An Honest Philosophy

Shadows and Demons

2012-01-26T10:45:00.003-05:00

Boris over at Squat RX wrote an interesting post a while back. The whole thing is worth reading, but the part that resonated with me the most was this:

"Reading this passage, I think to my own shadows - the demons I'm trying to exorcise every time I get under the barbell. I think to the shadows of all those who point at others with weight and fitness issues and say "Well I did it! What's YOUR problem?" When I see TV celebrity trainers screaming at the people they are supposedly saving from a life of obesity, I wonder what shadows they are projecting on their charges.."

Martial arts and combat sports attract people with demons. Lots and lots of demons. My first boxing coach, Greg Sorrentino, once told me that "you can't be good at this sport unless you're a little off in the head". Nearly two decades later (!) everything I've seen confirms his observations. Stable, happy, well-adjusted adults don't find happiness in learning how to beat the crap out of each other.

Every single martial artist I've known who trained for more than about six months (everyone can handle about six months) has demons to wrestle with. Maybe they were bullied as children. Maybe they have a lot of anger or frustration inside them. Whatever the demon, they come to the martial arts trying to find a way to deal with it.

Sometimes they find it. Sometimes, unfortunately, they just fuel the demon more. Done right, this stuff helps people battle their demons and keep them under control. Done wrong, it produces highly skilled, abusive assholes.

Some of the worst martial artists I've known were those who failed to control the demon. Or worse, thought they controlled it, but really, the demon was just controlling them. These are the people who start cults. Who abuse their students and call it "training". Who preach about the value of their training method, never seeing that their method is just a means of controlling, restricting, and harassing those weaker than them.

If you are a martial artist or a combat athlete, it's worth taking some time to figure out what your demons are. You don't have to LIKE them, just get to know them and recognize them...and make sure they aren't the ones in control. If you're an instructor, this becomes extra important. Your demon can do a lot of damage to a lot of people...

Next PDR Seminar: February 26th, 2012

2012-01-25T15:39:00.001-05:00

I'm happy to announce that I'll be doing a follow up Personal Defense Readiness seminar at Redline Fight Sports on February 26th. I'm calling it an "Advanced Fundamentals" course; everything we're doing will build off the last class, but we'll look at some more dynamic drills, and some ways of dealing with some of the malfunctions that came up the last class.

Here's the Blurb

What: Building on the ideas and concepts from our last course, this class will focus on further refining and developing your ability to Detect, Defuse, and Defend against violent confrontations. Specifically, this class will focus on developing and strengthening our understanding and capacity with the world's first behaviorally based self-defense method - the S.P.E.A.R. System™.

Attendance at the previous class is not required. This course will not interfere with any prior training and can be used to augment your personal toolbox.

It is course is open to students of all levels ages thirteen and up. Students should wear comfortable clothing that they can move and exercise in.

Who: Coach Jake Steinmann has been a student of the martial arts for eighteen years, and has been an active martial arts instructor for over a decade. Jake is a certified Personal Defense Readiness Coach under Blauer Tactical Systems. Currently, he runs Active Defense Personal Training, LLC, an organization dedicated to bringing quality self-defense instruction to the Greater Boston Area.

Where: Redline Fight Sports, Cambridge, MA

When: February 26^th, 2012, 1-4pm.

Cost: $20 pre-registration (must be paid in advance), or for previous course attendees. $25 at the door.

To register, contact Andrea Karis at (617)868-2275 or (andrea@redlinefightsports.com)

Questions about the course? Email Coach Steinmann at adptraining@gmail.com

This Week in the Web, 1-23-12

2012-01-23T08:00:00.000-05:00

Ross posted a video of an interesting drill Anderson Silva's doing...

My friend Seth Rosenblatt has an interesting article on technology for recovering stolen laptops, and the potential consequences of trying to do it yourself...

Tony Blauer explains his action vs. in-action principle.

Kelly Starrett at Mobility WOD has an interesting concept that has some cross over into martial arts/self-defense, if you look at it the right way.

A really interesting interview with an old Chinese martial arts expert here.

Some Motivation For You

2012-01-20T10:19:00.000-05:00

I've posted a version of this video/speech before, but here's a couple of combat sport specific versions.

Boxing:

MMA

Sexual Assualt Prevention

2012-01-19T09:00:00.000-05:00

This video, and some analysis, was posted over at the Combative Corner.

Warning: This video depicts the initial stages of a sexual assault. While it is footage from a movie, it is still powerful and disturbing.

The video was posted with a discussion of what Amy (Kate's character) could have done differently. I started working on my own response to that, but something kept bugging me. I couldn't quite put my finger on it until I took the dog for a walk yesterday afternoon (side note: having a dog grants you an amazing opportunity to have some thinking time every day. Surprisingly useful, that.)

The thing that bugs me is this.

All of the responses were about physical tactics: lock the door, get an improvised weapon, strike, use a triangle choke...everything proposed was a physical response. Which is fine, except that this video is a perfect example of how self-defense is not solely a physical problem.

Amy doesn't fail to defend herself because she lacks a physical skill set. She fails to defend herself because she lacks a psychological skill set. All of the strikes, eye-gouges, and triangle chokes in the world wouldn't have availed her anything, because she didn't understand how to work past her fear and get motivated enough to DO something.

Look at the dynamic of the scene. Amy knows (hey look, intuition at work) from the moment she opens the door that there is something wrong. If she didn't, Charlie provides plenty of clear pre-contact cues, from forcing his way inside, to repeatedly ignoring Amy's demands that he leave, to comments about her appearance and smell, sexual innuendo, and insults to her husband's manhood...short of wearing a sign that says "I am here to rape you", Charlie is pretty clear about his intentions from the moment that door opens.

The issue isn't that Amy doesn't know that something is wrong. It isn't that she lacks a physical skill set. The issue is that Amy is too paralyzed by fear to be able to do anything. She could have been a ninja commando MMA goddess, but without the knowledge to motivate herself and act, any theoretical skill set is useless.

The psychological, not the physical arsenal is the one that is lacking here.

Not The Usual Subject Matter For This Blog, But...

