side is plenty for hand and arm strikes, however.
Most trainees develop a favorite or "pet" kick when they train for a while on the key kicking techniques.
Always work on the use of your kicks — and of your pet kick — in the context both of preempting and counterattacking. Additionally, remember when you train and practice that a swift, simple kick is an excellent set up for a stick or knife attack — if you are using a weapon.
Sword and Pen – April 2010 Issue
[Reprinted With Permission]
American Combato
Seattle Combatives
KICKING is a powerful and reliable means of self-defense. No system or course in self-defense or close combat may be said to be complete unless the effective methods of kicking are taught and emphasized to the student.
Too many in the martial arts advocate kicking methods that look beautiful and that are certainly impressive athletic feats when mastered, but that are at best impractical and at worst extremely dangerous for the kicker, when attempted in hand-to-hand combat.
The combative value of a kick is not to be measured by its eye appeal. In close combat one is not posing for the cover of a martial arts magazine, or for a movie poster.
Consider a few of the important facts that must be considered when developing kicks and kicking strategies for actual, real world applications in violent encounters:
• One will not necessarily be "in training", with any elaborate or acrobatic capacities on tap, so to speak. One may not even be warmed up, or stretched out, or limbered when called upon to lash out with a kick against a violent offender
• One may be in one‘s 80‘s when attacked — and one‘s assailant(s) may be in his/their teen years or early 20‘s
• One will not be attacked on a polished wooden, cleared floor, or on a mat in a well-lit, safe area that is free of such natural impediments as rain or snow or debris that is strewn about
• One will almost certainly be attired normally. This may include heavy outerwear, shoes or boots, and the weather may be very cold, causing muscular stiffness in addition to one‘s lack of opportunity to "warm up"
• There may well be two or more attackers
• One may, if one is on active military or law enforcement duty, be encumbered by a lot of equipment and gear
• One‘s attacker will not be standing still, but will likely be moving — and moving aggressively
None of the above is even remotely conducive to any flashy or fancy kicks — whether high or low area!
Over the years we have come to the conclusion that for realistic combat readiness and personal protection one ought to master the basic front kick, side kick, knee attack, snap kick, and back stomping kick. With a question mark we will also add: Maybe the O‟Neill version of the roundhouse type kicking movement — referred to by O‟Neill as the “pivot kick”. We personally do not like the pivot kick much, but we defer to Pat O‘Neill‘s great reputation and experience, and we therefore leave it up to each student — individually — to decide if he wishes to make this kick part of his repertoire, after we teach it to him. If he doesn‘t like it, he can drop it.
In reality all kicks derive from only two: the FRONT KICK and the SIDE KICK. The "snap kick" is a front kick in which the inside edge of the foot smashes into the knee, shin, foot arch target, as opposed to the ball of the foot or the crook of the foot (both of whose impact points normally strike the testicles).
O‘Neill‘s pivot kick is nothing but a front kick delivered at a slight inward angle, arching into the groin/bladder area.
The knee attack is the first part of the basic front kick.
The back stomping kick is a side kick delivered to the rear, rather than to the literal side.
Simple stuff.
Our rules, then, for training to use kicking in combat are:
KEEP THE KICKS SIMPLE (The few that we have listed are more than enough)
KEEP THE KICKS LOW (Highest target, for knee attacks and front kicks, is the testicles. Side, back, and snap kicks go to the knees, shins, insteps)
KEEP THE KICKS DIRECT (This last point refers to avoiding any turning, spinning, jumping or angling type kicks (like the traditional roundhouse or crescent kick, etc.).
Developing the kicks:
Practice barefoot: Certainly you‘ll probably be wearing shoes or boots; but what if you aren‘t?
Practice with normal footwear and attire: Get the feel of how it will be when you are clothed normally and you use your kicks for real.
Practice on irregular terrain: You will not need your kicks in the training hall. In order to be able to kick on uneven, irregular ground, get out on uneven, irregular ground and practice your kicks there.
Kick things: Heavy bags, dummies, trees, brick walls. Always wear sneakers when kicking substantially unyielding targets (i.e. trees, etc.) but make sure that you build power, confidence, and absolute inner knowledge that your kicks pack destructive force.
Build up the legs and hips: Nothing can take the place of practicing your kicking techniques in order to develop and perfect them. However, since the leg muscles and the hips are instrumental in generating the crushing, forceful power that combat kicks ideally ought to impart, it makes good sense to work on exercises that build these muscles. The best exercise of all is heavy squats. Stair climbing, dead lifting, and the old "straddle lift" exercise are all excellent for developing superior leg strength. Leg presses are also good, but this exercise requires a leg press machine, and not all of you have access to one of these.
Good, reliable kicking techniques are very easy to learn. Once learned, however, they must be developed through assiduous repetition and hard work in training. Speed, power, balance, and accuracy must all be constantly improved and polished. Remember, the legs are not utilized for much by the majority of people, except the act of locomotion. We therefore recommend that training sessions be conducted with a greater number of repetitions allotted for the practice of kicking methods than that which one utilizes when practicing hand and arm techniques. We personally favor a schedule of 30 kicks each side (per combat kick that is practiced) each practice session. We feel that ten repetitions each side is plenty for hand and arm strikes, however.
Most trainees develop a favorite or "pet" kick when they train for a while on the key kicking techniques.
Always work on the use of your kicks — and of your pet kick — in the context both of preempting and counterattacking. Additionally, remember when you train and practice that a swift, simple kick is an excellent set up for a stick or knife attack — if you are using a weapon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)