Low Tech Combat

The Human Combative Behaviour Presentation

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Sat, 09 Feb 2013 13:19:00 +0000

Here is a first for Low Tech Combat.

I have spent a lot of time putting together a slideshow presentation all about Human Combative Behaviour. It combines some fantastic imagery and touches on many of the key points from the Manifesto aimed to educate people about human to human violence.

Here it is:

Human Combative Behavior Presentation from Adam LTC

It is a very nice and presentable way to express some of the ideas contained in the Human Combative Behaviour Manifesto which is completely free to all email subscribers.

To watch the presentation above just click on the right (or left to go back) arrow to go through the slides. There are 51 slides in total packed with valuable information about human violence.

It is an exciting and new way to present valuable information to what is most likely a new group of people who find professional looking presentations a great way to learn new knowledge.

Feel free to share this around. The link to the slideshow at the slideshare site can be found HERE. You can view the above Human Combative Behaviour presentation there as well as many other great presentations as well.

I hope you all like it!

LTC DIGEST #2 REGRETS, BOXING, MYTHS, MAN, FIGHTING, NARCISSISM AND WALKING DEAD

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Mon, 03 Dec 2012 05:55:00 +0000

Welcome to the second LTC DIGEST.

I got some good feedback on the last one so here is the second edition!

There's more great stuff in here. Another entertaining video (this is really well done), more interesting imagery, some great articles, educational news stories and more.

Enjoy and feel free to share this around!

CHALK WARFARE 2.0

This is a really well done video. Although the chalk weapons may be "high tech", I think we can excuse that just this once here at Low Tech Combat. It's too good of a video.

TOP 5 REGRETS OF THE DYING

As Stephen Covey would say, let's begin with the end in mind today.

"A palliative nurse who has counselled the dying in their last days has revealed the most common regrets we have at the end of our lives. And among the top, from men in particular, is 'I wish I hadn't worked so hard'.

Bronnie Ware is an Australian nurse who spent several years working in palliative care, caring for patients in the last 12 weeks of their lives..."

This is a must read short piece really. This sort of stuff affects us all. How are you sitting in life? Are you happy? It's not too late to change things.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2012/feb/01/top-five-regrets-of-the-dying

BOXING FOR SELF DEFENCE

This is a good article from Darrin at Big Stick Combat. He goes over some very good reasons why boxing is such a good option for self defence.

http://bigstickcombat.com/posts/why-boxing-is-an-effective-fighting-method/

ALPHA MALE IN THE NEWS

A good example of typical Alpha Male type violence. Remember, most assaults happen between people who know each other, especially when alcohol is involved.

http://norwalk.patch.com/articles/police-man-fights-with-brother-assaults-cop

CLIMATE CHANGING VIOLENCE

Here is another detailed article about the link between rising temperatures and violent crime. The data is adding up on this relationship.

http://norwalk.patch.com/articles/police-man-fights-with-brother-assaults-cop

You can also download a detailed academic research paper on the same topic at the following link. It is in PDF format.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2111377&

MYTH OF RBSD

Here Rodney King from Crazy Monkey Defense writes an excellent article highlighting some of the myths and shortfalls of many RBSD systems. I agree completely with this.

A good read.

http://www.crazymonkeydefense.com/blog/2012/01/30/the-myth-of-reality-based-self-defense/

SIMILARITIES?

Does this...

...look similar to this?

FBI SHOWS RACIALLY MOTIVATED CRIME DROPPING

Here is some good news. In the US it seems that instances of racially motivated crime is dropping. There appears to be no other effects causing it to drop.

Maybe people are getting nicer?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-degusta/fbi-statistics-reveal-decrease-hate-crimes_b_1884254.html

BEING A MAN

"It is surprising what a man can do when he has to, and how little most men will do when they don’t have to."

– Walter Linn.

Thanks Ross Enamait for that little piece of inspiration.

TRAINING COPS

Here Rory talks about training cops and how this is an altogether different kettle of fish to training civilians in self defence.

That is true.

http://chirontraining.blogspot.com.au/2012/10/cop-night.html

KEEP FIGHTING

"A former Gurkha solider fought off a..."

A good read. Keep fighting. No matter what. No matter how broken down you feel or how sure you feel you have lost. Keep fighting.

http://blog.hsoi.com/2012/10/15/keep-fighting/

WHAT WOULD YOU DO?

News story: One jobless heroin addict. 20 robberies on lone women. Violent robber of elderly female pensioners.

If you had some quiet time with this person, what would you do?

http://www.harrowobserver.co.uk/west-london-news/local-harrow-news/2012/11/02/escaped-prisoner-back-behind-bars-after-mugging-116451-32153846/

NARCISSISM AND RESISTANCE

"We decide (unconsciously) that we are the center of the universe. In our minds–and in our closets, our garages, and our bank accounts–we begin erecting an edifice of adoration for this new god, ourselves.

We convince ourselves that we are smarter, prettier, meaner, cooler, hipper, etc. than anyone else (or at least that we’re smart enough, pretty enough, and mean enough to handle any problem.)

In a way, this mechanism is healthy. In its benign form it’s simply self-confidence. And it’s often true that the narcissist’s beliefs about herself are valid, within reason. Often the narcissist is indeed brave, smart, strong, savvy, and so forth.

What is really happening inside the narcissist?"

Thought provoking and perhaps confronting to some. Good stuff as always from Steven Pressfield.

"Turn pro."

http://www.stevenpressfield.com/2012/11/narcissism-and-resistance-2/

STRANGER MURDER MYTH DISPELLED

"HALF of all female victims of homicide are killed by partners or ex-partners, according to new figures experts claim dispel the "stranger danger" myth.

Some 18 girls or women met violent deaths in 2011-12, nine at the hands of somebody with whom they were having – or had had – a relationship.

Only one was killed by somebody she did not know, new Scottish Government statistics showed."

Again. Do we need to keep showing documented evidence that in many cases, the most significant threat you face is amongst the people know?

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/crime-courts/stranger-murder-myth-dispelled.19350541

THE WALKING DEAD

"...So what’s the relevance to self-defense in all this?

It’s pretty simple:

The Walking Dead describes a world where our society has broken down because of extreme external circumstances. The protagonists have to adapt to this new reality or die. Their daily lives depend solely on their self-defense skills, in the largest sense of the term.

Pretty much every hairy situation you see in the show is something that can (and actually does) happen in reality, in a different context than a zombie apocalypse of course..."

This is a great article by Wim about the self defence value of watching such a cool show as The Walking Dead. The show sure offers up some interesting thought exercises. For example, in a survival and self defence context, would you kill one person to save two? Would you kill another human so you could live? Besides these two, there are numerous self defence lessons that Wim goes over.

http://www.wimsblog.com/2012/11/the-walking-dead-and-self-defense/

CONCLUSION

That's it, that's the second LTC DIGEST. I am sure you would agree there is some really good stuff this time around.

I hope you've enjoyed it!

Regards,

Adam

STRATEGIC SELF DEFENCE

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 18:25:00 +0000

There are three levels of Low Tech Combat.

They are strategic, operational and tactical.

This site Low Tech Combat focuses on the strategic because it is the most important aspect and the most widely neglected in self defence. Low Tech Combat is about strategic self defence. Many people go to classes and train regularly without stopping to consider if they are on the right path for them.

Is what I am doing best generating desired skillsets?

"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat"

-Sun Tzu

This goes beyond self defence. Many people react to various stimuli and go about their days without stopping to pause and reflect if they are achieving what they truly want to achieve.

This is a sad fact.

The Strategic level drives everything else, including self defence and combative skills. Or it should. If you do not make strategic considerations and decisions you are simply reacting to life as it unfolds in front of you and will not achieve what is important to you.

If you are unsure of the differences between strategy and tactics, you really should go and read this post first. Go and do that then come back. Done? Good, let's continue.

"Strategic self defence drives operational processes such as a training regime and then at these sessions tactics and techniques are learnt that fit into your strategic objectives."

This is how it works. It is very simple.

Strategic Self Defence

This is about identifying and developing long term personal goals. This is big picture stuff.

What do you want to achieve in your life? What do you want to experience?

Imagine you are on your death bed and are looking back on your life. What would you regret having never done, never tried or never pursued? What will you regret having wasted your time with?

Strategy can apply to martial skills however at this higher strategic level martial aspects also overlap with everything else in your life. This is important.

Prioritisation and Synchronisation

All aspects of your life at the strategic level SHOULD be synchronised.

Your martial training should fit in with your family life which should fit in with career which should fit in with education which should fit in with health and fitness which should also fit in with other hobbies and leisure time.

It all comes down to priorities. Deliberate prioritisation not random bouncing around.

Are you keen on competing in MMA? But is your family also vital to you? Do they get neglected when you combine a busy work life and after hours study with a busy training regime? What's more important to you? To achieve your personal goals in this regard or be a better parent and have more input into your children's life?

Will focusing on competing in MMA make you a better parent or is it just an excuse to be selfish? On the flip side, is not doing it simply an easy out?

This is strategic stuff. This is the most important stuff.

Thinking about this and making the right strategic decisions is what will make you happy in life and let you feel content when you are on your deaths bed looking back at your life.

Strategic elements of your life MUST be in order if you are to have a rich and fulfilling life where you focus on what is truly important to you. When you think strategically about your own life, everything seems clearer.

"Perspective can make some decisions much easier to make when viewed from the top down."

Considering and making strategic decisions can take time. These are deep and fundamental goals that will have a great impact on your life. They need to be well considered. Do not rush this vital stage.

Strategic decisions should drive your weekly and daily routine.

In the context of self defence, the following are just a sprinkling of questions that need answering:

How much time am I willing to be away from my family (if relevant) to train each day?
How many days a week am I willing to train?
Why do I really want to train? Self defence, you like a particular martial art, for health and fitness etc.
Are martial arts the right thing for me?
Do I want to compete? How seriously?
Is there a better way to achieve my actual goals?
Is what I plan on doing really the best way to achieve my goals?
What are my priorities?
What should I focus on? Knife defence, mugging scenarios, competition, street fight (assault) scenarios, home security etc.
What other things could I be doing that more effectively lead me to achieving my strategic goals?
If I am interested in many aspects of training, what are truly the most important to me, or my family and I?

These questions should fit in to further big picture questions about your life. There is only so much time in a day. On the flip side of that coin, there is more time available to be productive each day than we are happy using. Television and mindless Internet surfing (Facebook, YouTube and twittering etc.) can consume hours before you even realise.

These strategic decisions can take time. So take time.

Change

These considerations and questions may drive a lot of change in your life. Change can be uncomfortable.

"Change can be scary, really scary."

You may leave one gym to go to another. You may leave these good training partners you have gotten to know. You would have been comfortable there. You may go to a gym and start all over again. You will be the new guy again. This can be very humbling. You may not know anyone there. The training culture may be very different. You may struggle, even make lots of mistakes.

But that is the point isn't it? To learn something new? To learn something that is more important to you than what you were doing?

Whatever the pains of change, they will be good pains. They will be growing pains.

Remember the last time you made a big decision that changed your life?

Remember how exciting things were?

It could be that you moved cities to where you knew few people.
You may have decided to join the military or police force.
You may have taken that great job across the country or on the other side of the world.
You may have asked that girl to marry you.
You may have changed careers.

These are big events. It is these events that define us. These are strategic points in your life that define your life.

Taking your own responsibility for your own safety and security and for that of your loved ones is taking the mature approach. You are generating independence and a new level of self reliability.

There are many paths (and many lead to dead ends and to cheap rip off neighbourhoods) to consider when deciding to take on this responsibility to look after your own safety and security through wanting to learn strategic self defence. Making the right decision at the strategic level will save you a lot of wasted time and resources in the long run.

Making this mature decision to learn self defence for yourself and family should also fit into other big picture areas of ones life. The self defence aspect should not clash with other aspects. You will know what the other important aspects are to you.

Operational

Once strategic decisions have been made and you know what you truly want to do or achieve in your life, you need to plan how you want to go about achieving your goals. You cannot do this stage if you do not know what you want to do.

There is no way around this, but this stage will also take some time to do well. None of this stuff is easy. If it was, everyone would do it and everyone would be living rich fulfilling lives and nobody would be full of sadness and regrets in their old age.

In the context of self defence, the operational level is where your training routine is developed. Monday here, Tuesday there, Wednesday do this and so on. A regime can be broken down further into time slots within days for busier people. This is where daily, weekly and monthly routines are developed that aim to achieve strategic goals.

Tactical

When you follow your operational training regime and your routine, you will go to classes, go to courses and read books. At these classes and courses, you will learn techniques and tactics. This is the doing aspect. What you are learning is highly targeted towards your strategic goals. When you read books about subject matters important to you, you will develop knowledge that matters.

During your strategic appreciation you decided that what is most important is home defence and knife defence. One aspect of this that you implemented in your training regime was knife defence training. You practise a Filipino weapons based system but also go to four specialist seminars each year to transfer those 'fighting art' knife techniques into reality based and focused approaches. The skills and techniques are very much there from the Filipino training and these seminars fine tune your approach and focus you on your end goal of wanting to be able to have a decent chance of defending an edged weapon attack.

You learn how knife attackers hold their weapons, you learn whether knife attackers display the weapon or are more likely to hide it. You learn what type is more dangerous. You learn about and understand and feel physiological responses under stress through sparring and scenarios. These tactical level skills are very much in line with your strategic goals.

As you get into the training your knowledge of knife use will expand. You will probably read books and articles about knife crime and the underlying violent dynamic of knife use.

As your knowledge in the field improves, you may adjust your training regime, cut some things out, introduce better elements or do more of a good thing. This is called progress. This is good.

Strategic direction

This is how strategic level thinking about self defence and martial arts can and should drive everything that you do. There is only so much time in the day, so many days in a week, so many weeks in a year and so many years in your life. Don't waste this precious time. Don't waste your time doing things that are not really that important to you.

Make that commitment to take some time to consider your ultimate goals and dreams. Then make those plans and routines to make that happen. Then stick to those operational plans and go and learn those tactics and techniques that you most want to learn. Discard the rest.

Put pen to paper and work on your strategic self defence direction.

Yep, it sounds like a lot of work doesn't it? You can grab life by the balls and let your strategic goals drive what you do or you can take the easy route and just bounce around and let life steer you. Your call.

Did you find this article helpful? If so, please share it with a friend. Thank you in advance.

Adam

All diagrams were made by Adam at Low Tech Combat

Opening image by planetschwa

LTC DIGEST #1 FIGHT DUB, ENTROPY, STABBED, ARROGANCE and OODA

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Fri, 14 Sep 2012 19:01:00 +0000

Welcome to the first LTC DIGEST.

There is simply too much good stuff out there that other people are doing to not let you all know about it.

This digest aims to showcase the most interesting, important and sometimes downright impressive material from around the web.

We are talking articles, posts, images, videos, news stories and more. We will try to keep it mixed up.

These LTC DIGESTs will come out irregularly. I will only publish them as enough good material comes to light. I will not be sticking to a strict timetable because that will eventually mean publishing stuff that isn't worthy.

So here is the first LTC DIGEST. I hope you like it. Let us know in the comments if you want more of these or think it is a complete waste of time.

FIGHT DUB BY ECLECTIC METHOD
First some entertainment. This one is well done.

Nice huh?

EINSTEIN

"Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving."

- Albert Einstein

HAND EYE CO-ORDINATION

Here is a cool DIY hand eye co-ordination tool. It involves attaching a tennis ball to a hat via a piece of elastic. Good stuff. Found it over at Rosstraining at the link below,

http://rosstraining.com/blog/2012/01/11/tennis-ball-reaction-training/

Further instructions are HERE.

FIGHT ENTROPY

This was an interesting one. This article found a correlation between high temperatures and high levels of violent crime incidents.

This high temperature seems to drive aggression and more Alpha Male type crimes such as assault than more Predatory type crimes.

Overall, an interesting article. Here it is,

http://www.fight-entropy.com/2012/08/high-temperatures-cause-violent-crime.html

GETTING STABBED

I shared this image recently. I think it focuses on a very important message.

If you get involved in any violent encounter, no matter how brief, check yourself for stab wounds. Many people get stabbed and don't realise because it doesn't hurt. This Russian woman didn't know until she got home and someone else saw it sticking out of her...

I wrote a detailed article about that some time ago here,

http://www.lowtechcombat.com/2010/02/can-you-be-stabbed-with-knife-and-not.html

Here's the image.

Feel free to copy and share the image around however you want.