2012-01-18T09:05:00.001-05:00

This Week in the Web, 1-16-12

2012-01-16T08:00:00.000-05:00

Another video from Tony Blauer, courtesy of Crossfit.

An interesting article on strength, what it is, and how you get it on Hybrid Fitness.

Wim shared this video of a 50's French documentary on Arnis. I'm not an FMA guy, so I have no idea how it looks in comparison to modern versions of the art, but it's cool to watch. I like martial arts history, whatever the style.

A long, but worthwhile watch. The K-1 GP '99 Final. Ernesto Hoost vs. Andy Hug (RIP). Hell of a fight...

"Traditional"?

2012-01-10T14:50:00.000-05:00

Seth is writing about business and soceity, not martial arts, but I think it applies pretty well to martial arts anyway.

I've written before about my dislike of the term "traditional" martial arts. Let me reiterate, in case it's not clear, that it is the TERM I dislike, not the arts themselves. Part of those reasons I outlined in the post I linked to above. Part of the reason is the one Seth touches on in his blog.

See, I've been doing the martial arts, in one form or another, since I was about 15. (12, if you count the obligatory year of Tae Kwon Do that I did before my Bar Mitzvah). Not ages and ages, but long enough to have been around and seen some things, especially since I've had the opportunity to train with a pretty wide variety of teachers in a bunch of different disciplines. SOme of the teachers have been very similar; some have been vastly different, but one thign has been constant.

They all changed.

Some of them changed entire teaching methodologies. Some of them made minor "tweaks" to drills. They added an extra kata, or dropped a kata from their curriculum. I've even known people who completely abandoned a training method in favor of a different one that they felt better met their needs.

In the face of that, I have a very hard time believing in the long, unbroken, unchanged teachings from before time that a lot of "traditional" martial arts claim to have. I realize that there are some rare cases where we have actual documentary evidence that things have been preserved (at least to a certain degree), but when all we have to work on is some oral history and assurances that no, really, it's been done this way for thousands of years, unchanging...I just don't buy it.

Why I Think This Matters

Every now and then, when I get on a rant about something, my wife will look at me and say "yeah, but who cares?". I suspect this could be one of those posts, so let me explain.

The claim that an art has been handed down, perfect and unchanging since the dawn of time, has been used by instructors around the world to the detriment of their students. They use these claims to keep power rather than share it, to restrict growth rather than encourage it. By claiming that the system is perfect and unalterable, they free themselves from having to think or analyze what they are doing, regardless of the cost to their students. And that I find absolutely repulsive.

That's why I think this matters.

This Week In the Web

2012-01-09T10:09:00.000-05:00

If you ignore the rest of this post, please read this link. Tony Blauer said it best: this is what it's all about.

For the boxing fans, Ross shared some nice highlight vids from 2011.

Dan John has some ideas for the New Year as well. And he's also got a fantastic interview here.

And an article about Dan John's "Quadrant" system for athletes. I just read it, but I think it's interesting...going to have to look into this further.

Crossfit founder Greg Glassman on Visual Perspicuity

A neat interview with my instructor, Kru Mark Dellagrotte of Sityodtong.

What We've Got Here Is...Failure to Communicate

2012-01-03T13:46:00.000-05:00

I saw this video thanks to a self-defense instructor who posted it as an example of a smaller, weaker opponent standing up to a larger predator, and scaring them off. It bugged me. Thanks to Melissa McCue-McGrath, who knows WAY more about dogs than I do, I was able to figure out why. Hopefully, this articulation will make some sense.

The video in question.

Let me start with a couple of obvious things, before I get into what really bugs me.

1. Yes, the Kitten is "standing up" to the Rottweiler, and yes, it legitimately is in danger. The size disparity between the two is so great that the kitten could easily get hurt or killed completely accidentally. The kitten is not wrong to be afraid.

2. The person who owns these animals is a dick.

That said, the thing that really bugged me is this: the Rott ISN'T a predator. Or at least, it's not being a predator in that moment.

I'm just going to quote Melissa here, because it's easier.

The Rottie was definitely presenting with play behaviors: Soft body, "play bow", getting low, bouncing, and the monotone bark that said "Play with me! Come on! Play with me!"

To borrow a phrase:

<p>&amp;amp;amp;lt;p&amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;br&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;br&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;Th&amp;amp;amp;lt;/p&amp;amp;amp;gt;</p>

The kitten might really be in danger, and really standing up to a perceived threat, but the threat isn't what it thinks...

What does this have to do with martial arts and self-defense? Everything, I think. The trick now is to articulate it.

Many martial artists remind me of the kitten; they've developed systems to respond to their perception or vision of what at a predatory assault is like. Unfortunately, because they've never taken the time to actually study how assaults occur, they're training for the play bowing, soft-bodied dog that doesn't really want to hurt them*.

One of the things that drew me to Tony Blauer and his PDR system was that he was one of the first instructors I met who actually took the time to analyze how real fights actually happened. There are many other instructors out there doing that as well, but many more who are not. It is the people who are not that concern me.

The tools and tactics are only half of the equation. Many martial arts teach some excellent tools. But being able to apply them in self-defense means you need both sides of the equation. The predator, as well as the prey.

Hopefully, this is all making sense...

* This is not a sport-vs-street thing. I hate that discussion, and find little value in it. Please don't go there.

This Week in the Web

2012-01-02T09:00:00.000-05:00

Ian Abernathy has an interesting discussion on what constitutes a "trained" fighter in the context of self-defense.

Elizabeth Willse shares some words of wisdom from Jim Henson. Yeah, I know, it's not about kicking ass and taking names, but I think it's worth reading anyway.

For those inclined to make New Year's Resolutions, Leo Babuata shares a compact guide to fitness. In a similar vein, fellow PDR Coach Colin McNulty has some thoughts on how to lose that gut (something I'm working on at the moment).

The folks over at Target Focus Training make their case for slow motion training. We use some slow motion drills in the PDR System (and some NOT so slow ones). Not familiar enough with TFT to comment on their methodology, but the article is interesting.

And for those who like watching people get kicked in the neck, a Peter Aerts Highlight

Working on a bunch of posts for this week. More soon.