NEWS

Man was stabbed multiple times in a car park following a road rage incident,

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/true-crime-scene/man-stabbed-in-road-rage-attack/story-fnat7jnn-1226463234867

Man mugged with knife and pliers for iPhone (plus more stories),

http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/35/34/cg_76blotters_2012_08_24_bk.html

This assault started VERY typically. Victim now fighting for life in hospital...

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/good-samaritan-hospitalised-after-bashing/story-e6frea83-1226462903377

CURE FOR ARROGANCE

Wim Demeere wrote a great article about curing arrogance in the martial arts. Wim talks about his own younger days of being perhaps too arrogant (much like most young men) then goes on to talk about some disappointments and growth along with the abundance of arrogance in the martial arts today.

A good read.

http://www.wimsblog.com/2012/08/the-cure-for-arrogance-in-the-martial-arts/

ARISTOTLE

"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit"

- Aristotle

THE BAYONET

Here's an interesting short piece about the man who lead the last major Americal bayonet charge.

http://tgace.com/2012/08/30/what-is-the-spirit-of-the-bayonet/

BODY LANGUAGE

Check it out in this image below. This image was used in the Manifesto but is worth showing here. Look at the scene. Look at the aggression and high emotions. All it takes is to walk away. Harder to do at the time than when we are comfortable but very possible all the same.

Very typical scene of Alpha Male type behaviour.

Image via McBeth

OODA AND MARTIAL EFFECTIVENESS

This is one of the best articles to be written recently.

It's very well written and basically covers the importance of harnessing all aspects of the OODA loop in training. Most of the time, we train from a position of advantage. We know what is going to happen and we act with dirty knowledge. This is not preparing us for dealing with being surprised and forced into the OBSERVE or ORIENT phase of the OODA loop.

Training should include drills where the trainee is in a position of disadvantage. This forces the student to think under pressure. This is what happens when the attacker has the element of surprise and you get caught off guard. The author feels that training in the OBSERVE and ORIENT phases and generating our own ability to speed up the loop is highly beneficial and sorely lacking in many training systems.

Highly recommended.

http://www.budo-warrior.com/?p=274

10 CRIME MYTHS

This one is a well written researched article highlighting 10 popular crime myths. The author uses hard statistics (I love that, no rubbish!), to refute each of them.

A shortish but worthwhile piece.

http://blog.metrotrends.org/2012/08/ten-popular-crime-myths/

LONELY PLANET SAFE TRAVEL TIPS

This is a great article showcasing some really good tips to follow when travelling overseas (abroad). Travelling can be much more risky for people especially when they go into a new culture and are unaware of some very different social "norms".

Good stuff from the Lonely Planet crew.

http://www.lonelyplanet.com/asia/travel-tips-and-articles/76192

THOUGHTS?

So that's our first LTC DIGEST. What do you think of it? What would you like to see more of?

Let us know in the comments below so we know whether to keep putting these together or cut it away completely.

Regards,

Adam

Are Combat Sports a Waste of Time for Self Defence?

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Tue, 21 Aug 2012 08:29:00 +0000

This is a key topic of dispute.

Are the combat sports useful for self defence?

Or are they a complete waste of time?

I was reading the Budo Blog the other day which sometimes has really interesting articles and is well worth checking out. One of the recent articles was about an experience of one of the students of the editor for Budo Blog Kasey Keckeisen who is a police officer and martial arts instructor.

I found the article interesting and generally found myself agreeing overall except for one point. Kasey argued that training in the combat sports was of little use in self defence and was a waste of time. This point I disagree with and will go over sections of the article and detail the reasons why I disagree.

"A predator will use tactics he has developed to get what he wants from you in the safest surest manor. This is in no way a “fair fight”. The predator will take every advantage using speed, surprise and ferocity to prevent you from responding in any way that could be effective in stopping him."

Very true. I have no issues with this. This is as what has previously been written in "The Two Faces of Combatives" as well as “The Most Dangerous Animal” and numerous other works.

Predator vs Sport Fighting

Kasey then goes on to talk about using combat sport approaches to self defence against predatory attacks.

"It (combat sports) is a sport because it is hard work. You have to give the opponent a sorting chance. Weight classes, separate brackets for the different genders, different age categories etc, all to make things as fair as possible.
Skill is demonstrated by gaining dominance over someone in the same “class” using ineffective methods."

I agree with most of the above except that last bit “using ineffective methods”. Is an arm drag to get to the back “ineffective”? Is a rear naked choke “ineffective”? Is a big right hand to the chin that knocks an opponent out “ineffective”? Is a Thai clinch then knees “ineffective”?

Ineffective?

I think I know what Kasey means by this. Fighters cannot pull out a knife or shoot an opponent dead. Fighters cannot eye gauge or kick to the groin or use other banned techniques. However I feel this is an old argument that throws the baby out with the bath water.

Combat sports (such as mma) training develops far more than teaching somebody a hand full of “banned and lethal” techniques. And I am not trying to take away from Kaseys article overall just the section that the combat sports are a waste of time for self defence.

It's about the Base

MMA training develops a solid base. It develops as strong a foundation as will ever be needed for building any structure onto. MMA training develops the ability to get into an advantageous position. This is possibly the biggest benefit to training in MMA. This is often glossed over yet is so important.

It doesn't matter what techniques you know and intend to apply, if you try to apply them from a poor position with an opponent being in a dominant position, your technique will probably fail and you will give the aggressor an opening to go for and an incentive to attack you harder.

The other aspect MMA type training develops is (wait for it), Aliveness. I know many people hate on the term the same way some people hate on Apple. Regardless, the term articulates and captures very well the meaning which is the ability to flow from one position and/or technique to another against a resisting opponent. This is also so important. Real violence is dynamic so should training be. The training methods used in MMA develops this Aliveness.

Yes, fighters in combat sport matches are evenly matched. The argument against this implies that it is not really that important to be able to defeat an attacker the same size, the goal is to defeat a bigger attacker.

But I have a simple question to ask about this claim.

Bigger not Smaller?

If you cannot defeat someone in the same weight class (as in sport matches), how on earth should you expect to defeat somebody much bigger? There is no way to bypass people the same size and move straight onto bigger people. Sure you cannot use strength against a bigger attacker. Agree.

But arguing that the skills learnt in sport fighting cannot be transferred to larger people is flawed. Remember the early UFCs? I remember seeing a sport fighter under very few rules knock down and stop a large sumo fighter through simple effective striking techniques. I also remember seeing a skinny Brazilian defeat many larger opponents.

These two examples were when the rules were that basically the only thing not allowed was attacks on the eyes and inside the mouth. And these fights were when the overall skill level and corporate knowledge within the MMA world was nowhere near the level it is today.

Yes no weapons were used but this an argument that the combat sports are an effective unarmed combat methodology. Attacks against the eyes can easily be added into an arsenal from a solid base.

Single not Multiple

Another argument used against the combat sports are it is simply one on one and no other combatants are involved. This is true. But if you cannot efficiently defeat just one opponent, how do you think you can defeat more than one at the same time? I am not saying that combat sports are the end game in town, they are just an excellent base to build from.

"Cheat for the purposes of this blog meaning not getting sucked into a fair fight mindset."

Very true. Though I think it is underestimating sport fighters to think that they will play by competition rules in a self defence situation. MMA is a sport and the training method is a very effective means of training in hand to hand combat to a very hard and realistic manner safely. It is just training.

Scaling a Response

From a dominant position, they can choose any technique they want. They can scale a response. If it is just an angry and frustrated uncle at a party, they can hold them down and slap them around a little. If it is a group of four intent on hurting them, they can rip eyes out and stomp.

In today's world where legal use of force is so important, having the ability to scale a response is vital. Having only “lethal” tools in the arsenal is a risky game, legally. This is another key benefit to using the combat sports as a self defence base.

"I bet every hardass Military, Cop, Martial Arts Man reading this would have a hard time if ambushed by surprise by Brock Lesner. Yet that discrepancy in size, strength, and ferocity is what every woman faces with every man they encounter."

Very true and good point. To me this is highlighting the importance of the competent use of weapons rather than that combat sports training is somehow a poor form of unarmed combat.

Encountering a Large Aggressor

There are very few if any high percentage unarmed combat approaches to defeating an attacker on the street the size of Brock Lesner with his aggression who has the element of surprise. This is where weapons are needed (and of course awareness and avoidance but I am trying to stick with combative responses).

I agree you need to cheat and use every tool in the arsenal in such situations. But these are best applied from a neutral or dominant position as trying them from being mounted is still a bad idea.

Manoeuvring and Escaping

What is more important is getting out of being mounted. Do this any way possible. Going for eyes can free up space and reaction time to bridge and roll or escape the hips out. Combat sports skills are important here in this bad self defence situation.

Escaping from a bad position including from a position of rape is vital for females. Combat sports training is very beneficial here as well when talking about female self defence.

"Don’t get me wrong women still need physical skills, but don’t waste their (or your) time with stuff that only works in their weight class against women of a similar age."

I feel this point is again missing the key benefits of combat sports training. It is about getting to a dominant position. It is about getting out of bad positions and situations. It is about applying a scaled response. If you cannot apply these things against someone the same size you cannot go past go and collect your 200 dollars and go straight to larger attackers.

Plan B

The other key trait combat sports training develops is the ability to have a plan B. It is about going from plan B to C to D and so on. You will not panic or be lost when a technique is attempted and fails. Combat sports develops the ability to go from one thing to the next to the next with little delay or thought.

There is no avoiding the fact that defeating a larger attacker is very difficult. I don't feel that applying a scaled response from a dominant position (or escaping from a poor one) which is what the combat sports allows is a waste of time.

"Fuck fair fights, fuck sportsmanship - get that out of their head."

Very true! Again, it is throwing the baby out with the bath water. Combat sports is a training methodology. Those who train in combat sports for self defence will not stick to the rules in a real violent struggle. They will scale their responses as needed.

Training and Real Thing

I think it is important to not underestimate combat sports athletes in self defence situations. Yes you fight how you train. However combat sports athletes have trained under harsh and stressful conditions for so long that they have become inoculated to many of the stresses of combat and can think when engaged in combat. They can choose to slap, punch or rip.

I am not saying all combat sports athletes think in this manner. They probably do not. I am just saying that somebody keen on learning self defence skills can easily apply this approach and gain the benefits of training in a combat sport such as MMA.

"Work on physical skills that exploit these weaknesses, very high end use of force skills to end the attacker / the confrontation quickly. Including the use of close quarters weapons, edged weapons, fire arms ect."

I agree with this. But when talking about an unarmed approach, this does not highlight any deficiencies in the combat sports. In fact an excellent training provider ISR Matrix builds on combat sport skill sets and builds on top weapons use and small team tactics.

Overall it may sound like I did not agree with the article though I thoroughly enjoyed reading it and agreed with the overall intent of the piece. I just disagree about the shortfalls of the combat sports in self defence training.

Combat Sports in Self Defence

I recommend firstly trying to avoid violence which readers and subscribers of Low Tech Combat will be well aware of. Then if that is not possible, de-escalate a developing situation. Then if that is not possible, I am not recommending “fighting” the aggressor such as what is seen in the UFC.

I recommend applying an appropriate use of force in the sneakyest most deceitful way possible. This can be by verbally deceiving an aggressor or responding to an attacking technique you can read or some other response. Up to this point, this is where you attempt your best self defence approaches from verbal through to physical.

But what happens if your technique fails? Hopefully you have a transition to move into. But what if that fails? After all, your shoes aren't the best and the ground is slippery and you were caught off guard.

It is about this point where combat sports skills come into play. Once an encounter has gone beyond a few seconds you need “fighting” skills to fall back on. Again, I am not talking about going toe to toe like a UFC champ, it is simply using a fighting base to apply appropriate self defence responses.

Can you get to an advantageous position? Can you escape from a terrible position? These grappling skills will also enable you to disengage and flea if this is possible or even restrain. This is the short version of how I see the combat sports being of benefit in self defence.

Taking it Further

The training methods found in the combat sports generally follow the progression of learning a technique until competence is gained. This technique is then drilled easily at first and then further developed possibly introducing transitions depending on how the opponent responds. These drills are then progressed into a form of sparring which isolates that element of combat. Later full sparring is carried out.

We should also use this training methodology for all self defence. Techniques should be learnt. Once competence has been gained, they should be drilled and the drills expanded. Once a certain level of proficiency has been gained simple self defence scenarios should be introduced which harness those skills. The scenarios can then expand starting from a situation that evolves with a threat in the distance then closer introducing verbal elements then physical then if the situation is not resolved as planned the scenario continues.

Scenarios involving defence against weapons and use of weapons can also be included in this way.

The intensity of these self defence scenarios can be scaled as too much too soon can harm progress. So combat sports training methodologies utilising the strengths of the combat sports can be used for more specific self defence training.

I recommend hopping over to Budo Blog and reading the original article if you haven't yet as the article contained more than this one aspect I have focused on.

What are your thoughts? Are the combat sports a good or bad choice for developing self defence skills?

Image by MartialArtsNomad

13 Commonly Believed Myths About Self Defence BUSTED!

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 01:14:00 +0000

There are many Myths believed about self defence.

Some are absolutely WRONG. Others are not too bad but over simplify issues. These Myths try to get us to stop thinking for ourselves.

Some are more widespread than others. This largely comes down to people teaching who don’t know any better. It can come down to untrained people just spreading bad information.

There are simply too many Myths out there that need busting.

A key problem is the internet. Too often, poor ideas are taught to a large audience which gains traction and poor instruction spreads this way. McDojo’s are also a significant problem (see also here, here and here).

Who really knows how these 13 commonly believed Myths about self defence come from? The fact is, they are out there.

We are here to BUST them! Now let’s get busting!

1. Never walk around with your hands in your pockets

This idea comes from the opinion that you should always be ready to defend yourself, at all times. If your hands are in your pockets you cannot react quickly enough. Worse still, someone could come up behind you and get you in a bear hug with your hands trapped in your pockets. Now what?

But how likely is it really that you will be attacked suddenly when out shopping at the local mall in the middle of the day? When you are walking to the gym on a cold winters morning should you not put your hands in your pockets because you may be attacked at any moment?

The risk of attack is not enduring. It is not constant. It is not the same everywhere and at every place. There is a time and place for everything.

Saying that you should never have your hands in your pockets at any time is being extremely paranoid. That is being hyper alert. You simply cannot maintain such a level of alertness for too long without visiting the local psychologist.

There may be some times and some places where for a few moments or even an hour or just while you are moving through an area, that you should take your hands out of your pockets. That can be a smart thing to do.

But it does NOT mean we should always be on high alert for a violent attack. There are high risk times and places and low risk times and places. Simply act accordingly. So yes, feel free to slide your hands in your pockets when you feel the risk is low. When the risk of attack is higher, take them out. Simple.

Do not turn off your brain. Think for yourself. It is all a part of being aware of your surroundings.

Myth #1 BUSTED.

2. Never walk around with your earphones in

This is similar to the hands in pockets Myth. The theory goes that when you have ear phones in listening to music or a podcast, you are unaware of your surroundings. You could easily be marked and attacked.

But everywhere? What about on the bus in the morning and you know who everyone is? You see them every day. Same on the train. Ahh but what if someone from a rear carriage moves through? Possible. What if you sit at the back of the carriage so as anyone moves into the carriage you see them from the side? Could you just take them out then if necessary?

What about walking down the street? It would depend on the street and time of day. It all comes down to risk. If you spend time considering when and where is a higher risk for mugging type attacks, do not wear them then. Same thing for pickpocket type attacks. If you deem an area to be low risk, feel free to enjoy your music. It is just basic and rudimentary risk management. There is risk everywhere. But not high risk everywhere. Unless you live in a really bad area.

So maybe you choose to wear them on the bus, take them off as you go through the quiet area to the mall then put them back in as you walk through to work. There is no reason to never listen to music when out and about. Just be smart about it and at least consider the risk.

Again, just use your brain and consider these things. Do not let a stupid myth do your thinking for you.

Myth #2 BUSTED.

3. Don’t get eye contact with an attacker

The theory goes that you may antagonize a possible attacker. But what type of attacker? An Alpha Male or a Predator? For an Alpha Male you probably WOULD antagonize the situation. But for a Predator, you may just signal to him that he has lost the element of surprise and you are aware of his game.

Avoiding eye contact to a Predator will simply give off victim signals to him. It is not about staring the Predator down, it is just about noticing the Predator. This combined with looking around calmly and scanning your surroundings will likely result in the Predator seeing you as a difficult mark, so he will likely let you through his hunting ground.

So while staring at an Alpha Male can be a bad idea, avoiding eye contact with a Predator can also be a bad idea. So this rule is not a universal truth. Like most things, there is a time and place.

Another ill informed myth that tries to get people to stop thinking for themselves.

Myth #3 BUSTED.

4. Keys are an excellent improvised weapon

You’ve heard this one. On your way to your car in the car park, hold your keys a certain way so that if you are attacked, you can use them as a weapon. But just what do you think you are going to do with keys? You will probably cut an attacker open and cause a whole lot of their blood to cover you, that is for sure. Anyone think a mugger may have some blood borne diseases? Possible drug habit maybe?

But the aim of using physical force is to stop an attacker. Not cut them open with tiny flesh wounds. Fighting back at all may be enough to cause an attacker to cease his assault. In this case it doesn’t really matter too much what you use, as long as you fight back hard.

But for a more committed attacker, keys do not have much stopping or destructive power. They do not really offer a length advantage either. I’ve said it before that it would probably be a better option to go for an open palm strike to the chin. Such a strike to a high chance knock out point has a better chance of stopping an attacker than a fist full of keys.

Keys simply do not offer enough advantages over empty hand options to be considered a worthwhile weapon. And this was discussed recently when I spoke about the 5 Best Improvised Weapons in the World.

Myth #4 BUSTED.

5. Grappling with a knife attacker is suicide

This myth sees people stating that you should never grapple with a knife attacker. Such a thing is suicide. But let’s think this through. A knife attacker wants to strike you with it. It could be either a stab or slash, but most likely a stab of some kind. To do this they need to thrust it into you. This is a striking movement.

What is a good option in an unarmed context against a skilled striker? Get inside their striking techniques and grapple with them. This minimizes their ability to use their strikes effectively. Everyone knows going toe to toe with a skilled boxer is a bad idea. They will clean you up. You are playing their game. Closing and grappling is what they want to avoid.

So how is grappling a knife wielding attacker bad? Would such a myth believer feel it is better to go toe to toe with a knife attacker? Crazy. But many people believe this myth. The only way to stop a knife attacker from stabbing you (beside running away or being too far away), is to control the knife bearing limb. This involves elements of grappling. See here, here, here and here for evidence of this.

So it is not suicide, it is actually the best option.

Myth #5 BUSTED.

6. Always run away from a mugger

Seems fair enough. But it depends. Running away is good because it gives you distance from them and any edged or impact weapons they may have. Legally, it is smart as well. But there are times when it can be dangerous.

The main time this would not be the best option is when two things happen. One, you are in an area with a high rate of firearms use. Or you see one. The other factor is if you try running without giving them what they want such as your wallet or iPhone.

If you try to run without giving them what they are after, you risk being shot in the back. These two cases happened within a couple of days of each other and demonstrate this point.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/man-shot-muggers-refuses-give-iphone-article-1.1012734

http://www.dnainfo.com/20120124/south-bronx/muggers-shot-at-victim-four-times-robbery-attempt-police-say

Not surprisingly, both cases were in the US. One was hit with one well aimed shot and the other one was shot at four times but they all missed.

Yes running can be a very smart thing to do. But if firearms are likely or confirmed, throw down whatever it is they want prior to running off. They will likely be happy they have what they are after and will not try to shoot you as the risk will not be worth the gain to them. But if you hold onto that wallet or iPhone and flee, it may well be worth the risk as those two cases demonstrate.

There is also the ethical and morale aspects of what do you do if there are more than one of you being mugged?

Do you abandon them and save yourself?

It all depends doesn’t it. Who are those you are with (wife, children, friend, acquaintance, stranger), how many attackers, are they armed, are you totally out gunned and outnumbered, is it better to get away and call the police etc.

So running can be a smart thing to do, but consider the other aspects to it. It is not a blanket rule. Again, another simplistic myth that ignores many aspects of smart self defence.

Myth #6 BUSTED.

7. An attacker on the street will attack you like your co-operating training partner

This one is obviously a terrible myth. Most people know attackers do not attack like what happens during one and three step sparring. But they train that way. They may also do free sparring. So it is two parties who are already fighting (a mutually agreed fight on the street is illegal in most places by the way). There is nothing in between. An attacker will not step forward and punch and then stop. But thousands of people train that way and claim it as self defence.

A knife attacker will not step forward and thrust a knife straight at your abdomen and then stop there. But that is how thousands of people train knife defence. An attacker will NOT wait until you are ready and then do an attack of which you know what it will be. But that is how thousands of people train. Tens or hundreds of thousands probably.

There is nothing wrong with training that way initially. Skills need to be developed. That is one way skills can be developed. But for the vast majority of people, the training never progresses beyond that. And that is what the real problem is. At least some of the time, towards the end of a training progression, students need to be attacked in similar ways as what a real attacker will attack them like. It doesn’t have to be all or nothing. It should gradually progress up to a point.

This is so important. It is vital.

An obvious myth but thousands around the world continue to believe this. It is evident in their actions.

Myth #7 BUSTED.

8. Two against one sparring is the best multiple attacker training

Many people see two on one sparring as very difficult and very useful multiple attack training. And it is difficult. No argument there. But I have news for you.

Three or four or more attackers are FAR more likely than just two attackers (see also here). Two on one attacks happen only rarely so it is almost a waste of time to prepare for them. Multiple attack situations are far more dynamic in real life than just two on one.

Two on one sparring is not enough. It should only be used as a progression to three or four or more attacker scenarios. Maybe sparring is not the best idea. It is likely too difficult. But realistic scenarios involving many people would probably be a good idea.

Two on one sparring is not really of much use. That is the cold hard truth of multiple attacks in real life.

Myth #8 BUSTED.

9. The most dangerous knife attacker will hold the knife out in front and threaten you with it in a menacing manner

Systems that mostly teach knife defence with an attacking student displaying the knife out in front are mimicking what could be termed as the least lethal knife attacker. Generally when a person displays a knife to threaten, they only intend to threaten with it.

Just give them what they want and they will likely go on their way. It is unlikely they will attack you from there unless you say or do something very stupid. So practicing to defend against a knife attacker in this way is almost a complete waste of time.

The most lethal type of knife attack is one where the victim never sees the knife, at least until after they have already been stabbed. This usually occurs during an argument. The victim will usually think they have just peen punched. Often, the victim will be stabbed by a knife and not realize it because they do not feel any pain beyond feeling like they were punched.

So training to watch peoples hands during an escalating encounter is smart. Look for reaching under the shirt, behind the back etc. This is the most dangerous form of knife user. If they are being sneaky about pulling it out it is because they want to stab you with it without you realizing. They will not flash it around so you know they have it.

Myth #9 BUSTED.

10. You need to know two or three different counters to each type of attacking technique

This myth is usually born out of systems with a very large repertoire of techniques or a large syllabus. They need to justify all of their flashy moves with using different counters for each attacking technique. It looks good in a class but does nothing for developing a students ability to apply an effective technique against an attacker under stress and possibly being surprised and overwhelmed.

The best approach is to use one or two counter techniques for as many attacking techniques as possible. This is so that under pressure, there is less to think about. Not just logical conscious thinking but for the reflexes and muscle memory. Hicks Law states that the fewer actions to process the quicker and more appropriate the response is likely to be. A persons reaction to an attack takes longer when one possible counter belongs to a large set of possibilities rather than a smaller set.

Although some respected instructors debate the relevancy of Hicks Law, the fact is fewer options from a smaller bank is better. I think even Hock would agree with that. This also frees up our ‘bandwidth’ to deal with new unexpected information as this would leave us less likely to be overwhelmed than it would if we had a large selection of techniques that needed considering.

Although those hundreds of different scripted techniques may look good and impressive to new students, they are largely a waste; Especially when it comes to being able to apply techniques against a resisting attacker under stress.

Myth #10 BUSTED.

11. You will perform better under stress due to the increase in adrenaline and quicker responses etc.

This is largely the belief of younger students. They think that under the stress of the real thing, they will perform better and be stronger and quicker because of adrenaline. It makes sense in theory but does not work in the real world. We do not rise to the occasion, we sink below our abilities of even our training level.

There are no shortcuts or excuses for poor training or conditioning. In a real encounter, you will not think clearly, you will tire quicker, you will not move as well, you will not be as clean and smooth.

Ask any fighter about this. They will tell you the same. Fights are always harder than training, unless you have a great match against someone who you were simply an overmatch for. And a ring fight is organised and the fighters know it is coming. Add to that stress a surprise real life and death self defence situation and our abilities will further deteriorate.

You may initially have more strength than normal but this will quickly pump out and you will have hands and feet of concrete. I hope for believers of this myth that all of your encounters are very short and are broken up quickly.

About the only thing that will serve you well, is your resistance to pain. Most other effects will be more pronounced and will drop your ability to think and perform fine motor skills.

Luckily this myth is dying off but there are still many who believe this. It is simply wrong.

Myth # 11 BUSTED.

12. You should ‘finish’ an attacker after you have taken them down.

So you have taken your attacker down so you finish them off with an arm break or a few punches to the face and head. After all, that is what you do in training right?

Except someone walked around the corner mid encounter and began videoing it with their smart phone. They didn’t see how it all began. What will the video see? You beating someone down and assaulting them while they were held to the ground.

You can explain yourself. It won’t matter.

When that person was on the ground, they were no longer a threat to you. You continued to use force after the threat had stopped.

This is important. Do not use finishing moves in training. Especially after doing a knife disarm. Cutting a throat is murder. If you continue to use ‘finishing’ moves, please say hello to my cousin Bubba for me when you meet him. Sooner or later, you will.

Myth #12 BUSTED.

13. Your attacker on the street is going to be untrained and easy to beat

Here is our final myth. This was recently discussed by Iain Abernethy and Wim. Let us first look at the two components that make a threat. One is capability, the other is intent. And I will get back to this point soon enough. Now let’s look at the likely attacker. He may or may not have had some ‘fight’ training. Considering the circles an attacker would likely surround himself in, there would probably be some type of ‘corporate knowledge’ of what type of attacks work and what do not. They would also know some ‘tricks’ of the trade.

The other thing to consider is that your attacker is not going to walk up to you and ask you to fight and then wait for you to agree and you both take up fighting stances and crack on. His form of attack is not ring fighting. It is attacking. And there are two main types of attack as I am sure everyone who reads Low Tech Combat would know.

One is an Alpha Male who starts off very emotional and does not attempt to hide his intent to start a fight with you. Things will start verbal. Adrenalisation will occur. In this state, the attacker will probably have one or two key ‘street moves’ that only he and a few friends will know about.

I remember one tough street fighter acquaintance from my younger days who had a secret move he would always do. He was left handed. He would stand in a right handed stance with right arm back. Most people would assume he was right handed. As things evolved during the argument and posturing leading up to a fight, he would wind back his right arm slightly in an apparent wind up to punch with his right. He would make it slightly obvious so people would fixate on that right hand. As he seemed to be launching that right hand he was in fact winding up his left, strong side. Just prior to landing that right which people would fixate, flinch and react to, he would launch his heavy left hand and in most cases drop the person . Either way he would continue on with a massive flurry of punches. Very difficult to come back from for the other person.

The other is the Predator. He will hide his intent. He will not try to pick a fight with you. He may want to mug you of your wallet or phone. He will be in his area and he will be scanning for prey. When you go through his area, you will probably not be ready for it. He has set the scene. He will be judging and assessing you. You will be unaware of this. He may ask you a question. You may be surprised. He will see this and pull out his knife as you are looking at your watch to tell him the time.

So in both of these instances, who is REALLY the biggest threat for the most likely real violent encounter? I would say the other guy is. You may be better at ring fighting but this is not the ring. This is their arena.

The other guy has probably been in more of these situations. They know what happens. They initiate the scripts used. They have the initiative. They are controlling the situation. They may have armed themselves prior. This increases their capability. They may have friends with them. This increases their capability.

They have also been the ones who have decided to target you. They have made that decision to attack you. They have selected you for a reason. They believe they can beat you. They want to beat you down or they want what you have. It may seriously be a case of survival for them. They NEED your wallet or phone so they can sell it to buy drugs and maybe a bit of food as well. You will be under pressure. They will be less so.

The untrained attacker will likely have higher capability and intent for their game in their arena. This is why they do not walk into boxing gyms and challenge fighters there. They know they will be outclassed. Likewise, we shouldn’t claim we have more capability at their game. When we understand this, we can better prepare ourselves and increase our own capabilities and intent in their game.

Until then, it will be a tough ask. Hopefully you get some weak unarmed loner who made a poor decision.

A career criminal will not be easy. Just another reason to use awareness, avoidance and de-escalation yeah?

Myth #13 BUSTED.

Summary

So there we have it. 13 Myths about Self Defence BUSTED. The aim of this article was to highlight to you that there are few blanket rules that we should follow blindly. Any instructor who espouses such Myths has simply stopped thinking for themselves and wants their students to stop thinking as well.

There are few easy blanket rules. In this game of Low Tech Combat you will need to keep your mind open and keep thinking. Rules should not do your thinking for you.

If you come across others who are pushing these Myths you may want to let them know that things are not so easy.

What are some other Self Defence Myths you want to BUST? Let us know in the comments below.

Disagree with what you have read here? Let the world know by adding your thoughts in the comments below.

Regards,

Adam

Image by Dan Finnen

The Warrior is Dead, Long Live the Warrior

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 04:34:00 +0000

When you type in the query “What is a Warrior” to Google, you get over 25,000,000 results. Yes, that’s twenty-five million.

And yet it is still such a disputed topic.

Many argue about what a warrior is and is not.

Some argue that only a man that has fought in a war and returned is a warrior. Others say a brave child who has fought off cancer is a warrior.

There are many other classifications and strong opinions on what may be allowed to be defined as a warrior and what must not be.

Others profusely despise the term in its entirety. The term has lost all meaning in the 21st century pop culture where young men learn their morales from day time soap operas and shiny movies whilst drinking soft drink and eating fairy floss.

Such people believe the term has been both over romanticized and distilled down into a feel good term that can be attached to anyone who shows basic goodness.

Let's get to the bottom of this...

So What is a Warrior?

Let’s begin by looking at the Dictionary term. And herein lies the first difference...

Warrior

1. a person engaged or experienced in warfare; soldier.

2. a person who shows or has shown great vigor, courage, or aggressiveness, as in politics or athletics.

Quite a difference.

The first definition is the more traditional meaning of word warrior. The second is more modern. The second definition is quite broad. Almost any professional football player or ice hockey player in the world is therefore a warrior. Then again, anyone who has ever started a fight out the front of a pub could be called a warrior. Especially if they made a big song and dance of it with lots of yelling, chest puffing, veins popping and scene making.

But is that really accurate? Does it even matter? We will get onto that later...

The term warrior was believed to have first been used in the 13th or 14th Century in England or France for “one who wages war”.

That fits in more neatly with the first definition. It is the more traditional. But is that being elitist? Is it fair to ignore everyone who has never been to war?

Warrior Ethos

Steven Pressfield (author of one of my favourite books, Gates of Fire- Amazon link), eloquently talks about the warrior ethos. He is more broad in his acceptance of what a warrior is. Pressfield explains his opinion:

“It’s you and me, as we fight the daily battle against our inner demons of self-sabotage, self-betrayal, self-doubt and so forth—not to mention the real, external foes we must contend with in our art, our businesses, and our personal lives...”

Pressfield does raise numerous interesting questions that delve deeply into the topic. He asks questions such as:

“What ethic does he fight for? Is a code of honour necessary? If so, where are its tenets?How does it arise? Is it something we have to be indoctrinated with by mentors and elders? Or does it arise spontaneously, summoned by the exigencies of the struggle and the imperatives of the human heart?”

Interesting questions. Go and have a look at Pressfield’s writings at the link provided above. They certainly add to the discussion.

In the first example I showcased above of Pressfield’s article on warrior ethos, he includes many aspects of what I feel are simply areas we all struggle with in life in general.

There are some key things missing from Pressfield’s writings as to what a person who goes to ‘war’ experiences. The very real and immediate risk you may be killed. Not just shot but turned into pink mist or have body parts shred away from your body. The very real and immediate risk of your best friend next to you being killed by another human violently is also present.

Life is not easy. Life is hard. We all go through hardships. That much is true. But that does not mean we are all warriors.

We are however, all human.

Those areas Pressfield mentions makes it sound to me that he is describing what humans deal with in this thing called life. Day time television hides the aspects of life that we all struggle with. It hides those dirty and unpleasant areas away. It ignores them. But real struggles remain. That is life.