Thinking of the Children

2011-12-27T14:08:00.000-05:00

A friend and student of Sityodtong posted this on his Facebook wall earlier today:

Hey martial arts friends and families. I have a childhood friend in Georgia who is on the fence about enrolling her son in a martial arts program. Please go to my page and comment on the original thread with regards to your opinion(s) on the benefits of martial arts for kids.

I admit, I cringed a little bit reading this. Mostly because I knew that if I started writing about it, it would be long, and might not entirely fulfill my friend's directive of sharing the benefits of martial arts for kids. But I offered my honest opinion, and he asked for it. I figure it's going to be long enough to be a blog post.

Teaching martial arts to children has become an industry in the United States (perhaps the world...). Like all industries, it's got it's good sides and it's bad sides. Unfortunately, I think the bad sides are often more prevalent, possibly because they just get more press, and possibly because there really are a lot of absolutely awful children's martial arts programs out there.

Apparently, the person in question lives in a one-horse town (metaphorically), so the question of "which school" is apparently off the table. I find that both surprising and puzzling, but there it is.

Side Note: I don't teach children very often. The youngest kid I've ever taught for more than a week was eleven years old, and he was a hardcore hockey player who used to spar Muay Thai with adults and complain that they were going to easy on him. I think teaching children is great, but my experience is more with adults than with kids. However, I've seen a lot of kids' programs over the years, and I think I have enough experience to judge the good from the bad.

The Good Stuff

Martial arts can be great for children. They are an athletic activity, and I believe that athletics, in general, are important for children, especially now. We live in an era where children are becoming increasingly inactive and obese, and anything that gets them off their butts and moving around is a good thing (mostly).

Of all the things that martial arts schools claim to teach kids, I think the one I've seen most in evidence is discipline. NOT self-discipline, necessarily, but discipline. There's a critical distinction there. Discipline is basically the ability to follow orders. If sensei says "do 1000 pushups", you say "yessir" and do 1000 push-ups. That is not the same as self-discipline, which is the ability to make yourself do 1000 pushups without someone telling you to.

Discipline is a valuable skill in certain segments of society. Some kids really need it.

There seems to be some evidence that martial arts can help with ADD/ADHD. I haven't read the literature to be deeply familiar with it, but I know it's out there.

The martial arts can teach a child a lot about perseverance in the face of adversity. In any school worth its salt, all of the students, children included, will be pushed at some point. If they are doing a striking system, that means they should get hit. If they are doing a grappling system, they should get thrown, pinned, and otherwise manhandled. I believe that these experiences are invaluable, and often lacking for a lot of our youth. Kelly Starrett speaks about this more here:

The martial arts might teach a kid how to defend himself, but probably not. Sorry folks...I think most martial arts schools don't even teach ADULTS how to defend themselves well, never mind children. More of that under the bad section.

A martial arts school can be a place where a child can make new friends, forming bonds that can last for years, if not a lifetime. Some of my longest, closest friends I know thanks to the martial arts, and in some cases, they are people I might never have known otherwise.

Similarly, a good instructor can be a lifelong mentor to the child. Outside of my parents, some of the most influential people in my life have been the martial arts coaches that I've had. That is a powerful thing.

Which leads me to...

The Bad Stuff

I'll start with the flip side of what I mentioned a moment ago: your child's instructor can be an incredibly powerful influence on your child. That is, in fact, their job. While that influence can be amazingly positive, it can also be horribly destructive and negative. Martial artists, as a rule, have issues. Many of them have the emotional and mental maturity of a twelve year old child. Some of the worst human beings I've met have been martial artists. I've trained with instructors who were adulterers, borderline alcoholics, liars, and outright frauds. I've read about worse.

Side note: please don't jump in here and tell me that those people aren't "true martial artists". That's a cop-out answer that ignores the fact that these people wear martial arts uniforms, practice martial arts, and do everything that the non-evil martial artists do. Good guys and bad guys are not conveniently labeled or color-coded, and there are predators who wear the uniforms of the people who are supposed to stop them. They may be horrible people, but they are still martial artists, for all that it matters to anyone.

In the case of this particular woman has only one school to evaluate, so the question becomes, are the people who run that school the kind of people who she wants influencing her son? And not just about martial arts, but about life? Again, with frank honesty: it is never a shock to me that we don't have a lot of kid's at Sityodtong right now. The gym culture is coarse, crude, and not exactly PG. Some parents aren't bothered by that. Many are. If you are going to put your child in the hands of any teacher, be sure that they are the sort of person who teach your child the things they want to learn.

Bad thing number two. Many martial arts schools will claim to teach your child self-defense. Few actually will. Sorry if I'm offending some of you reading this, but there it is. I think this is DOUBLY true when it comes to kids. The subject of children's self-defense is amazingly complicated, and the fact that little Johnny can do a split and break a couple of boards does not mean that he is any more capable of defending himself before he got his junior black belt. If you are at all concerned with your child's safety, you need to read Gavin De Becker's books The Gift of Fear and Protecting the Gift. They outline some strategies and concepts for children's safety that all parents (and indeed, all people) should be aware of, regardless of whether they have or ever will have any martial arts training. Then read Rory Miller's Meditations on Violence, Tony Blauer's articles, and Strong on Defense if you can find it. Then see if you can find an instructor who knows what they're talking about.

Martial arts can become an obsession for kids. Yes, that can be a nice thing, but it can also mean a huge amount of time and energy devoted to a single passion. They may let other things slide, like other sports. Or schoolwork. I had one student who I had to have a good sit-down with because he had let his grades slide in favor of training.

Some martial arts schools are basically cults. Be sure you are not enrolling your child in one.

While many martial artists will swear up and down that the benefits derived from their practices are unique to them, I think that's largely untrue. Most of it is just the good stuff that comes from athletics. Which is all good stuff, mind you, but martial artists hardly have a monopoly on things like perseverance, loyalty, honor, respect, and discipline. The really good ones can teach something about fighting, but frankly, most kids I've seen will learn more about how to protect themselves playing hockey or football than they will in the average "lil' draggin's" class. Yes, the spelling errors are deliberate.