So I think Pressfield’s thoughts on the warrior ethos are interesting, though misplaced. I feel Pressfield is too generous with the term warrior and that takes away from the meaning of the word. I will explain why I feel that way as this article progresses.

Here is another example of someone who believes that a warrior can be anyone. Here is a sample of their opinions of what a warrior is:

“Military organizations are made up of real warriors. Police and fire organizations are full of them. Many of todays martial artists would qualify for "warrior status".Even though it may seem that I am only equating fighting/military/police with a warrior I am not. Anyone regardless of profession can be one. It is a mindset.”

I disagree completely and I will highlight one key difference for now, more will become clear later in the article.

Mindset?

The mindset of a warrior involves being prepared to actively and consciously kill another human being. To kill efficiently, and as part of a team. Not just for self defence. They need to also be prepared for people who may quite likely choose to actively and consciously kill them.

This is not something anyone regardless of profession needs to deal with. This is an intense, confronting yet necessary aspect of being a warrior. The day may never come, but a warrior must always be prepared for it.

There are many tough and challenging aspects of life that most people deal with that warriors also need to deal with as well. But not everyone needs to deal with the very necessary aspect of being able to kill or be killed. That is unique to the warrior.

A human may stumble across violence from time to time, but a warrior is expected to live in it from time to time.

From a Police Officer’s Perspective

tgace offers his own definition of what a warrior is. tgace is an experienced police officer so his thoughts are from that perspective. Here is tgace’s definition of what a warrior is, summarised:

“I believe a true “Warrior” is someone who fights our enemies and puts his/her ass on the line for something bigger than himself ... Sporting events and dancing around in a dojo, or strutting around a gunrange in your 5.11′s and thigh holster doesn’t count. Many people want all the glory with none of the sacrifice and risk … as in risking your very life ... Just because someone wants to be a Warrior doesn’t make them one IMO ... a person leaping into the fantasy of “being” a warrior who just happens to really be a guy who works at the Best Buy help desk and goes to class 2X a week is a bit lame IMO.”

Fairly hard core and straight down the line. I think one of the keys here in tgaces definition is fighting for “something bigger than himself”. This type of differentiation comes up again and again when talking about a warrior.

It hits on a key point.

Samurai - Warriors

This is perhaps a good time to talk about Samurai. In some circles Warriors and Samurai are spoken of in similar ways. After all, a Samurai is widely accepted as being a warrior. One area that crosses over is one of the ‘higher purpose’. I need to note right here that I am no expert on Samurai. I will attempt to only touch on basics. If I am wrong about any of this, please correct me in the comments below.

Samurai were Warriors who 'Served'

From the earliest times, Samurai felt that their path was the path of the warrior. That path was one of honour, emphasizing duty to ones master, and loyalty until death. We can see that tgace is talking about the same thing here. The actual term, Samurai, roughly translates to “those who serve”.

In the Samurai days, this was talking about serving in military forces, under daimyos and emperors. The ultimate purpose of a Samurai was to fight and die for a master. Not just a person calling himself a master who ran a class (like we see today), but heads of armies. This is the ‘higher purpose’ of a Samurai and Warrior.

Knights - Warriors

The purpose of a Knight was also to ‘serve’. A knight was:

“a mounted soldier serving under a feudal superior in the middle ages.”

or (depending on time), was also

“usually of noble birth, who after an apprenticeship as page and squire was raised to honorable military rank and bound to chivalrous conduct.”

There are common themes coming through.

Serving for a higher purpose in a combative element.

Knights were Warriors who 'Served'

Today, “something bigger than the self” could be seen as serving the community through policing or defending a country through military service. This is todays ‘higher purpose’, much like what the Samurai and Knights sought to do.

And this is one key factor that comes up frequently when discussing what a warrior is and is not.

Does this mean that all police officers and military members are warriors? Definitely not.

Police and Military members are motivated by a number of different things and ability varies:

Some are just incompetent.
Some are corrupt.
Some are motivated by the money or the job security.
Many do not actually do the ‘fighting’.

Anyone who does not actually go out and do the job, on the ground, is automatically not a warrior.

Simple.

Whilst not all police and military members etc. are warriors, it is still only those few from such groups that can be labelled a warrior, so far from what we have covered. It is only those who serve, who serve for the purpose of serving, and serve well, that are warriors.

What about Mercenaries?

A Mercenary is:

“a person who takes part in an armed conflict based on the promise of material compensation rather than having a direct interest in, or a legal obligation to, the conflict itself. A non-conscript professional member of a regular army is not considered to be a mercenary although he gets monetary reward from his service.”

The Geneva Conventions defines a Mercenary as being:

“motivated to take part in the hostilities essentially by the desire for private gain and, in fact, is promised, by or on behalf of a party to the conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar ranks and functions in the armed forces of that Party”

This is where I feel things get blurry and much emotion can cloud a person’s thinking process. I have some questions.

Person A is in the armed forces of Country A. Person A does not agree with a military campaign that Country A is embarking on. But Person A goes to the campaign anyway because military laws say they must. Are they motivated to serve? No.

Person B is part of a Private Military Company (PMC). Person B believes in his heart that the campaign Country A is embarking on is the right thing to do. Person B is sent to the same campaign as Person A and works there. Are they motivated to serve??? Yes.

Is either Person A or B a warrior? Person A is ‘serving’ but they do not want to. Person B is not ‘serving’ technically but they believe in what they are doing. So is this not really serving? Surely.

So is not person B the real warrior here? Person A may be a soldier but we have seen that not all soldiers are warriors. In many places soldiers are conscripted into service. Are these people warriors? It would depend. There can be no way of generalizing here. Some do it only because they must. Others would greatly enjoy what they do and will stay on for life. Some would be warriors and others would simply be conscripts.

Mercenaries or Warriors?

What about people who join the military for the money???

They are soldiers, they are not mercenaries but are they warriors? Are they actually mercenaries in uniform? They are motivated by money after all. Isn’t this the clear difference in all definitions of mercenaries? Mercenaries are motivated by money. It is almost a loophole that military members cannot be called mercenaries.

This is where I feel that motivations for ‘serving’ become important. A soldier who is not serious about his profession is not a warrior. A mercenary who is serious about ‘serving’ for the right reasons can still be a warrior.

What of the soldiers who feel very strongly about a campaign that their own country is not doing anything about? What if there is genocide occurring somewhere, the soldier is frustrated at their country not deploying so they discharge and seek to go as a mercenary and do the job that a nations army should be doing? Are they a mercenary? Yes. Is this bad? No. Are they a warrior? Yes.

There is no black or white.

What about the Combat Sports?

Mohammed Ali. Royce Gracie. Are they warriors? Not going by the previous definitions. What are they then? What are people who actually fight others? Surely they are warriors? They DO the action.

I will offer my thoughts on the matter:

What are people who compete in combat sports? Fighters.

What are those who fight full time as a profession? Professional fighters.

What are the best fighters? Champions.

Simple.

These are very accurate terms. They are fair as well. Ask a champion if they ever felt that all of their team mates and themselves may end up dead at any moment. Or that a poor decision could see an entire family (or village, or town, or city or country) ruined. They will probably say no. It is combat yes. No doubt. It can be brutal one on one combat as well.

Fighters not Warriors

But it is still organized sports. Do they do the job day in and day out to serve their country or community? NO. They generally do it to become Champions. It is for their glory and their clubs glory.

And that is not to take anything away from it. They are excellent combat sports athletes. They are tough sports who make tough fighters and champions.

The definitions for what a warrior consists of is becoming clear by now and fighters are not warriors.

Actually to clarify, being a fighter does not make you a warrior. Though a warrior can be a fighter. Make sense?

I can understand why some people feel that they are warriors or would want to be a warrior. It is only natural in young men.

tgace talks about the phenomena of the warrior:

“Many people, mostly male, have that desire to be a “warrior”. To be a “man amongst men”, to be the one that people look to when the chips are down. “Feared by men..loved by women” yadda yadda.”

I think it is only natural that the male species would have some type of deeply felt desire to be ‘combative’ or capable when it comes to inflicting violence on other men. I think it would be unlikely to find any species of animal where this is not the case.

It would likely be evident in any animal species that has survived and evolved for the length of time humans have. I only hope as society changes and these types of things are being ‘bred out’ that we do not lose this trait entirely.

Our species may find itself in trouble otherwise.

What about Cleaning Dogshit?

Police can be Warriors

Rory Miller has written an example of what he thinks a warrior is. It is simple and certainly not romantic. Rory explains in the article:

“Doing dangerous things because they need to be done isn't noble or heroic. It doesn't come from a sense of great passion. It doesn't come from a tortured soul or any of the motivations that writers try to imagine.

It is exactly like cleaning up dogshit.

There's a steaming pile of dogshit in a public place and most people just walk on by, pretending not to see it. A few will get indignant: "Someone should do something." The worst won't even clean up after their own dogs...

But a few, a very few clean up dogshit when they see it. Not because it is noble. Not because it resonates with knights on white horses. Not because it is fun and exciting. Not to save the maiden. Because it needs to be done, and if they don't do it, no one will. And if no one cleans it up, sooner or later the dogshit will get tracked everywhere.”

It is a good example of a definition that does not try to get all mystic. Violence in the world is a problem. Many people know about it and talk about and feel strongly about it. But only a few actually do anything about it.

However, I would say that not everyone who cleans up the dog shit is a warrior. Some are forced to do so otherwise they will lose their jobs. Some do it to look good in the eyes of others. Some do it for the money.

But some do it because they want to do it. That is their place.

They are motivated to clean it up. They may find professional satisfaction at doing it well too. They work towards finding better, simpler, safer and smarter ways to go about cleaning it up. They know it needs to be done, they do it well, but they don’t think they are special for doing it.

What of the Character of a Warrior?

Surely this is an important aspect of a warrior? Yes and No. If a person is serving for the purpose of serving and are intent on doing it well, everything else should fall into place. It is hard to imagine a person who is intent on serving others acting poorly.

The various ‘codes’ for warriors were perhaps more aimed at the poor quality and performing soldiers, samurai and knights etc. to keep them from behaving poorly? Were not the ‘codes’ aimed to control their behaviour? Much like laws do?

Soldiers can be Warriors

I feel that the ‘codes’ of the various warriors of old were a controlling measure for soldiers, samurai and knights etc. who were not true warriors. True warriors who aimed to serve and were motivated to serve would need no ‘codes’ to control them and ensure they behaved appropriately and followed direction.

Perhaps as well as providing control, they could have steered lesser men onto the path. They could provide guidance and inspiration. The ‘codes’ also provide clear direction and control over the warriors. The ‘codes’ were law, direction and basically a set of orders to the warriors.

This allows the leader to direct their warriors how they see fit with few grumblings or questioning. The warrior submits totally to the direction of the leader. It is through following the leader’s commands that the warrior serves the community or country.

The military today operates the same way. History and tradition aims to instill esprit de corps. It also aims to steer and modify behaviour to act or conform with a certain way, much like the ‘codes’ of old.

'Codes' of the Warrior

The ‘codes’ of old would also have gone a long way to ensure that the warriors were acting appropriately in public. This would reflect back well on the leaders. This would ensure popular support for the leader.

So while I feel the various ‘codes’ such as Chivalry and Bushido etc. were an aspect of the warriors of old, it was their actions and motivations in combat that made them warriors, not what they were directed to read.

The various ‘codes’ of warriors are the main aspect of the warriors of old that many people feel apply to others. This is the area where people feel that many or even all people can be warriors.

This is not so.

The ‘codes’ were the least important part of being a warrior. It was the actions during combat that counted most. Many people forget about the real life and death combat part of being a warrior. It is very convenient for them.

Following SOME codes (whilst conveniently ignoring others) does not make you a warrior.

People can be good people, have integrity, be honest, be humble, have honour and do good things for people and not be a warrior. They are simply good upstanding people. And good upstanding people are a good thing for society. But these good upstanding people are not warriors because they are good upstanding people.

People who want to be labelled as a warrior have ego issues. They generally act by themselves. They want the credit. They want people to think good of them. They want titles. They do not feel they work with equals. They do not feel they are an integral part of a team.

A warrior does feel they work with equals and that they are an integral part of a team. Those equals are their comrades who will protect their backs and they likewise. It is just another example of people not understanding what a warrior is.

What Do I Feel About the Term Warrior?

Based on what I felt prior to writing this article and then doing the research for it (which hasn’t really changed my thoughts on what a warrior is, though it has clarified my thoughts on the matter), I feel that the term Warrior should only be applied to people who engage in some form of combat against other people.

I also feel it should only be used for those who engage in that combat in order to serve the community in some way on behalf of that community. They also work in groups, not alone. That is where the term originates from and it just makes sense to keep it that way.

Maori were Warriors

That is not to say a cancer survivor (for example) is not a very brave person and deserves respect and accolades. They are and they do. But they are not a warrior. They are not a doctor either. Or a scientist. Or a fire fighter. They are a cancer survivor. Searching for some other term disrespects what a cancer survivor has been through. The term cancer survivor surely is a high enough and worthy title?

So a warrior is someone who engages in combat, on behalf of the community or country as part of a team.

But do these people call themselves warriors?

I don’t think they do. Some do, but most don’t. Generally these people call themselves soldiers or police officers etc. They don’t call themselves warriors. It seems only other people call them that. They let others worry about titles and words.

What does this mean? Is the term warrior irrelevant then? Because those the term refers to, do not use it?

Perhaps.

But the term warrior is out there. Let’s attempt to clarify what it should mean.

What is my definition of a warrior?

“A Warrior is a title that others use who are not warriors to describe a person in a group that goes out and uses the minimum force necessary for a greater cause. That is, the community or country that they serve. Not the self.”

That is all. Nothing more, nothing less.

Not very romantic is it?

Let’s break down each component so I can explain the reasons behind each aspect...

“A warrior is a title that others use who are not warriors...”. is a way of saying straight away that warriors do not call themselves warriors. It is just a title, a word.

“...to describe a person in a group...” is a way of mentioning that a warrior works as part of a cohesive group or team or organization or squadron or battalion etc. They are not loners or individuals. They are not status seekers. They never have been.

“...uses the minimum force necessary...” is a way to mention that all warriors these days apply force in a strictly controlled manner. Even military forces have strict rules of engagement. They are not savages who slaughter. This section also highlights that police and military members who are not out and closing with the ‘enemy’ are simply not warriors. One needs to be out confronting and cleaning up the ‘dog poop’ in order to be a warrior.

“...for a greater cause. That is, the community or country that they serve’’ is a way of explaining that a warrior acts on behalf of a greater cause than themselves. This could be through policing, peacekeeping or military action etc. It is not because of money or because they were forced to act a certain way under pressure or coercion. It does not automatically include all military members and police. It is due to their own willingness and conscious choice. This transcends whether one is a military member or ‘mercenary’ as well. A certain job does not make one a warrior. It is the intent and motivation.

“... Not the self...” Obvious. Not motivated by their own glory or status etc.

And that is my humble definition of what a warrior is.

Going by this strict definition I have written here, today I am not a warrior. I am content with that. I will not lose any sleep over it. I do not feel any less of a man. I will not look for excuses or lie. I am not angry for not being able to call myself a warrior. I am who I am.

I hope others will stop thinking of themselves as being warriors when they are not. The term is way overused and is losing its real meaning. Only ego will see people ignore this and keep thinking of themselves as warriors when they are clearly not.

Feel free to blast me or offer your thoughts and opinions in the comments below.

Images via trexcali, Commodon, OliverN5, The Life of Bryan, The US Army, philcalvert and superwebdeveloper.

Why You Need to Add Vehicles to Your Training

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Sat, 11 Feb 2012 00:41:00 +0000

This is a guest post by Nick at Indestructable Training. The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of Low Tech Combat.

How much time do you spend in a car or truck every day?

How many cars or trucks do you pass by?

Vehicles make up a huge part of our daily lives. We use them to commute to and from work and school. Parking lots are filled with cars that we walk by all the time. Even in the city, you walk by a huge number of cars parallel parked on the side of the road. You cannot escape the fact that wherever you go and whatever you do, vehicles will be a part of your environment.

We face dangers every day on the road

Besides being a constant part of our lives, vehicles are also one of the most dangerous parts of our environment. Anytime you get behind the wheel you are facing a significant amount of danger. Drunk drivers, rowdy teens, and rampant texters all share the road with you every day. When you factor in additional dangers like poor road conditions and man-made obstacles, you can see that there is a lot you should be prepared for on the roads. Then there are parking lots...

Parking Lots are a Dangerous Place to be

Parking lots are another hugely dangerous environment, simply due to the presence of vehicles. Being alert enough to not get run over is a minor concern compared to the threat of an assailant ready to attack you. The parking lot jungle is an easy place to be hunted, and it provides an ever changing maze of tight quarters and confined spaces. Someone could be lying in wait around any of these corners.

Parking lot assaults are not uncommon. Just the other day the writer at balloongoesup had a near miss with two kids who sized him up on his way into a sporting goods store. These two kids were waiting behind his Jeep for the opportunity to try and assail him. If it weren't for the unlikely occurrence that he happened to be walking to his vehicle with a security guard, this encounter could have ended much differently.

I too have found myself in a few situations I would prefer to have avoided, but thankfully I ended up fine I was approached a few years ago by a transient in a crowded parking lot who needed some change to buy lunch or booze. Luckily he moved on easily, but it could have been an easy setup for an assault.

More recently a crazy woman drove by me in a department store parking lot. She pointed at some paper I was carrying and asked me if it was hers. By rendering me utterly confused, she could easily have been a distraction from something more sinister. It turned out she was merely crazy, but this was yet another parking lot incident. These often unexpected situations in the confines of a parking lot leave plenty of opportunities to be harmed. A parking garage can be even more dangerous.

Road Rage isn't Just for Driving

Ever been in an accident? Even a minor fender bender can turn into a very dangerous situation if you happen to hit or be hit by the wrong person. An angry driver who just had his beautiful sports car banged up can be very aggressive and dangerous. It doesn't take much time for him to be out of his vehicle and be in your space. Do you know how to deal with these situations? Do you know how to get out of your vehicle quickly enough to not be trapped by this angry attacker?

A process as seemingly trivial as getting into and out of a vehicle can require a decent amount of practice to be made efficient. This is a skill that needs to be both second nature and smooth. The last place you want to be in a confrontation is stuck in your vehicle. Mobility is key in self-defense; if you cannot drive away, you want to be out of that vehicle.

The Confines of a Vehicle Make Fighting an Entirely Different Game

You probably don't realize it unless you have tried it, but fighting inside a vehicle is not for the faint of heart. Maneuvering, learning to take space from your adversary, and knowing how to access and prevent access to weapons are all difficult tasks inside a vehicle. Discovering these difficulties for the first time when you really need to overcome them puts you at a huge disadvantage. These are all skills that can and should be practiced before you need them, even if you don't think you are likely to need them.

Fighting around a vehicle also presents its own challenges. Being ambushed inside the triangle (in between the car door and the door frame) is a very bad situation to be in. Training can help you know how to prevent getting in this situation, but also how to get out of it.

Effectively Using a Firearm Changes Dramatically in and Around a Vehicle

If you carry a gun, you have many additional reasons to train around vehicles. Shooting within the confines of a vehicle is not as easy as it may seem in the movies. You should not only know how to employ that firearm to engage targets within the vehicle, but also how to safely and effectively engage targets outside it. And what if you are not traveling alone? Your training should encompass how to engage targets without putting your passengers at risk.

You should train gun handling around a vehicle because it presents problems you may not expect. The car itself is not quite the cover it is made out to be on TV. Most bullets pass through both sides without much trouble. Windshields do an amazing job at changing the trajectory of your rounds. There is certainly a right way and a wrong way to use a vehicle for cover and to shoot in and around it. You don't want to be discovering this under pressure.

Whatever you do or wherever you go, vehicles will be a part of your life. Anyone who lives in a modern culture is likely to be surrounded by and often reliant on vehicles. It is in your best interest to learn how to apply your self-defense techniques and tactics in a vehicular environment.

Nick Savery is the author of www.IndestructibleTraining.com, a blog discussing integrating training across a variety of systems and platforms for the purposes of self-defense.

Image via John Goode.

The 5 Best Improvised Weapons in the World

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 10:47:00 +0000

WHAT IMPROVISED WEAPON IS BEST?

Improvised Weapons can be a great equaliser.

They can be acquired at short notice.

Improvised Weapons can prevent the need to carry an actual weapon, which legally is very good.

They can be just as effective as actual weapons.

But not all Improvised Weapons are created equal.

In this article, I will be having a look at what makes a good Improvised Weapon, what makes a bad one, the benefits of Improvised Weapons and then finish by highlighting the 5 Best Improvised Weapons in the world for today's day and age. A modest aim.

Let's get into it.

Many people talk about how good improvised weapons are. A lot of the time though, what a person recommends as a good improvised weapon, is often a poor one. There are a number of things an improvised weapon should be.

An improvised weapon should:

be a benign item that is not automatically viewed as a weapon
be strong enough for its purpose
be better than an unarmed option
have a use outside of a weapon
be able to be used quickly

This list is not exhaustive. But already, it rules out some potential improvised weapons. Let's have a look at what we want.

It Should be Benign

For an item to be used as an improvised weapon, it should be able to be carried by a person (or be close to an area where conflict is likely to occur), without drawing attention to it being a weapon. If an attacker can see an items potential for use as a weapon, they may quickly mentally develop counters in the event it is used. They may even desire to use it themselves.

If it is benign, they do not consider it. They cannot be prepared for it. If they do not consider it, we can harness the element of surprise when we bring it to bear. The element of surprise is a massive advantage to whoever holds it.

Strong Enough for its Purpose

An item may look to be good as an improvised weapon, but consider for a moment the forces that it will be required to sustain. It will be used at a time where our very life may be at risk. It needs to be strong enough to be used at full power against a hard object. Of course, you can expect it to be slightly damaged, but it should not immediately cave in, break or shatter.

If you would hesitate to use the possible improvised weapon against a wall or heavy bag, it probably isn't suitable to be one of the 5 best improvised weapons in the world.

Better Than an Unarmed Option

This kind of sounds obvious, but an improvised weapon needs to be better than an unarmed option. Consider a good unarmed option. This would be an attempt at a knockout, perhaps by using an open palm strike to the chin. This is a solid strike to a well known and effective knock out zone. An improvised weapon needs to offer advantages beyond this unarmed possibility. If an improvised weapon cannot achieve this, it is not one of the best 5 improvised weapons. Perhaps it is not a good improvised weapon at all.

An improvised weapon could offer any number of advantages. It could offer us a reach advantage. This is very good, especially if the attacker is armed. It could offer an impact advantage. It may offer a more solid and less forgiving striking surface and/or weight. It may be completely unexpected and provide the element of surprise. It may offer us a sharp edge for us to cut or stab if we need to. It may be able to be used as a shield, which would be especially useful in an armed attack.

A good improvised weapon should offer us a clear advantage over a good unarmed response, otherwise we should just use the unarmed response.

Useful Not as a Weapon

An improvised weapon should have another use, not as a weapon. If it doesn't, it is probably just a weapon. A knuckleduster is not an improvised weapon. A folding concealed knife is not an improvised weapon. A balisong is not an improvised weapon (no, it is not a 'letter opener'). These are weapons.

If you carry one of these or use one, it wil be considered as a single purpose weapon. An improvised weapon is more innocent. This will be explained further, below.

Quick to Deploy

An improvised weapon needs to be able to be used, when needed. It should not take long to get and deploy. A car jack (or its handle) may be a good weapon, but it will be in the boot. If you keep it on the passenger seat it may raise some questions by the police if you do use it. It can seem premeditated. And you cannot really walk around carrying a car jack. This limits its utility. Although in a home garage it would be fine.

If it needs to be carried in your backpack, it is not really up to being a top 5 improvised weapon. It will take too long to get by the time you may realise you need it. So any good improvised weapon needs to be quick at hand and/or quick to deploy. This area can be massaged...

A Bad Improvised Weapon

Besides the points raised previously, a bad improvised weapon may maim an attacker, but will it stop them?

One commonly espoused improvised weapon is a set of car keys. I have even mentioned these on this site before, some time ago. Sure, they may have their benefits. They are harder than knuckles when held appropriately. But do they offer knock out power? Or will they just cut up an attackers face? That is my concern with them. You get blood all over you from some crim who has what blood born diseases? AND it doesn't really stop them? This is an example of an improvised weapon not being as efficient as an unarmed option.

Wouldn't an unarmed knock out blow to the chin be more effective at stopping an attacker? Yes, keys may instil some confidence to fight back. That is really the main benefit of the use of keys as a weapon. For a weak defender, it may even provide more damage than what they could deliver unarmed. So that is an option for them, but overall, they are an average improvised weapon. And there are better options than keys.

Another bad improvised weapon is one the user cannot use effectively. If you cannot use an improvised weapon well, it will likely be largely ineffective. It may even be taken off you and used against you. If you identify a good improvised weapon (some will be listed below), learn how to use it. Consider one to three moves and practise them again and again. Know where it will be, know how to go for it and know how to utilise it. Spend time thinking about its deployment. Think about legal consequences.

A bad improvised weapon will just break as you crash it over an attackers head or even break as you begin the swing. Do not annoy the attacker with an ineffective improvised weapon. You will just make the attacker more committed and determined in his attack when he realises you are attempting to fight back with a weapon of some sort. He will likely go further with his attack. There are times when an uncommitted attacker will flee but don't chance your luck by assuming that will be the case.

A bad improvised weapon will not be there when you need it. You may not need an improvised weapon on you all the time, 24/7. Think ahead for the high risk times and places. At those times, you need to be able to have access to one. No matter how good you think your crowbar is, you will not be able to take it to the shops.

There is a time and place for many improvised weapons.

The BIG Benefit of Improvised Weapons

The biggest benefit with using improvised weapons is that in the eyes of the law, you were not using an actual weapon. You did not use a knife or baton. There was no apparent pre-meditation or preparation for using a weapon. You did not pre arm yourself.

Considering the law is so important.

If you need to use force in a real self defence situation, a great equaliser is a weapon. It is the "street tough's" number one rule of a street fight. Grab anything you can, and hit them with it. A weapon is such an equaliser, especially if the attacker has a weapon or there are multiple attackers.

But using a weapon you had secreted on your body, in the eyes of a court or jury will be much harder to justify self defence than if you just used some item you happened to have nearby in desperation. This also applies for home invasions.

Can you see the difference here?

This is why an improvised weapon must have another benign use.

Also consider that using any weapon, even if it is improvised, is using more force than an unarmed attacker is using. Unless they are much bigger than you, they have a weapon, they are kicking your ass or there are more than one, or you are female and they are male, it is not recommended to use an improvised weapon, or even any weapon. Just another legal consideration.

Considering all of the above, the following include short and long range, cheap and pricy, for home defence and defence when out and about as well as when travelling. A good spread of requirements.

What are the 5 Best Improvised Weapons in the World?

5. A pocket of loose change

LOOSE CHANGE

This is a simple and basic projectile weapon. A bunch of loose change thrown really hard straight at an attacker will likely trigger a flinch in them. Just get the change out and throw it really hard. An alternative would be a suitably small rock or rocks. Anything small and with weight. To conserve ammo, throw the coins one or two at a time.

Benefits:

Extra long distance
Projectile weapon
Delay an advance
Multiple volleys can be used
Surprise an attacker
Used to regain the initiative and launch into follow up attacks if required, or escape
Enable space to manoeuvre
Provides time to call out for help, gain attention of third parties, deter willingness for attacker to continue etc.
Quick to get to, especially if it is a mugging type attack, hand in pocket etc.
Can be used to buy coffee, fill parking meter

Disadvantages:

You need to have a pocketful of loose change
You may not be a good thrower and miss entirely
May only get one throw
Unlikely to deter a committed attacker

4. A Backpack

BACKPACK AS SHIELD

A backpack (or other suitable bag), can be used as an excellent shield. A backpack can quickly be swung around and held up in front of the body acting as a modern day shield. It can even be held by one arm leaving the other free to use a weapon or fend or whatever.

Benefits:

Can be used as a shield
Can leave other hand free to use a weapon (such as No. 5, 3 or 2)
Can slow down and/or confuse/delay an attacker
Unexpected use, can put attacker off
Can be swung or used as a weapon, primarily to create distance to facilitate manoeuvre
Can freely carry around out in public
Quick to use
Can leave lying in house at strategic locations for home defence
Can carry around your stuff, handsfree

Disadvantages:

Limited use as an offensive weapon, no stopping power
May not always have
Can flail around, be hard to control
Can be too heavy to hold up if carrying heavy/numerous items

3. A Drink

BOTTLE OF DRINK

A bottle of drink (glass or plastic), a hot coffee, a can of soft drink, glass of soft drink etc. can all be used as excellent improvised weapons. These are cheap and you can have one anywhere. They can be used a number of ways.

Benefits:

Can carry a drink almost anywhere
Very benign, common
Half filled or more in a bottle with lid on can be used as an impact weapon
Hot fluid can be used to scald
Cold fluid can be used to distract/cause flinch/harness element of surprise and regain initiative
Cheap disposable item
Various drink types are available everywhere
Full unopened can is a solid impact weapon, especially when thrusted straight out
An Aluminium Can can cut when scrunched up and twisted and the sides split
Half full or more bottles and cans as well as glasses can be thrown as projectiles
Drinks can provide sustenance

Disadvantages:

Limited range advantage, unless thrown
Limited hard, solid surface except unopened can
Scalding from hot coffee gets one shot
Broken glass can injure self
Almost empty plastic bottles offer limited advantages over unarmed strikes

2. A Maglight Torch

MAGLIGHT TORCH

My Maglight torch is an excellent, solid impact weapon with bonus light that can be used tactically as well. I have had one for years and it will always feature in my home defence strategy.

Benefits:

Solid weight
Good to use as an impact weapon
Very Strong
Used for offense and defence/blocking
Common household item in event of blackouts etc.
At night, can turn light on in attackers face for further effect, even set up a strike
Excellent for home invasion situations
Offers some range beyond unarmed
Good for striking weapons or weapon bearing arms/hands
Lots of systems that formally teach stick of similar length so can gain proficiency
Can be used to provide light when it is dark out

Disadvantages:

Difficult to have at hand in public places, no bags, cannot get into bag in time etc.
Many situations would be unable to have
Need room to swing

Learn more about the Maglight HERE.

1. Unbreakable Umbrella

UNBREAKABLE UMBRELLA

I have had my Unbreakable Umbrella for a couple of years now. I got the knobbed end rather than the crook, curvy end. I find it easier to hold and wield. This umbrella is perhaps the ultimate improvised weapon as you can take it anywhere you want to go. You just need to get over the fact you are carrying an umbrella around, they can be kind of dorky to some. Good for home defence, travelling and when out and about.

Benefits:

Excellent long range, can strike weapons or weapons bearing arms, hands etc.
Can swing out wide extending with one arm or can be held close with two hands and thrusted
Can use to keep attacker away, enabling time to call for help
Can keep multiple attackers at bay, at least for some time
Can be used in stabbing/thrusting motion to strike with the tip
Can be used as impact weapon
Common benign item
Can be taken even on aircraft
Used for offence and defence/blocking
Can be carried in public places
VERY strong
There are lots of systems that teach stick fighting of similar lengths to the umbrella so you can gain proficiency
Can keep rain off you and a friend

Disadvantages:

Can be odd on bright sunny days
Some can feel awkward carrying around an umbrella
Can be cumbersome to carry around at first
Can be seen as 'uncool'

Learn more about the unbreakable umbrella HERE.

How would you use these improvised weapons? You could use some for at home, some for when you go out at night, some for travelling, some for during the day, some for commuting etc. Think of a way to layer the use of improvised weapons.

So there we have it. The 5 Best Improvised Weapons in the whole entire world.

What do you think? What do you think is missing from the list? Leave your comments below.

Opening Image via Bidrohi >H!ROK< and the remaining from the Author, Adam at Low Tech Combat.

Note: The Maglight and Umbrella links are affiliate links where if you buy them, I get a small commission. This will not make the item any more expensive. Any commission I get will help cover some of the expenses from the running of this site and the newsletter. This has not influenced my decision to recommend these AT ALL. I have purchased both of these items with my own money and genuinely recommend them. I'd like to thank you in advance for choosing to use my affiliate link to purchase any of these items. It is much appreciated.

Interview: Matthew Apsokardu on Traditional Martial Arts and Self Defence

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Sun, 22 Jan 2012 11:26:00 +0000

MATTHEW APSOKARDU

Do Traditional Martial Artists have their head in the sand when it comes to self defence?

Some do, no doubt, but some do not. This interview is an example of one who most definitely does not.

Traditional Martial Arts are not just focused on self defence. Students are also studying an art. Some students practising Traditional Martial Arts are learning self defence skills they would never have been exposed to otherwise. Some would never have sought out a self defence class or course. So this exposure is a great thing for people. Traditional Martial Arts is how I began on the path.