To sum up: At the end of the day, my view on martial arts for kids is pretty much in line with that of martial arts for adults, which is this. Know what you want. Know why you want it. Research. Think carefully. Caveat Emptor.

This Week Around the Web

2011-12-27T12:52:00.000-05:00

Note: I'm going to try to do these on Monday's, but sometimes, like this week, life will get in the way.

Rory has an interesting post on assumptions. I'm planning to follow up with a couple of these, but it's worth reading and thinking about.

Ross just put up an absolutely amazing video on his blog.

Kru Toy Sityodtong shared this video of kids at Sityodtong Pattaya training to be pad holders and trainers. Very cool.

A neat interview with Dan John. Some German at the beginning, but the part with Dan is in English.

"A Lifter Must Think" -- So must a martial artist, combat athlete, or self-defense instructor.

Monday Afternoon Stuff Around the Web

2011-12-19T15:44:00.000-05:00

(Side Note: I am considering making this a regular feature on this blog moving forward. What do you all think? Are these weekly postings valuable?)

Mac on Choosing a Handgun for Self-Defense. While I don't carry, I know people who do, and I believe that choosing to do so is an awesome responsibility that requires a lot of consideration. This is worth reading.

Ross shares a couple of inspirational videos here and here.

And Wim's got one here

PDR Coach Kelly Muir has an interesting website called Instructor Revolution. Kelly does a lot of work with children and teens, and has some pretty solid ideas about how to teach to that age group (and teaching in general). She teaches a population that I largely don't (I tend to work with teens and adults, but not really young kids). Worth checking out.

And finally, a Muay Thai fight. Buakaw vs. Jomhod. I'll reserve commentary, except to re-iterate that fundamentals win fights. :-)

Identify the Problem and Do the Work

2011-12-16T09:00:00.000-05:00

I'm not really familiar with Craig Douglas's work, but man, I like his philosophy.

I've also now fucked up his name twice. So Craig, if you somehow see this post, sorry. You seem like a cool dude, this clip got me interested in your stuff, and I will now completely get your name right, I promise.

Judgement

2011-12-15T11:30:00.000-05:00

Wandering around the Internets, I came across some folks who were heavily, heavily critical of an instructor who is popular in certain circles interested in self-defense. Yes, I am being purposefully vague; I don't really feel like getting roped into the digital poo-flinging.

What I did think was interesting was during one of these "conversations", the question was raised "Have you ever actually trained with this guy? You might feel differently if you got some hands-on time with him."

To which the critic responded (paraphrasing here), "Why would I need to? I've got his writing, I've got his video, and I am no rank newbie. What I read and see looks like shit. That's enough for me."

As I said, I'm not interested in the digital poo-flinging. I am interested in the question of judgment.

On the one hand; I've seen people judge instructors or systems based on nothing more than a video clip and rumor, and it pisses me off. I've seen this happen a lot with Tony Blauer and his system, and even with Kru Mark Dellagrotte once or twice. People see a clip, read a piece of an article, and read a post that says "well, I heard from my brother that he heard that so-and-so was a pompous ass" and decide that the instructor in question has nothing to offer.

Which annoys me. Even if you take out the name calling, it's still annoying, and it supports my belief that, when in doubt, it's good to go experience something first hand. Experience is a great teacher, and a better judge than anything else.

Of course, the flip side of that is two-fold.

1. How much experience is enough? You can't possibly learn an entire system from a three, five, or eight hour seminar. Does spending a few hours doing a system you've never done qualify you to judge it? Or do you need to spend months, or even years, training it before you decide? I remember a practitioner of a particular Okinawan system telling me that if I only studied his art for 15 years, I would realize that it contained the same things the SPEAR did. I decided that 15 years was a little too long for me to spend on an art that would teach me something I already knew, so I declined. But the point remains.

2. At what point can you legitimately say "you know what, I know enough about this, I think I can make judgement on my own without working with this guy."? I'm not the world's greatest Nak Muay, for example, but I think I know shit Muay Thai if I see it. Likewise, there is a point at which something is so clearly ludicrous that experiencing it in person seems unnecessary (Yellow Bamboo, anyone)?

I generally try to err on the side of giving folks the benefit of the doubt, but sometimes, that's really tough. I can recognize when I'm being judgmental without experience, but sometimes, that's a really tough line to walk.

In Other Exciting News

2011-12-13T10:31:00.000-05:00

After far too long, Tony Blauer is finally returning to Boston to offer a PDR Instructor Certification Course. I've been wanting this to happen for far too long, and I am psyched to finally have Coach in town. If you coach self-defense, this is an opportunity not to be missed.

Details here: http://pdrteam.com/?p=1783

Review: The Fighter's Body

2011-12-07T09:00:00.000-05:00

The Fighter's Body: An Owner's Manual: Your Guide to Diet, Nutrition, Exercise and Excellence in the Martial Arts

by Loren W. Christensen and Wim Demeere

Discussions about nutrition border on those about religion when it comes to the potential for animosity, fanaticism, and disregard for even the most basic rules of civil discourse. Combine that with the predilection martial artists have for confrontational mannerisms, "one true way-ism", and a general need to have all of the answers, 100% of the time, and you have the potential for some serious disaster.

Fortunately, co-authors Christensen and Demeere have managed to produce a book that not only provides some good fundamentals for any martial artist looking to clean up their diet, tweak their training regimen, or just look at some new ways to improve their performance, but they did so while avoiding fanatical adherence to a particular diet, exercise program, or prescribed routine.

While the book's title might suggest otherwise, this is a book primarily about nutrition. Of the fourteen chapters, only two of them contain any descriptions of physical exercises, drills, or workout routines. Here's the breakdown.