I asked Matthew Apsokardu to do this interview as I know him from his blog (and you probably will too), Ikigai Way. Matt has been studying the martial arts for 16 years and has acquired the rank of 4th Dan Okinawa Kenpo Karate and Kobudo of the Nakamura Shigeru, Odo Seikichi, Bruce Heilman lineage. He is a good guy who always offers some straight up commentary on matters I raise here on this site about violent behaviour such as knife attacks. He has also written some very interesting posts on his site as well that make for interesting reading. He is very experienced and knowledgable in the martial arts world yet still very humble.

I wanted to ask Matt from a Traditional (and Classical) Martial Arts background his opinions on matters relating to self defence. I want people to see what he responds with. His answers demonstrate that not all Traditional Martial Artists have an unrealistic perception of real violent behaviour and violent attacks. A good Traditional Martial Artist understands his arts strengths and weaknesses and is not blinded by his involvement.

Let's begin.

Matt, can you give us a short brief of your background and about how you got involved in martial arts and what led you to become such an expert?

I wouldn’t use the word expert anywhere around me, but I’d be happy to share a bit about my background.

I started my training in Okinawa Kenpo Karate and Kobudo when I was about 11 years old. I didn’t really know what Okinawa Kenpo was or how it was different than other martial arts, but it seemed like a fun and engaging activity.

Lucky for me, an individual named Bruce Heilman had been bringing his instructor, Odo Seikichi, to the U.S. for some time and was based around Reading, PA, not far from where I lived. I started at one of Heilman Sensei’s branch schools, but ultimately came to study under him directly.

Over the years I’ve gotten to study with many of Heilman Sensei’s contemporaries and friends, all of whom are respected instructors in their particular fields.

About 8 years ago I also began formal study of the Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu style of swordsmanship, although I am not a direct lineage student.

Who or what was one of the biggest helps / lessons /reference points etc. in steering you down the path in your earlier days?

Multiple times a year Heilman Sensei arranged training gatherings with martial artists from all over that he knew to be of high quality in both character and martial content (a habit which he continues to this day).

Seeing those senior artists come together and operate at a high level always inspired me, and ingrained a sense of openness about traditional arts.

I later came to learn that Heilman Sensei was carrying on a long Okinawa Kenpo tradition of sharing, started by Nakamura Shigeru as he built his Okinawa Kenpo Renmei with individuals such as Shimabukuro Zenryo and Uehara Seikichi.

What do you feel are the 3 best aspects of traditional martial arts that directly improve ones self defence skills and/or ability?

I’d like to take a temporary semantic detour. In my mind, there is a significant difference between classical martial arts and traditional martial arts, the exact differentiation points of which are debatable.

I generally think of classical martial arts as those that developed prior to the influence of World War II. Traditional arts are those that developed during the lead up to the war, during the conflict, and as a result afterward.

The focus of classical arts and traditional arts as I have defined them were, and continue to be, very different.

My personal training straddles the fence between the two, as certain aspects of Okinawa Kenpo have been affected by Nakamura Shigeru’s time in the “karate school system” as well as his later life as he reached back deeper into the art’s core essence via instructors like Kuniyoshi Shinkichi. Furthermore, my direct instructors come from a varying amount of experience in both classical and traditional worlds.

One of the biggest fundamental differences between classical and traditional is the focus on sport and regimentation. Classical karate was an intriguing intermingling of experience and resources (Okinawa being a highly utilized crossroads for trade and travel). As such, The Okinawans were concerned with effectiveness in their techniques and how efficiently they could ward off very real threats from Wako (pirates), intruders, and each other.

As WWII began to ramp up, Japanese influence caused karate to skew in the direction of physical fitness and mental readiness for military obedience. After the war, the bad taste of those efforts caused karate and other arts to keep the physical fitness aspects but move in a more benign sport direction, losing a lot of lethality in the process.

With that in mind, I’d like to suggest three aspects that traditional training still offers of value:

1. Muscle memory through rote repetition of kata and kihon. The simpler, the better, hence an overarching love of naihanchi kata once it is understood (although it performs terribly at tournaments).

2. Increased impact tolerance and reduction of conflict fear through the use of sparring drills.

3. Increased sense of self confidence and lowering of “victim behavior” through posture, eye contact, demeanor, etc.

What are the two biggest shortcomings of traditional martial arts that affect peoples self defence skills and/or ability?

Continuing with the discussion of traditional:

1. Lack of training in realistic conflict drills, stemming from an over-reliance on sparring “games” and kata repetition.

2. Often as a result of #1 - a false sense of confidence and ability that results in serious injury or mental shutdown during real self defense encounters.

What areas of traditional martial arts are likely to evolve in the future?

The evolution of traditional martial arts is going to be highly influenced by the continued impact of MMA and the tournament circuit.

More and more ground/clinch fighting is likely to be introduced into traditional schools that didn’t have any of those aspects built into their systems.

Alternatively, the effectiveness of other styles will continue to dwindle as they focus primarily on competitive aspects of martial sport.

What is one (or more) of the best drills used in traditional martial arts that are relevant for developing self defence skills?

Kata is certainly the most important weapon in a traditionalist’s arsenal when it comes to developing skill. That being said, kata can also be used as a cover-up for laziness in drill creativity.

One drill I happen to like a lot is the “turn around attacker”. In this drill, all the students in a class make a single file line in front of one of their classmates. The lone classmate (Tori) then turns his back on the would-be attackers (Uke).

One at a time the attackers walk up behind Tori, and as Tori either hears or feels them coming, he/she turns around. As Tori turns around, Uke attacks in an unpredictable fashion (sucker punch to the face, grabbing at the shirt, grabbing the arm, etc).

It is then Tori’s job to utilize his/her flinch response to avoid/evade/intercept the initial aggression and conduct an effective response to eliminate the threat. Tori is not to stop until Uke is clearly handled. Strikes are done to vulnerable targets but are not conducted with full contact.

This drill doesn’t address noticing pre-attack indicators, but there are other drills for that. This one is highly valuable for getting past that moment of initial aggression.

Fundamentally, cases of assault and muggings are quite different to each other with different mind sets, goals etc., What type of attack do traditional martial arts mostly concentrate on?

A lot of traditional schools address both. They utilize sparring environments to simulate an assault scenario where precursors provide a level of preparedness and indication that violence is on the way. Also, sparring is rarely lethal (which fits into the alpha male category of assault violence).

Self defense repetition drills usually do the job of preparing people for mugging scenarios. This is where you’ll frequently hear action-response explanations, i.e. “if an attacker points a gun like this, you do this. Ok now try it”.

I’m not suggesting these separate methods are entirely effective, especially when left unintegrated into a more complete whole, but that’s what you’ll see.

Will someone be proficient at dealing with most likely self defence situations after becoming a black belt in a traditional martial art?

Acquiring a black belt is definitely not a guarantee that an individual will be prepared for self defense environments. I can tell you, looking back at myself when I was a Shodan, I still had plenty of gaps in my understanding and ability.

On the flipside, I’ve met some green and brown belts who could more than adequately handle themselves in self defense situations. The belt color doesn’t translate universally for all martial artists; personal aptitude and quality of training are much more important factors.

What is the best attitude/perspective etc. for a traditional martial artist to have, to help them along the path to effective self defence?

To me, love for a traditional art is expressed when you are the most unyielding skeptic about what you do. If you aren’t aware of the strengths and weaknesses of your style then you are trying to protect what it represents rather than what it was originally built for.

Good traditional/classical styles will hold up to scrutiny, but they won’t appear flawless. That can be scary for some individuals, especially after they spend 20,30,40 years training in it.

The best attitude for a traditionalist is one of balance. It’s important to preserve the cultural traditions, kata, and philosophical underpinnings of an art while not being frozen into complacency by them.

Can you provide some real world examples of some traditional martial arts students (or instructors) who have applied what they learnt in real self defence situations?

I’m happy to say that I train with some truly impressive individuals. I thank all of my instructors and influences for their pragmatic approaches. They manage to preserve what their teachers shared with them while also grounding their methods in reality. Just a few specific examples:

• Major Bill Hayes of Shobayashi Ryu is a rare classical martial artist who truly embodies the spirit of Okinawa. He took karate with him on his second tour of duty in Vietnam and was also one of the founding developers of MCMAP, the Marine Corps Martial Arts Program.

• Jody Paul is a direct student of Toma Shian and Uehara Seikichi (Seidokan and Motobu Udundi, respectively). He was also a member of the initial Navy Seals team. His training revolved around small team operations conflict.

• Miguel Ibarra is an instructor of Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu and also a probation officer in Bronx, New York. He has an extensive knowledge on the effectiveness of techniques and the varying uses of pain compliance vs mechanical debilitation.

What are some of the common problems that traditional martial artists experience in real self defence situations?

A common problem for traditionalists is the chaotic and tight nature of real conflict.

Too much sparring set at an intermediate distance can create great intermediate technique, but sacrifices the ability to shift range. The mind can easily lose its focus and fluidity if a habitual distance is altered and conflict gets messy.

Furthermore, an over-reliance on scripted yakusoku kumite (prearranged block-punch encounters) can provide a false sense of technique improvement, as the issue of assessing unknown attack indicators is completely ignored.

If you had to give away one secret about self defence, what would it be?

Don’t underestimate the impact of your eyes. Where you look leading up to conflict and during conflict can have drastic effects on how matters develop.

Leading up to an altercation, the eyes can be used to dominate and subdue an opponent of lesser spirit. However, they can also cause an alpha male to feel threatened and move more quickly toward violence.

Similarly, eye contact with a potential predator can invite them to latch onto you or begin a conversation, while glancing sheepishly away will spark their innate instinct to search for weakness.

During conflict, the eyes should not become fixated on anything in particular. Personally, I prefer to avoid staring directly into an opponent’s eyes as it can cause wayward trains of thought, reducing reaction time and flow. A broad gaze based around the center of the chest tends to allow for optimal viewing and reduces intimidation and personalization.

In swordsmanship, an opponent is simply a recipient of your technique, nothing more.

What is one thing traditional martial artists can take away right now to enhance their self defence skills?

Put yourself in situations where you might not look like a polished expert of all things violence. In exchange you get a chance to test your abilities to handle chaotic attacks and self defense situations.

There is a pervasive idea that in the dojo (or dojang) every block should work and every strike should be a one-hit-kill. These are lofty ideals, and something worth working towards, but it also inspires people to hide from failure.

I enjoy the times when my abilities break down or when a technique thuds with resounding ineffectiveness. It’s a reality check, and an opportunity to discover where I need to improve.

Where can people find more information about you and your thoughts on traditional martial arts?

I write over at my martial arts blog entitled Ikigai Way. The topics include thoughts on classical training in karate, kobudo, swordsmanship, and general matters like self defense and martial philosophy.

I also have an interviews section where you can learn more about some of the people I mentioned above and other important folk in the classical/traditional community.

For anyone interested in more about how classical karate can translate into modern day conflict, they may want to check out this project: Natural Karate.

Matthew, thanks very much for your comprehensive answers. It’s been thoroughly enjoyable. I hope you, the reader, have found the interview interesting reading.

Although I generally recommend people to avoid Traditional Martial Arts purely in a self defence context as there are better options out there, I still believe they can be very valuable and fulfilling for peoples lives. They can be beneficial for self defence and for developing other areas of themselves.

What are your thoughts on this interview? I personally found Matt's responses very interesting and insightful. Share your thoughts below in the comments section.

Adam

5 Most Important Skills For Protecting Yourself

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 03:00:00 +0000

Note: This is the first guest post published at Low Tech Combat! Go to Authors Box at bottom of post for more details of Author. The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of Low Tech Combat.

It is unfortunate but we seem to be living in a more and more violent society. Inner city crime rates are on the rise again and the recent widespread riots across London and other major cities in the UK highlighted the extent to which criminal gangs control our cities.

As stupid as many muggers and thugs appear to be, some really are not completely dumb. Like any successful predator they target the easy prey. If someone is walking along the street looking confident, strong and alert then a mugger will often steer clear. It is when people are looking nervous, timid, day dreaming or simply too weak to defend themselves that a mugger will attack. So, to avoid a dangerous situation learn to carry yourself in a more assertive way by following these safety tips.

1. Stay Alert, Look Ahead

If you have a habit of day dreaming while you walk you may find yourself walking into trouble. A mugger often relies on the element of surprise and it is very easy to surprise someone who is walking along while day dreaming. Make sure that you are always looking ahead so that you can spot signs of danger. If you see someone, or a group, on the path up ahead that look out-of-place cross the road early to avoid them.

If you are walking late at night always be extra alert. This is the most dangerous time as most criminals only attack when it is dark and they are high on drugs or alcohol. There is nothing shameful about looking over your shoulder every now and then to check who is around you.

2. Walk Confidently but not Arrogantly

A confident person is rarely targeted by a mugger. This is connected with staying alert, but also you should walk with assertiveness and confidence. Just changing your posture can quickly change the impression people have of you.

Standing up straighter with your shoulders back and your chest puffed out slightly can ward off any would be attackers. However, do not look too arrogant as this can attract too much attention too and the moment your shield slips you become a greater target. Remember, attackers are just predators that prey on the weakest.

3. Know When to Run

There are really 3 key skills that could save your life - swimming, running and fighting. Swimming is not relevant on the street, so your focus on staying street safe should be running and fighting.

As brave as it may seem to take on a mugger it is always better to avoid a confrontation and there is no shame in running. There are 2 advantages of running from an attacker. Firstly, you may out-run them and get away without a fight. This is the ideal situation should the need arise. Secondly, if they do catch up with you and you are fit and have learnt to fight too, you should be in a better position to take them on.

Often though an attacker will not take chase. When a 26-year-old was attacked with a knife one evening in 2010 (Knife Attack in Burwell, UK) he quickly ran off which saved him from further assault and loss of property.

4. Use Quick and Effective Techniques

Never underestimate the fitness and fighting ability of a mugger - even if you have several years of martial arts training under your belt for they may have a decade of street fighting experience under theirs! It is for this reason that fighting is best avoided, but should you have to fight, make sure that you are prepared.

Ideally you should learn some basic self-defence and learn to strike where it hurts. There is no shame in attacking vital organs, you do what is necessary and then get out of there as fast as possible by running away from danger.

If you have to fight, make sure you strike hard and quick. Forget any soft styles you may have learned and never push someone off as this just gives them more space. If you find yourself in close you must strike hard and hopefully wind your attacker and then quickly make your escape.

When training in a martial art it is important to learn the differences between training and the real thing. When practicing in the gym you do not suffer from elevated adrenaline levels, tunnel vision and reduce conscious thought. In a real life situation these can occur and your training should teach you how to manage them and still make a clean escape. The key is to be stressed in training but calm in real life.

5. Stay Away From Trouble

Sounds obvious doesn’t it? But answer this: how well do you really know your town? After the recent trouble in London many people admitted they only just realised how many people were living so close to them who had such poor economic prospects.

Every year we hear that many people are living on the poverty line, but how often do you stop to question who these people are and how they survive? Staying out of trouble could be as simple as taking a slightly longer route home when walking, cycling or even driving. Know your neighbourhood, your streets and learn the safest routes.

Staying out of trouble also means avoiding dangerous nightclubs and even some house parties. Doormen in clubs are notorious for allowing people to smuggle weapons in. People carry knives, hammers and even guns into some night clubs.

These simple tips could keep you out of serious trouble. Although we learn martial arts to defend ourselves, the ultimate form of self-preservation is to not put yourself in danger.

“To have 100 victories in 100 battles is not the highest skill, To subdue the enemy without fighting is the highest skill.” - Sun Tzu

And of course, even better than subduing an enemy is to avoid meeting one altogether!

AUTHOR BOX: This guest post was written for Low Tech Combat by Jack Roberts of Black Eagle Martial Arts.

Image via Lua Ahmed

Is Killing Someone Who Broke Into Your Home, Self Defence?

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Sun, 18 Dec 2011 22:00:00 +0000

FORCED ENTRY

A number of cases in the UK recently are certainly saying YES, it is Self Defence.

There seems to be a big trend in the UK this year for both law makers and politicians (including the PM, David Cameron), for wanting to clarify the law to state that stabbing a home intruder to death should never be punished. It should only ever be determined as acting in self defence.

"put beyond doubt that homeowners and small shopkeepers who use reasonable force to defend themselves or their properties will not be prosecuted"

- David Cameron, British Prime Minister

Below we will be having a look at three cases where all of the people featured were found to have acted in self defence where no charges were laid. The defenders were deemed to have used reasonable force. All of the intruders were killed by stabbing wounds from a knife.