1. Myths and Lies
2. It’s All About You
3. It’s All About Calories
4. Bad Diets
5. Vitamins
6. Liquids
7. Your Daily Eating Plan
8. Losing Weight
9. Making Weight
10. Dropping Weight Fast
11. More Muscle, More Power
12. Fueling the Machine
13. Your long-term Plan
14. The Mental Game

Conclusion
Training Logs
References

Of all of those chapters, "It's All About You" might be the most...descriptive, I guess...of the authors' views on nutrition. In each chapter (and sometimes, several times in a chapter), the authors' advise the reader that their suggestions should not be taken as gospel, and that the reader should experiment to find the best regimen that works for them. For someone looking for the word of truth (or who is fanatically devoted to a particular diet), this might seem frustrating or "wishy-washy" (as one Amazon review has it), but the older I get, the more I've come to appreciate the complexities that surround anything having to do with fitness or nutrition. Things that work great for me don't work for other people, and vis-versa. Even what works for me has changed, as I've aged and my body has changed. If I don't want to follow the same workout program that I followed five years ago, why would I expect that the same program would work for someone with a completely different body type?

Besides, describing the book as "wishy-washy" is unfair. The authors' do provide clear guidelines. Specifically, they favor a balance of 40% carbs, 30% protein, and 30% fat, taken in through good, healthy food. They prefer six small meals a day. They are not big believers in supplementation. You get a cheat meal (they call it a "dirt day", but it's the same idea). All of this stuff is clearly laid out, as are some plans for both losing and gaining weight, including methods for cutting weight fast if the need is there. Someone looking for a clear plan of action can certainly build one with the materials in this book. Someone looking to be told "on day 4, you eat THIS for breakfast" won't.

I confess to not having played deeply with any of these ideas (I just finished the book a couple of days ago), but a lot of the advice seems solid. Some of it mirrors my own experiences. Some of it I haven't tried yet, but I may experiment with it. The only quibbles I have are minor ones (Demeere suggests using a Smith machine for squats is okay, while my experience and conversations with folks suggests that those things should be outlawed by the Geneva Accords).

As the title suggests, this is an owner's manual; like an owner's manual, it is simple, straightforward, but not necessarily hugely in depth. If you want to learn more about a specific nutritional plan, or a particular exercise regimen, there are better, more in-depth places to look. If you're just trying to get a handle on these things, and don't know where to start, this is a pretty good jumping off point.

Interested in this book? Buy a copy from my Amazon Store, and check out the other cool stuff I've got on sale there.

Travel Safety with Tony Blauer

2011-12-06T09:00:00.000-05:00

A neat little video from Coach Blauer on checking into your hotel...

January Seminar

2011-12-05T14:04:00.001-05:00

On January 22nd, 2012, I'll be running a three-hour Personal Defense Readiness Fundamentals seminar at Redline Fight Sports.

Here's the blurb:

What: The culmination of over twenty years of research into the realities of confrontation and violent assault, the Personal Defense Readiness program is widely acknowledged as being on the cutting edge of personal safety training. This class will flow from mind-set, to contact, to confrontation, using the PDR’s unique Three D's model: Detect, Defuse, Defend. Using our Non-Violent Postures™ you will learn how to identify pre-contact cues, position for interception, and convert the startle-flinch using the world's first behaviorally based self-defense method - the S.P.E.A.R. System™. This course will not interfere with any prior training and can be used to augment your personal toolbox. It is course is open to students of all levels ages thirteen and up. Students should wear comfortable clothing that they can move and exercise in.

Where: Redline Fight Sports, Cambridge, MA

When: January 22nd, 2012, 1pm.

Cost: $20 pre-registration, $25 at the door.

To register, contact Andrea Karis at andrea AT redlinefightsports.com
Questions about the course? Email me at adptraining@gmail.com

Thornton, Harris, and Me, Part II

2011-11-29T12:12:00.001-05:00

Recently, I wrote about a post from Matt Thornton, written in response to an article by Sam Harris on the subject of self-defense. I emailed Mr. Thornton, and I’m delighted to say that he was willing to have a very intelligent dialogue with me regarding many of my concerns. With his permission, I have reprinted his reply below. The only edits I have made were to run a spell-check at his request. I've also included my replies to his replies, as I wrote them at the time. I'm sure that I will have more thoughts on some of these subjects, but I wanted to get this out here.

Before I even get into this, I want to say this. I'm really pleased with the fact that Mr. Thornton was willing to have this dialogue with me. He is the head of a major international martial arts organization, and certainly in a position where he could have chosen to ignore my email, either pleading busy-ness, or simply ignoring me because he felt I wasn't worthy of his time. His willingness to discuss his beliefs and views speaks volumes, in a good way.

I've included his original email, and my responses in italics.

Hello Jake, Thank you for the email. Your questions are well thought out, and good. Here are my replies, feel free to post them publicly if you like.

You stated: "For a variety of personal reasons, one of my big suspicious or alarm bells is often triggered when I see religious or philosophical ideas attached to martial arts training. I believe that the job of a martial arts coach is to teach, well, martial arts. Obviously, that can be a pretty broad-ranging term, and lots of stuff gets wrapped up inside it. But I think there is a point at which a coach can overstep their bounds."

Let me state very clearly that I completely agree with you here. You mentioned, very honestly, later in the piece that having not trained at one of my events personally, you don't know whether I do, or do not, do that. So let me answer that, I do not.

When I am teaching Martial Arts, I am there to teach Martial Arts. Most people pay between $150 to $200 a weekend to attend one of my seminars, and I would feel badly if I spent their time, and money, talking about a subject they were not there for. My Martial Arts seminars are just that, Martial Arts.

Even more to the point, if they are there for MMA, I don't spend my time teaching GI BJJ, anymore then I teach stand up when doing a BJJ seminar. As a professional, I make a point of delivering what the audience came for.

I did not address this in my original emails to Mr. Thornton, but I do want to state that I was really pleased with this part of his response. Too many instructors get caught up in delivering what they want to teach, not what their audience wants (or needs), and do their students a grave disservice as a result.

In addition, I too am cautious when people begin over reaching their level of expertise. I find it disturbing when Martial Arts coaches begin advertising themselves as "life coaches". I think this is irresponsible. Yes, what we do in terms of physical training brings many benefits. It can help people be healthier, more confident, provide a social community, etc; in short, it does change lives. But that is a by product of a good training environment, and I am by no means a therapist. So yes, I agree those lines need to be drawn very clearly. And I don't like to see them crossed.

That said, I am an outspoken atheist, as well as a member of the skeptic community. I do give talks regularly at the university related to critical thinking applied to Martial Arts; and engage in debates on issues related to religion. However, these are completely separate things from my gyms, my classes in my gym, and my seminars on Martial Arts.

I will if asked discuss this, but not on class time.

Which, just to clarify my own position, I think is great. I am a big proponent of the need for critical thinking in the martial arts, and in life in general, and I've been a fan of a lot of your writing precisely because you encourage people to think and test things for themselves.

Similarly, I'm all for people who wish to engage in debates regarding religion, science, etc doing so. Honest, intelligent debate is healthy and an awesome thing.

You asked: "I have to wonder if I could show up at one of Mr. Thornton's courses and train without being subjected to the idea that I'm foolishly subscribing to a useless fantasy because I sometimes go Synagogue on Friday nights and don't eat one day a year to somehow make up for being a bad person (yes, I know it's not terribly logical, but I'm okay with that)."

Answer, yes you could. Not only that but if during class time someone started harassing you about such things I would be the first to step up and stop it. There is no room for that on my mat. And you are welcome here anytime to see for yourself. So I hope that is clear.

Very clear, and if I lived in Portland, I'd happily stop by one of your classes (honestly, if I lived in Portland, I probably would have stopped by years ago). I'm actually acquainted with your east coast rep, Steven Whittier (he and I share a coach in Mark Dellagrotte), and I know he's had you out here a few times. I've never managed to make it to one of your events here, but I'd happily show up to one.

That leads to a larger point; if your religion is private, meaning you are not bringing the topic up, not engaging in public policy debates based on theological beliefs you hold, etc, then I don't think anyone should bother you about it, period. Barring of course, close friends or loved ones you may have who you share a relationship with that makes those topics fair game. However, the moment you bring the topic up, or engage in a public debate, then I think you, or anyone else, should expect to have those ideas challenged. This should be done in a respectful way, and the line, which has always been for me crystal clear, between an idea being 'stupid' (some simply are), and a person being 'stupid', is not ambiguous. That is a line I try to not cross.

That is also totally fair. Public debate is, well, public. I'm completely okay with the idea that if I bring up a particular notion, whether religious, martial arts, or other wise in a public forum, people can and should challenge it. One of my repeated admonishments to my students is for them to not take my word as gospel.

And on one final note on this topic, yes, we have religious people of various sects within SBGi. Again, if they keep the Martial Arts training to 'training', they are good people, and they are skilled at coaching methods of 'Alive' training, etc, then they are welcome by me. Every other conversation occurs over beers, and not on class time.

I figured as much, but I appreciate you clarifying.

You stated: "Mr. Thornton contends that the BJJ trained student will do better because under assault "her body starts reacting automatically". Human bodies don't work that way. The BJJ student's body won't do anything unless she mentally capable of thinking, moving, and accessing her skills."

Let me clarify, as this is an empirical topic. When the flight or fight response kicks in, and the fight has turned physical, then the athletes 'Alive' training in the core delivery systems is what takes over. That is mind and body, as far as I am concerned mind is body, as mind is simply a word we apply to what the brain does. Post event, it isn't uncommon, be it a cage fight, competition match, street fight, or arrest scenario that turned hairy, for the parties involved to not be able to recount to you exactly what, and how they did what they did. Again, I am painting with a broad brush, as there exceptions, but none of this is theory; this is twenty years of working with combat athletes, as well as law enforcement and military personal and agencies.

Military training, to use another example, is structured to account for this 'affect'. The constant repetition of something like clearing a firearm after a misfire needs to be ingrained in such a way that, should the soldier find themselves in a live firefight, the body responds and clears the jam absent conscious/clear thought. This is no secret.

This is all I mean when I say 'automatically'. The 'automatically' is the entire mind body organism performing its training under a high stress scenario due to hours upon hours of proper training; that is all.

That is fair, and much clearer. I wasn't clear that you were using the term "body" to include the entire organism (mind and body), and from that perspective, I do agree with you. Your initial statement read more like the ones made by some martial artists who seem to think that with sufficient training, their bodies will simply start moving around of their own accord, without any conscious (meaning, brain directed) action of their own. People may not remember everything that happens (except, as you note, those who have had so much exposure to violence as to be desensitized to it), but I do believe that there has to be some level of conscious engagement in order to make those skills work.

To draw a sports examples: I'm sure you've seen plenty of fights in which one fighter, having been rocked, slammed, or suddenly forced into a difficult position, failed to counter or escape something that they "knew" how to stop, but didn't because of the overwhelming mental stress.

Of course, proper training helps teach people how to deal with that fear and stress, and alive training is important for just that. I'm not making the argument that it isn't, or that you are wrong about the value of alive training. I hope that is clear.

You stated: "...just as there are differences between how one prepares for a sport BJJ match vs. an MMA match (you need to account for the presence of strikes, the lack of a GI removes or restricts certain tactics), there are elements in a self-defense curriculum that should be present that are not always addressed in sport training. That is not at all to deny that the sport training is valuable or healthy."

This is one of my ongoing frustrations with some in the RBSD community. Every article I write, and every class I have ever taught related to self-defense (and I have been teaching all over the world now for 20 years), takes into account the differences between things like GI, no-GI, MMA, and self -efense situations. Each has its own emphasis. So you are preaching to the choir on that one. To constantly hear, "the street isn't the same as sport", is a bit frustrating as I know of nobody who thinks it is.

Yeah, and for that, I owe you an apology, because I have read enough of your writing to know that you know this. The last part of that post was hastily written, and could have used some expansion.

However, and this is the point I emphasize, that doesn't change the fact that the delivery systems do not magically change when you find yourself mounted in a Safeway parking Lot, as opposed to the MMA cage. There is no special "street" escape. And no, we don't want to be there. But, that isn't always up to us. And if someone does find themselves in that situation, it will be the hours spent drilling the delivery system of BJJ in an 'Alive' format, that will get them out in the most effective manner possible. And 'that' is the point.

Completely and totally agree. [In retrospect: I would add in here that I think that other systems besides BJJ teach effective mount escapes. Many grappling systems teach ways to escape the mount. I don't think Mr. Thornton would disagree with me on that, though I suspect he'd emphasize that regardless of what the system is called, the escape is going to look more or less the same.]