One other case will highlight what was NOT considered reasonable force and this person was sent to prison. This was a controversial case at the time.

Let's get into it.

Vincent Cooke

VINCENT COOKE

During the home invasion, the home owner, Cooke, had been taken upstairs at knifepoint by the intruder, Raymond Jacob. Whilst being taken upstairs by Jacob, there was a struggle and Cooke stabbed the intruder.

"At the time he was in fear for his own safety and the safety of his wife and son, who arrived at the house as the incident was happening."

- The Prosecutor

The courts decided that Vincent Cooke had acted in self defence and had used reasonable force.

Thoughts? In this case, I doubt anyone would disagree. When criminals start moving people around, they normally mean no good. And if anyone is ever in that situation, where your wife and son arrive as this is all happening... well... In that situation, it is reasonable to assume that something very bad was going to happen either to you, and/or your loved ones.

The other key here is that the intruder was using a weapon, a knife.

This case is a clear example of reasonable force. Killing in this instance was deemed Self Defence.

Source: BBC

Peter Flanagan

THE FLANAGHAN HOME

Peter Flanaghan, his 27yr old son and his son's girlfriend were woken during the night, just before midnight by sounds downstairs. Flanaghan investigated the disturbance and was confronted by four intruders, one of whom was armed with a machete. When Flanaghan confronted the men, a scuffle broke out between him and one of the intruders and Flanaghan stabbed the man in the chest.

Shortly afterwards, three of the other intruders were seen carrying the body of the stabbed intruder down the street. When they heard sirens approaching, they abandoned their accomplices body on the street and fled. They were soon caught.

"People are entitled to use reasonable force in self-defence to defend themselves, their family and their property. All the evidence indicates that in the frightening circumstances that he faced, Mr Flanagan did what he honestly and instinctively believed was necessary to protect himself and his home from intruders."

- Chief Crown Prosecutor

Thoughts? You've got your son and his girlfriend upstairs as you go down to investigate the sound. When you see the four men, one armed with a machete, what goes through your mind? What would go through any normal persons mind? That is the key. If the answer to that question is similar to what happens, what happens would be seen to be reasonable at the time and the claim of self defence will probably be established.

Key factors in this case were that there were multiple attackers and they were armed, one with a machete.

Source: The Independent

Cecil Coley

CECIL COLEY

Cecil Coley, 72yrs old, was playing cards in his flower shop with a 60yr old friend of his. Four men armed with guns and knives stormed into the shop. During the ensuing struggle, Mr Coley received a number of injuries, including a serious facial injury, and his friend was knocked unconscious. At some point in the incident, one of the guns, a blank firing pistol, was fired.

"all the evidence indicated that when Coley took a knife that was on the shop counter and struck out with it, he was acting in a way that he felt instinctively necessary to protect himself while fearing for his life."

- The Prosecutor

Coley killed one of the intruders by stabbing. Coley was deemed to have acted in self defence.

Thoughts? It must have been terrifying for him. Four men armed with knives and guns. Coley was 72. Coley was outnumbered, outarmed and much older. These are all factors that contribute towards a favourable self defence decision in court. Coley had them all on his side.

Source: The Guardian

Brett Osbourn

Note: This case is longer than the others as the circumstances need to be explained.

Brett Osbourn and four friends were watching television over a drink.

Wayne Halling had been smashing the windows of other houses in the street with his fists and head, giving himself more than 90 wounds. His wrist was cut to the bone and he had sliced half through one of his toes. He was covered in blood.

By the time Halling arrived at the home where Osborn was sitting with his friends, he was, as every witness who was interviewed stated, a "terrifying sight".

Halling got in the house because one of Osborn's companions, Kelly Hinds, had heard the commotion and gone outside. The drug-crazed Halling took her for "Emma", the girlfriend who, he screamed, had "set him up". Miss Hinds recalled that he "grabbed me and pushed me against a parked car. I immediately got blood from him on my top. I managed to push him away".

Halling pursued her back to the house. Miss Hinds managed to get inside but, even with the help of her pregnant sister, Jodie, was unable to close the door against his weight or stop him from pushing his way in. He staggered along the corridor, smearing the walls with blood.

Jodie Hinds screamed "He's in the house! He's in the house!" and Jay Westbrook, her boyfriend, struggled with him, knocking him down. But he got up again and kept going.

Osborn recalls: "There is blood everywhere, things are flying everywhere, the girls are screaming hysterically. I just don't know what to do. Then he starts coming towards me." In fear and confusion, Osborn picked up a steak knife with a 6in serrated blade that he says was on the floor. He would later tell the police: "I didn't know what he was going to do to me." Also, knowing that Jodie Hinds was pregnant, he was terrified of what might happen if she were attacked. "He came towards me, sort of grabbed me," says Osborn, "and I lunged, and stabbed him that was the only thing I could think to do. It was just the panic. He's mad, he's crazy, he's just smashed up three houses, attacked people, beaten up my friend. I didn't know what was going to happen. There's blood all over him. The only thing I could think of was to protect myself and the other people in the house."

Halling fell to the floor. Police and an ambulance then arrived: there had been several calls to the emergency services, but because of fights in Romford as the pubs closed, officers had been slow to get to the scene.

"The law does not require the intention to kill for a prosecution for murder to succeed. All that is required is an intention to cause serious bodily harm. That intention can be fleeting and momentary. But if it is there in any form at all for just a second - that is, if the blow you struck was deliberate rather than accidental - you can be guilty of murder and spend the rest of your life in prison. Moreover, while self-defence is a complete defence to a charge of murder, the Court of Appeal has ruled that if the force you use is not judged to have been reasonable - if a jury, that is, decides it was disproportionate - then you are guilty of murder. A conviction for murder automatically triggers the mandatory life sentence. There are no exceptions."

- The Barrister

The legal situation was explained to Osborn by his defence team. Mr Bott and Mr Potter advised him that although they thought it very unlikely that any jury would reject his plea that he had stabbed Halling in self-defence, they could not, in all honesty, claim that it was a certainty. There was a small chance that a jury might decide that his use of the knife was "disproportionate". The jurors would then be bound, under the law, to convict him of murder.

Osborn pleaded guilty to manslaughter as a result of provocation. He was sentenced to five years in prison, of which three years was expected to be the maximum sentence.

Thoughts? This was (and remains), a controversial case. Many people felt that under those circumstances, Osborn had acted reasonably. He was with friends, including two females (one of which was pregnant and one was assaulted by Halling), he was clearly unstable, was covered in blood and had forced his way into their house.

The main difference in THIS case was that Halling was unarmed. There was only one of him. Osborn had used a knife. These are the facts that make a ruling of self defence difficult. Was using a knife and stabbing Halling five times using reasonable force? It's all too easy to look back in hindsight, a calm mind and some clarity of the situation.

Did Osborn need to wait until Halling had picked up a knife first? Would it be reasonable to feel that Halling would launch into a lethal attack at any moment? In the situation Osborn found himself in, I would assume that Halling was an immediate threat. At any time, he could arm himself and attack. After all, where did all that blood come from? Did he just kill someone down the street?

You COULD go for the self defence plea but again, who knows what a jury would think of using a knife against an unarmed aggressor. It's risky either way.

Because this case could have gone either way, I though it important to highlight that sometimes people in genuine self defence situations go to prison due to split second decisions.

Source: The Telegraph

Summary

Let's not forget for one moment in our calm look at the facts with the benefit of hindsight, each of these cases would have been quite sudden and quite scary. They were all desperate situations where those involved would have been shocked by the element of surprise and that shock would have endured throughout.

All genuine self defence situations are scary. Someone is trying to kill you! (I hope your training scares you from time to time as well, it should).

In this state, humans cannot make clear and logical decisions. How we react, besides acting on instinct for the untrained, will largely be a result of our own training, beliefs and make up.

What are your thoughts on using lethal force to defend yourself or your loved ones?

What are your thoughts on using lethal force to defend your property?

Are they different?

Have you got weapons handy in case someone does break into your home? Will that make any attack you use with that weapon pre meditated in the eyes of a jury? That is something you need to consider. Is there a way you can store it in a place that is more natural for you to instinctively go for it? Instead of having a knife under the bed, could you store it with some diving or fishing gear in a cupboard nearby? Things like this need to be considered. You do not want to set yourself up for a prison sentence before an intruder has even forced his way inside your home.

What about after the fact?

Those three men that were deemed to have used reasonable force in a self defence situation still have to live with them killing someone for the rest of their lives. Have you considered that? Are you inhumane? Will you take pleasure in killing? Do you look forward to it? Will you regret it every day for the rest of life?

Or do you accept that in such a situation, they have forced you to respond in a way to defend yourself. They have caused it, not you. You need to come to terms with how you will mentally view such a situation. Not just pre (as in trying to build confidence to act, though that is important), but post. How will you feel about your actions after the fact?

Does it really matter what your thoughts on it are if you spend the next ten years in prison?

Such considerations are just further reasons why we need to train in systems and methods that only use reasonable force, all of the time, such as ISR Matrix. If you are training in some ancient way where you do a sweep and then do a 'finishing' move once you have the attacker is down, you are training in an old obsolete system for the realities of todays day and age.

If you train knife defence where you do a disarm and then cut the attackers throat with their own knife, you are training in an obsolete system for todays day and age.

Spend some time thinking about what you consider reasonable actions are in the event someone (or group of people), breaks into your home. Think of numerous situations. What will you do? Maybe it will help if you spend a few moments writing down all of the realistic possibilities for your area. Then consider your appropriate options for each.

Can you fall back into one room that can be securely locked, like a safe room whilst you call the police?

What are the laws in your area?

Do you ALWAYS have all doors and windows locked? Even during the day? Do you always open the front door when someone knocks?

Food for thought.

What are your opinions of self defence in the home, or about the cases above? Do you know of other cases that are controversial?

Is killing ok?

Should we be able to use MORE force during a home invasion because it is in our home?

Share your thoughts in the comments below.

Opening Image via timsamoff

Human Combative Behaviour Manifesto

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 03:32:00 +0000

The 2nd edition is here.

The Human Combative Behaviour Manifesto.

Understanding human to human violence enables you to recognise a violent encounter before it happens. It enables you to avoid places, activities and times that are high risk for certain types of violence.

It enables you to avoid violence.

Understanding human to human violence better enables you to de-escalate a situation if you have been unable to avoid it.

Sneak Peak Inside

Have a sneak peak inside the Manifesto below. Note: The Manifesto in the video is the older original version.

Understanding Human Combative Behaviour is about knowing that broadly, there are only two types of violent encounter...

An Alpha Male encounter.

And a Predatory encounter.

The Human Combative Behaviour Manifesto provides details of both of these types of violent encounters. You will learn the following:

Know how to recognise high risk places, times and activities for each of the two types of human combative behaviour
Understand the vast differences in the Alpha Male and the Predator
Know the different goals of each
Know how to avoid each
Know how to de-escalate each (they both require two very different approaches)

There is a whole lot more in the Manifesto. It is over 10,000 words and 40 pages.

BONUS Case Studies

Besides the Manifesto, you will also be sent 5 Case Studies. These will explore 5 real attacks and look at how they happened. The case studies will show you what type of combative behaviour the attacks were, the locations they happened and what the victim was doing at the time (and what they were not doing...) and more.

These case studies will showcase real incidents in the light of the knowledge learned in the Manifesto and will show you how you can apply the knowledge learnt in real life.

The case studies will show how a knowledge of human combative behaviour could have enabled the victim to recognise early what was going on and avoid the incident altogether or evade it or de-escalate it.

Free Updates too

You will also be sent updates from this site, Low Tech Combat, as new articles are published as well as future special newsletters that will be sent only to newsletter subscribers. Subscribers will also be sent any future updates of the Manifesto as new information is obtained or refinements are adopted.

Get it all Now

Simply fill in your first name and email address above or below or in the top right of the sidebar of this site.

Once you have done that you will receive an email shortly after.

You will need to confirm you want to opt in to receive the Manifesto.

Once you have done that, you will receive your first newsletter which will tell you how to download the Manifesto. It is very easy. You will then be sent the Case Studies which will be sent to you about once a week. I am sure you will enjoy it all.

What Do Others Think?

Let's have a look. This is Dan from The Daily Prep.

***Not convinced? Have a look at some of the feedback which has begun coming in about the Manifesto already, below in the comments section***

The feedback below is speaking for itself. People are loving it!

Remember, you can unsubscribe at any time. In every email you get from Low Tech Combat, there will be a button you can click to stop getting any emails from us ever again. It is really easy. You can keep the Manifesto and any other emails you have gotten from us too. And tell people why you don't like it below. The whole world can read your reasons.

Enjoy :)

Adam at Low Tech Combat

The Manifesto will be Released this Weekend :D

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 03:51:00 +0000

Announcement: The Human Combative Behaviour Manifesto will be released this weekend! 10 - 11th December 2011

Check out the short Promo video below :)

It will be available at some stage over this weekend. Not sure of the exact time as yet. Depends on the technical set up. I am very proud to be able to release this for free to all of the Low Tech Combat tribe. I am hoping this will be a very valuable resource.

Not long to go now.

Adam

Intro to Low Tech Combat: Video

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Sun, 20 Nov 2011 06:44:00 +0000

YouTube link http://youtu.be/hKqulsW6OHs

Welcome to our brand new video :)

It is just a short 1 minute introduction to Low Tech Combat. Please share it around and let people know what Low Tech Combat is all about.

And while you're at it, let them know about the upcoming release of the Human Combative Behaviour Manifesto... It's coming soon.

Collection of Videos From Gathering of Modern Master Minds

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Wed, 02 Nov 2011 08:37:00 +0000

Here is a sample of three audio based videos from a gathering of some well known and highly skilled and experienced martial arts and self defence instructors and practitioners. The following videos include such names as Kris Wilder, Rory Miller, Marc “Animal” MacYoung, Al Peasland, Nicholas Yang & Iain Abernethy.

What do you think? Some interesting stuff for sure.

The rest of the series of 11 videos can be found HERE.

Finally, the Differences Between Strategy and Tactics Explained

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Tue, 02 Aug 2011 11:36:00 +0000

Too many people use the terms ‘strategy’ and ‘tactics’ incorrectly or even talk about a particular ‘thing’ or topic as being both a good strategy and tactic. Usually, this is actually referring to a tactic but the person likes to throw in the word strategy because it sounds cool, they don’t know better or believe it somehow implies a deeper thought process and means more...

Not any more. No more excuses.

There are unquestionable and very fundamental differences between strategy and tactics and these will be clearly detailed in this article. Not only are these words used poorly and often interchangeably, but a poor understanding of the meaning of the words can inhibit or mislead a persons overall training outcomes and objectives. It can muddy a persons goals and lead people down the wrong path. Sometimes, years can be spent training a certain way or in a certain system that is not really in line with their long term overall goals, purely because the meaning of ‘strategy’ and ‘tactics’ is not clearly understood.

These matters and more will now be discussed in detail.

What are Tactics?

Traditional definition:

...the art of disposing armed forces in order of battle and of organising operations, especially during contact with an enemy.

Simply, it is the art of disposing armed forces, especially during contact.

Tactics are those short term decisions and actions that give a combatant an advantage during combat or that time immediately prior.

Tactics include, but are not limited to, the following:

Counter fighting
Drawing an opponent to use a desired attack in order to present an opening to attack
Feinting to determine likely responses
Stop hitting
Using set up questions
Using non aggressive stances and posture to mentally disarm an aggressor
Telling an angry male that you thought you knew their girlfriend from school, that is why you were staring
Appearing crazier than the aggressor in order to prevent a possible encounter going physical
Repeating the same technique in order to prompt the defender to expect it again and then do something else
Go low then high, high then low, left then right, right then left etc.
Deciding not to argue with the drunk male who said you were a pathetic moron and told your girlfriend she could do better
Identifying that guy across the room who is pissed at you for some reason so you decide to leave that room or establishment prior to violence kicking off
Crossing the road or turning around when you see a dodgy person lingering near a driveway up ahead at night
Deciding not to use that ATM because there are some people hanging around that do not appear quite right
Buying that drunk guy a drink after his got spilt by you

This list is not exhaustive. Tactics are where the action is. Tactics are those actions and decisions taken with a short term focus. Tactics are right in the thick of an encounter or just prior to it happening or potentially happening. For many people, tactics are where the juice is. It is what they love. It is often quite enjoyable to watch a sport fighter fight who is a very good tactician. There is a lot going on. You can see them setting up their opponent. They are often referred to as smart fighters. They think. They utilise tactics and do it well.