In my letter to Sam I stated that when it comes to RBSD I was painting with a broad brush, and this was true. There are certainly many exceptions which prove the rule. There would be no argument from me on that point.

As for healthy, what I was presenting Sam with was a very specific situation. In this case, an insecure adolescent who may find themselves picked on in school. My experience has been that contact sports, be it BJJ, Judo, Boxing, Wrestling, etc, can have dramatically healthy results on that child's entire life. As I stated, sports, when done right, are simply good for people.

This is another place where I could have written more, and probably should have.

I WAS the insecure adolescent who got into the martial arts to feel tougher, and my training over the years has run the gamut from the traditional (Aikido), to the fraudulent (a "kung fu" "master" who is the subject of a story far to long for email), to the "alive" (Muay Thai, Boxing, a smattering of Judo/BJJ, and Tony Blauer's PDR system). I now coach Muay Thai and the PDR, and continue to try and train and learn.

I completely agree with you that sports are good for people of all ages, and particularly, for those insecure adolescents.

While I believe that there is tremendous value in self-defense training, I also believe that sport training offers a much healthier, sustainable long-term model for most people. My experience has been that most people prefer to spend the majority of their time focusing on a sport that is fun and enjoyable, rather than spending every training session contemplating potential robberies, rapes, or murders that might occur. I do think it is important to address self-defense issues with those who want it, but for a regular training program, a sport model seems to be more sustainable for most (with some exceptions, as usual).

That's the discussion, more or less. There's some stuff in there that I'd like to think through a bit more, and probably will write to expand upon a bit.

Again, I want to thank Mr. Thornton for the dialogue. It was very cool, and I really do hope to get to one of his events some day.

Harris, Thorton, and Me.

2011-11-16T16:05:00.001-05:00

Matt Thornton, the head of the Straight Blast Gym International Organization, had an interesting response to Sam Harris's article here.

I like Mr. Thornton's writing in general, and I think a lot of what he says in his response has merit. At the same time, just as Thornton feels that Harris misses a couple of things, there are a couple of things in Thornton's own writing that didn't sit well with me. This is my attempt to think some of those things out.

1. While I understand, I think, there is something that bugs me about Thornton's automatic equation of traditional martial arts with pure fantasy, and his training with pure rationality or science. Actually, no...it goes deeper than that.

For a variety of personal reasons,one of my big suspicious or alarm bells is often triggered when I see religious or philosophical ideas attached to martial arts training. I believe that the job of a martial arts coach is to teach, well, martial arts. Obviously, that can be a pretty broad-ranging term, and lots of stuff gets wrapped up inside it. But I think there is a point a which a coach can overstep their bounds, and when the coach starts dictating the religious or philosophical beliefs of their students, I think they have gone too far.

Please note: I have absolutely no evidence that Mr. Thornton DOES this. But reading his article as not terribly devout, but still basically practicing member of the Jewish religion, I have to wonder if I could show up at one of Mr. Thornton's courses and train without being subjected to the idea that I'm foolishly subscribing to a useless fantasy because I sometimes go Synagogue on Friday nights and don't eat one day a year to somehow make up for being a bad person (yes, I know it's not terribly logical, but I'm okay with that). Just as I would not want to attend a martial arts seminar where I was preached to about how Jesus can save my soul (and I have read about such things), I would not wish to attend training where I was told that my religion was a useless fantasy that causes all the evils of the world.

Again, for clarity. Mr. Thornton may not do any such thing, and I'm not accusing him of doing so. For all I know, his gym is filled with many religious members. I'm responding to his words, and the thoughts they triggered.

2. In his hypothetical grocery store assault, Mr. Thorton contends that the BJJ trained student will do better because under assault "her body starts reacting automatically". Human bodies don't work that way. The BJJ student's body won't do anything unless she mentally capable of thinking, moving, and accessing her skills. NOW, her experiences in training, especially if they are experiences that realistically mirror the assault, may help her mentally work through that initial moment of confusion, BUT it is not her body magically taking care of business.

3. As someone who teaches at least one system that frequently gets shoved under the RBSD brush, I feel like I need to say that not all of us are un-athletic paranoiacs. I think combat sports are awesome (I coach one, at a highly competitive school), but just as there are differences between how one prepares for a sport BJJ match vs. an MMA match (you need to account for the presence of strikes, the lack of a gi removes or restricts certain tactics), there are elements in a self-defense curriculum that should be present that are not always addressed in sport training. That is not at all to deny that the sport training is valuable or healthy.

Of course, I also don't really like the RBSD label to begin with, so there is that.

Thoughts and feedback welcome.

Reading and Viewing for the Week

2011-11-11T10:00:00.000-05:00

Rory Miller teaching some drills and talking:

A short recap of the most recent PDR Instructor Development Course. It sounds like it was a fantastic time as always. Sorry I missed it.

A short interview with Ross Enamait.

An essay by Sam Harris on the realities of self-defense. I have no real idea who Sam Harris is (Tony Blauer shared the link), but the article is excellent.

Dan John talks with Zach Even Esh

Part One:

Part Two:

Facts and Fallacies About Fitness and Fighting (With Apologies To Mel Siff)

2011-11-10T15:00:00.000-05:00

I tried not to make this a rant. Twice. I failed.

The rant was born out of a combination of factors, partly reading Joel Jamison's excellent article on the Myths of MMA Conditioning., partly just several conversations with fellow trainers, clients, and students.

Here's the executive summary for the attentionally-challenged: being in good shape does not mean you can fight.

Not clear enough for you? Let's try again: BEING IN GOOD SHAPE DOES NOT MEAN YOU CAN FIGHT.

What Brings This Up?

While I suspect that this always been an issue, I've noticed it more and more in the last few years, partly due to the rise in popularity of "hard core" fitness programs and competitions. These programs, which often focus on high intensity circuit training (among other things) are quick to throw around a lot of marketing verbiage about how those who participate in their programs are "warriors" or how their training is so EXTREME that YOU COULD DIE! Combine this with the inane "boxing fitness" classes (sorry ladies, but if you want to "get fit without getting hit", there are lots of exercise modalities that don't require a punch in the face) that sprung up in the wake of Billy Blanks and his Tae Bo, and you have generations of people who have managed to convince themselves that their exercise program has somehow gifted them with the skill and knowledge to be able to fight.

Here's the problem. It's not true.

Fact: Fighting is a SKILL.

Like any other skill, you cannot develop it by not doing it. The suggestion that you can is insulting.

Gymnastics requires skill. So does Olympic lifting (if you think pulling several hundred pounds from the floor to overhead in one smooth motion is just a matter of having big muscles, go try it and get back to me). Hell, running is a skill, which is why you have people who study running techniques, teach clinics, and generally study how people RUN. Hell, Chess is a skill. And fighting? That's a skill too.

I would not dream of showing up at the Olympic training center and thinking that I would outperform the worst lifter there because I have some skill at Muay Thai. So why would you, with your sub-Olympian performance (I know it's sub-Olympian, because if you were an Olympian, you'd be prepping for the Olympics) show up in my gym and expect that you can out-perform me or one of my teammates? Olympic lifting will teach you as much about fighting as fighting will teach you about lifting.

Fact: The battle is not always to the strong.

Old, but true. I have watched, many times, the older, weaker, teacher beat the snot out of the younger, fitter student and leave the latter gasping on the mat for air. I don't care how much an-aerobic conditioning you do, the first time you roll, or the first time someone gloves up and smashes you in the face, you are going to experience a whole new world. It is a world where how fast you row, or how much you can deadlift, will not be enough to save you from staggering around, wondering if there's an oxygen tank nearby, and trying to figure out why the other guy hasn't even broken a sweat yet (answer: the other guy is better than you are).

Fact: Fitness helps.

Okay, let's be fair. Being in good shape is helpful in a fight. It can make the difference in winning or losing in competition. There are benefits to fitness outside of the fighting realm, and fitness should be pursued for numerous reasons that have nothing to do with fighting. Obesity, and its attendant disorders, kills far more people every year than violence does. Being fit is hugely important, and I advocate fitness a great deal.

But please, stop deluding yourself. A hard workout is not a fight. It is a hard workout. Being strong, fast, enduring, or whatever, while all wonderful, do not translate into you being able to fight your way out of a wet paper bag. At best, it will give you an edge up.

So please, workout. Workout hard. Push your limits, physically and mentally. It will make you a better person. But do not believe for one minute that it is somehow translating into you being able to kick ass in the ring or on the mat. If you want to be able to do that, go find a credible coach, shut your yap, and learn something.

Program Minimum: Thirty Days Later

2011-11-08T12:09:00.000-05:00

Towards the beginning of October, I made a decision to radically alter my strength and conditioning regimen. Between the stress of various jobs, impending familial responsibilities, training, teaching, and what not, my workouts had transformed from a place of joy into just one more source of stress. Part of that stress came from trying to integrate and use information from too many sources at once. My S&C was a mess, and not even a productive mess at that.

In Never Let Go, Dan John shares a quote that "when things go wrong, simplify." I decided to take that advice to heart, and do an experiment. For the last thirty days, my program has largely consisted of the "program minimum" from Pavel's Russian Kettlebell Challenge book. The program calls for a combination of snatches and bent presses, done in repetitions and sets as the user dictates. I chose to use a 55 pound kettlestack, and after a couple of sessions, settled on a scheme of doing a total of 100 repetitions per workout. Some workouts were primarily (or entirely) snatch focused. Some workouts I did more bent presses. I always made sure to get a few snatches in, since those are the primary lift in the program. I also continued to deadlift heavy once a week, and do my usual skill training.

So how did it work?

Psychologically, it worked great. By having a concrete, simplified program, I was able to relieve a lot of the stress I had felt regarding my workouts. Keeping track of my progress, and maintaining consistent goals for reps, rest periods, and so on, allowed me to feel like I was actually getting somewhere, and enjoy my workouts again. I confess to having a minor urge to start playing with some other lifts, which I may or may not give into, but overall, it worked pretty well.

How about physically? Did the program work?

The RKC book claims that the program minimum will grant you:

"A lean body"

When I weighed myself at the start of the program, I was 188.5 pounds. When I weighed myself thirty days later, I was 190 pounds. That's not a particularly significant change, especially since the pound and a half could easily be the result of some extra water, or a couple of extra pieces of Halloween candy. This mostly just reinforces my belief that diet matters more than exercise for weight control, especially for me.

"a heart and lungs that would make Dr. Cooper proud"

I have no idea what standards would make Dr. Cooper proud, and haven't been doing any measurements anyway (in retrospect, I could have checked things like my resting heart rate). I will say that I feel like my endurance has improved a bit, particularly when working in the clinch. In particular, I feel like I am able to maintain my strength and power for longer periods of time, and able to bring my heart rate down more quickly. So that's been good.

"a back of steel"

No real way to tell. For one thing, my deadlifting strengthens my back as much as any kettlebell lift will, if not more. All I can say is that my back hasn't been bothering me as much as it has in the last few months, but I'm also no longer sitting at a computer for eight hours a day, which probably has a more meaningful impact. In any case, my back and upper body does feel very strong right now, and that is nice.

"and bones invincible to osteoporosis and other aliments."

No measurable way to tell. I didn't have any bone aliments before starting this, nor do I now.

Despite the difficulty in supporting Pavel's claims (which, let's face it, are clearly a bit hyperbolic anyway), I do think the experience was good, and the program has done me a lot of psychological good. Physically, it certainly hasn't hurt, and I do think that it has helped shore up a few weak areas (my shoulders, in particular, last a lot longer during sparring).

The one area where I noticed that this program does nothing for is my neck; I've known in the back of my mind that I've been neglecting neck work in my programs for a while, but this really highlighted how badly I'm ignoring it. While I don't want to start over-complicating things, I think my next project will be to go back to Ross Enamait's Missing Links, and try to put together some supplemental neck exercises to add to my routine. I also want to start making some shifts into my diet, starting with adding some "table push-aways" to my daily routine.

The most valuable lesson I've taken from this is that Dan John is absolutely right; when in doubt, simplify.