Tactics and a 'game'

Of note, many sport fighters are certainly not good tacticians. Instead, they use their exceptional power or techniques. They have very good tools and they know how to use them. This could be in the form of combinations that work for them, superior quickness or an unstoppable takedown followed by submission or ground and pound.

These combinations of moves that work well for them are a basic form of rigid tactics. As an example, they will punch high for a while and when the opportunity presents itself, they know they will go for the takedown. This rigid form of tactics is what is referred to as a fighters ‘game’. They have a game plan they are going to follow. It is like a strict system of tactics that are tied together. Once a talented fighter with great tools has a good ‘game’ that works for them, watch out. They can be very hard to beat, even for a fighter who utilises a more fluid implementation of tactics.

Tactics are what most people focus on. It is what many people are good at. It probably makes up around 99% of a persons training time. It is what we do when we 'do' training. We drill, we spar, we roll, we compete etc. Most people have a pretty good appreciation of what tactics are and how to train in order to develop and enhance them. The mistake is, many people call some tactics, strategy. This is incorrect.

What is a Strategy?

Ok, we understand what tactics are now, so what is a strategy?

Traditional definition:

...a plan of action or policy designed to achieve a major or overall aim.

Strategy happens away from the action. If you are involved in a violent encounter, you are not using strategy, you are using tactics. Hopefully good ones and hopefully to a good standard.

Strategy is big picture stuff. Strategy happens when you think about something deeply over a period of time and make a deliberate decision. This could be a goal or plan or whatever. These could be medium term but are generally long term. Even very long term. These deliberate decisions or goals are what drives everything else. Implementing a strategy often takes work and effort. It can require a detailed plan as to how you are going to reach your strategic goal.

It is often hard work to make something achievable. That is one of the reasons few people engage in strategic thought and implement a strategic action plan to get things done in accordance with strategic aims. Its all too easy to place it in the too hard basket for a while and then go back to doing whatever you feel like on spur of the moment decisions or just follow what everyone else is doing. Following this pattern, it is very unlikely you will by accident end up where you want to be.

And then you are 80 years old and realise you havn’t done what you truly wanted to do...

In a martial arts or self defence context, deciding you want to learn how to defend yourself is very much a strategic decision. And an important one at that! However, too many people leave the strategic thought there and simply begin doing whatever classes are close to them or what their friends do. The basic strategic intent is there, however the implementation of that desired end state is done poorly. The decision of what to learn can impact on a person for years to come. A person may begin going to a certain class for 4 to 10 years or even longer. We are talking about a long time. But is that class really well suited to the students desired end state? Their strategic aim?

The issue largely stems from a beginner not really understanding violence and violent crime, so any decision they make at this early stage is likely going to be ill informed. As time goes on and the new student learns more about that violence they have made a decision to prepare themselves for, better decisions can then be made. Improvements to previous decisions can be made. The implementation of that strategic aim can improve over time.

A persons overall goals can change, so their strategic direction will change accordingly. They may change from wanting to be able to defend against a real attack to wanting to understand a certain culture and art they have since fallen in love with. As strategic goals change, their plan as to how they want to achieve those goals needs to change as well.

Another persons overall goals may harden. They may be more interested in the area of human to human violence and may want to learn more and more and pursue the worlds best practises and concepts in that field. This persons overall strategic goals don’t change, but their plans about how they are going to pursue them, will. It will become refined over time and more targeted and informed. The implementation of the strategic plan will improve as knowledge of the subject improves.

Strategic decisions drive activity through plans and routine. After identifying an overall strategic goal (and this may take some time to consider), a strategic plan is developed as to how that strategic goal is going to be realised. That plan is then implemented into ones life and is followed. This becomes a persons training routine. In that routine, classes and seminars are gone to, books are read and thought is undertaken.

Lessons are learnt. Done properly, these lessons directly contribute to moving towards achieving those strategic goals.

One of those areas that are developed whilst actioning our strategic plan is tactics. We learn tactics at our classes and whilst studying. With a properly implemented strategic plan, these learnt tactics will be very relevant to our desired strategic goals.

Strategic Decisions Drive our Learning of Tactics.

This ensures what we learn is what we want to be learning. If we did not make well considered strategic decisions we will likely not come across those lessons that we desire which includes our understanding of tactics. What point is being the worlds best at performing a Wushu demonstration when what we really wanted to do was become a proficient boxer? This is just a simple example of how not making those important strategic decisions and sticking with the intent can lead one easily down some other path that seemed interesting enough at the time but became all consuming as friends were going there and the people were nice and friendly.

Along the path, knowledge can increase strategic understanding and provide direction as to how our routine will best facilitate learning.

Here are some strategic issues and areas where knowledge can drive understanding and appropriate training which will likely lead to relevant tactics being learnt:

Understand the real violent crime statistics for your own neighbourhood
Understanding what form of violent crime YOU are most likely to encounter in your day to day life (fight at pub, mugging at car park etc.)
Understand what weapons are most commonly used in real attacks
Understanding that three or more attackers are much more likely than just two
Understand that some people will harness social norms to gain an advantage over you non violently
Understand how ego and face can become a core reason that violent encounters begin
Understand that assault types of attack are much more likely (about 10 times more), than muggings and robbery
Understand that about half of all assaults are between people who know each other (It may not be the stereotypical drunk guy you dont know in the pub)
Understand where the primary danger zones are for you and when they are most dangerous

The above is not an exhaustive list. These are just some big picture considerations that could be seen to be useful in driving some training methodologies that would be most relevant to a person for THEM and not a one size fits all. Once knowledge is gained and strategic direction is followed, look out. Such a person would be well on their way along the path.

The importance of strategy does not only need to apply in the martial arts or self defence context. It can apply anywhere. Think of a long term goal and work towards what is truly important to you. That is strategic thinking and strategic action. Along the way, you will learn tactics that work for that particular strategic field.

This article has demonstrated some of the clear differences between strategy and tactics. The differences are obvious. When you hear people use the terms incorrectly now, it will be loud and obvious. Harnessing the power of strategy is the most important thing. Tactics follow strategy. Strategy drives a good understanding of tactics.

Strategic subjects are generally those which are written about on this site. Most articles here are about bigger picture areas of what we call Low Tech Combat. To us, this is the most appropriate use of the written word on the internet. Tactics are best learnt in person from another person. However, too many people are engaging in training that does not really follow their overall intent. And that is a shame.

Strategy must come first in order to facilitate informed decisions and appropriate training.

Images via Okinawa Soba and Davide Restivo

Colour Codes of Awareness

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Sun, 26 Jun 2011 20:46:00 +0000

The Colour Codes of Awareness from White through to Black

The Colour Codes of Awareness can be used as a model or system for conceptualising just how we should actually apply awareness. Many people espouse that we should always maintain awareness of our surroundings and be on the lookout for warning signs and indicators that warn of a person about to possibly attack. But it can still be unclear as to how we should go about being ‘aware’.

The Colour Codes of Awareness provide a clear and simple explanation about how to go about applying awareness and how to be aware. Such is the beauty of the system. This system was first developed by Jeff Cooper who was an officer in the Marines who served in WWII and Korea and was later a weapons trainer. The system I will be presenting here is a modified version which I think is more targeted and specific to the topic of awareness.

The system uses a scaled or tiered colour system to indicate different levels of awareness. The colours progress in order from white through to yellow, orange, red and black.

White - No Awareness

The white level is where you are completely unaware of what is going on around you. An example would be walking down the street to buy some fruit, staring at the ground and thinking of what you will be doing on the weekend. At the white level you are very prone to being caught by surprise. Some may even be able to remember being in such a state of awareness and being caught by surprise as someone else turned a corner at the same time as you and almost ran straight into you. Imagine if a person standing casually against a wall that you did not notice all of a sudden pulled a knife and demanded your wallet or purse. That feeling of surprise would be much much larger than simply bumping into someone.

White is bad. It leaves you vulnerable to being caught by surprise. Even a highly trained fighter will be on the back foot in such a situation and could be the difference between surviving and not. One of the very best things we can do for our own safety is to deny any possible attacker the use of the element of surprise. When you are in white, you are not aware of anything going on around you.

In white, you are vulnerable.

Leave white for when you are home. Of course, only if the doors and windows are locked. The home is one place we should all feel safe. Some extremists insist that even at home, we should never be at the white level. I certainly disagree on this one. If the doors and windows are all locked, let your guard down a little. Enjoy dinner. Enjoy that movie on the couch. But when out and about, we should all be in yellow mode as a default setting...

Yellow - Casual Scanning, General Awareness

The yellow level is what we should all be in at most times. At the yellow level, all we are doing is maintaining a general awareness of our surroundings. This involves recognising when we go into higher threat areas such as an empty multi level car park alone, or along a street that leaves a busy entertainment area at night by ourselves. These are higher threat times and we should logically be security conscious when in these environments. It is only through being aware that we can recognise a possible threat early so we can avoid it or take other measures. Being aware of our surroundings enables us to recognise this as we go.

As well as being aware of our environment and surrounds, in yellow we also maintain a general awareness of the people around us at any one time. This involves just a casual scan as we go about our lives. It is not about walking along, staring at people and turning our head in every direction. It is certainly not about being paranoid. It is simply about casually scanning as we go along with our life. Often when doing this, we will see our friends or family at a shopping centre well before they see us for example.

Essential for this yellow level to work, we need to know what we are looking for. Here, knowing some of the key signs and indicators of people likely to be trying to hide violent intent is vital. Some of these aspects are things such as clenched fists, avoiding eye contact, rocking back and forth or bouncing slightly, quick actions rather than relaxed and casual as well as hiding their hands are just some.

These are the types of things to look for when in yellow. These types of cues are used in conjunction with the environment you are in. Being in a busy mall in the middle of the day where pick pockets would be likely and being in a quiet train station at night where muggings or robbery would be more likely require two different types of approaches.

Actually knowing what to look for and knowing where the most dangerous areas are and actually casually scanning as you go about your life is what the yellow level is all abut. Scanning without the knowledge to know what to look for is misguided, though better than nothing. Skipping through an empty car park then lane as a short cut but scanning is misguided as well, as you may encounter 6 youths with weapons in front and behind you. This is about environmental awareness as well.

Once you have identified a possible threat, the orange level springs to life...

Orange - Possible Threat Detected, Assessment

You have been aware of where you have been going and you have casually been scanning around you and you have detected someone suspiciously hanging around a driveway up ahead who is hanging back mostly out of view...

Congratulations.

You have detected a very possible threat. This is how you stay safe from violent crime. Now that you have detected this possible threat, keep watching. Assess their behaviour. Think about the context of where you are and what the time is. Maybe you will see that this person is merely waiting for a lift as a car pulls alongside and picks him up. Maybe he has had a few drinks and is looking for somewhere to do a piss. It’s up to you to assess if this person really is a threat. It may take a split second, it may take a couple of minutes depending on how far away you are and things like that. If it is nothing, keep going on with your life.

The main thing is that you have identified something and have considered a threat to you. Many people never accept that someone would do any harm to them. It will never happen to them. Sometimes, it does. Most times it won’t though. There will be many instances of where you go from yellow to orange to yellow to orange and so on. This is the meat of how to avoid violent crime. If you are not looking for it, you won’t see it.

Red - Decision, Action

You have been in orange mode and have determined that the threat is likely a real threat. It is now decision time. Time to act. In the case of the person hanging around in the driveway mostly out of view, one possible action could simply be walking across the road before you get anywhere near that person. Maintain a watch on that person as you go by. Remember, most predatory attackers are looking for an easy victim, someone unaware, someone who can be caught by surprise. They will probably let you go by. Continue on, maintain awareness. Possibly as you cross the road, the person comes out a little, looks up and down the street quickly and is looking to cross as well. Turn around and go where you came from. If you need to, run. This could only ever be possible because you were at the yellow level to begin with and detected this threat early.

Red is all about taking avoidance actions. It is only possible because of the yellow and orange levels before it. Avoidance is more than just walking away from an argument (though it still can be), it is about detecting a threat early and then avoiding it. It could be leaving a bar or going to a separate area of a bar because you have seen someone eye balling you after they thought they saw you checking out their missus...

Is avoidance cowardly? Is it the weak way out for losers? I have heard some poor and immature arguments saying it is. Normally it is people with very low self confidence, very low self belief and fragile egos. I am very comfortable with myself and my abilities. I look at avoidance as winning. If I can recognise a threat and avoid it, I have won. Without lifting a finger.

Black - Engaged in Physical Encounter

Black is when you are engaged in a physical encounter. It could be a fight, a gang attack or whatever. This is not really a level of awareness but needs to be included as well. For one very important reason. What happened at all of the previous levels dramatically effects what happens at the black level. If you were in white mode and got attacked, your chances of success are quite low, no matter your ability. Whereas if you were in yellow mode, then recognised a threat, determined it was a probable one, and took action to avoid it first... Then you know exactly the nature of the attack. You are not shocked by surprise. Sure, it will still be a scary thing but you are not shell shocked by a massive push from the side.

You will know the nature of the attack such as whether it is predatory or alpha male. You may be able to lessen the time of the encounter. You will have a better base to draw on any methods you use as you know how it developed and maybe even why. You may have even detected that there are actually three guys and not only the one you see now. That is a key factor to know so you are not blindsided. You are in with a fighting chance.

You may have even had time to find an improvised weapon to even the odds a little. If you were in white mode, no such luck should be expected.

You may even have been able to determine that the guy is not a lethal threat because of what you saw prior to him picking you. He may just be hopelessly drunk or even mentally challenged. You may then attempt using less force than if you were caught by surprise.

Summary - Awareness = Avoidance

The point is, by starting at yellow, you give yourself options. You minimise the chances of being caught by surprise. Even though you may not be caught by surprise, it should be said that there will still be stress. Utilising the colour codes of awareness will not necessarily stop things such as tunnel vision, slow motion time, auditory exclusion, high heart rate, loss of fine motor skills etc. But, it will limit their effects as surprise is taken out of the equation. Combat will always be stressful. Low Tech Combat is Raw. But seeing things develop early can limit these effects and enable us to still think and act. Especially important is that harnessing the colour codes of awareness enables us to act before it turns physical.

All you need to do is start off at yellow and avoid white. Its that simple.

Yellow then orange then red. Hopefully that is all. That is how awareness works and how awareness equals avoidance.

What Does the 21 Foot Rule for Defending Against a Knife Mean For Non Mil/LE?

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 12:46:00 +0000

Nathan over at TDA Training has asked me to contribute to a series of posts about a video he published on his site which showcases Dan Inosanto. I was only too happy to contribute! It is quite a famous video. In it, Dan shows how a Police officer with a weapon still in its holster, generally requires a surprise knife attacker to be 21 feet away in order to allow enough time and space to recognise what is happening (the person has pulled a knife and is charging), and then make the decision to act, and then draw the weapon and fire at the centre of the attacker. Any less than 21 feet and the officer is generally not able to draw the weapon and fire in time before the knife is inserted into the Police officer's body. I recommend going to watch the 21 foot rule video at Nathan's site before reading on.

This video is specifically aimed for Law Enforcement (LE). For non LE or Military personnel for that matter, what does this video teach us? What about purely from a self defence perspective? There are some things which are quite important in this video and some things that are not relavent.
TGace from The Things Worth Believing In has detailed some of the more pertinent cases against the video at TDA Training. This is a good read and I won't go into what TGace covers too much here. Also, Patrick Parker from Mokuren Dojo highlights that the handgun is not always the supreme weapon. The knife can be more dangerous. This video shows some examples of this. Peter talks about this and more HERE.

Is the 21 Foot Rule Irrelevant?

From a self defence perspective, the video is largely irrelevant. We do not walk around with a pistol in a holster (except maybe some of the US readers and subscribers, but you guys are a minority). We do not need to fumble for a pistol. So that part is completely not of use to us. Or is it?

What type of movement is going to draw a pistol out of a holster? Yes. It is a fine motor skill. Straight away, regular readers will know what this means. It once again highlights that fine motor skills fail under pressure. Even when quite a lot of training has been done on just one fine motor skill movement. When an attacker with a knife chargers, that is the only move. The LE officer does not need to choose from a large number of possible techniques. There is just one. This makes things much easier to process under real intense stress. But still, we can see in the video that one simple fine motor skill fails (or is very slow and fumbly), under pressure.

This once again highlights that relying on fine motor skills is a very risky endeavor. Relying on gross motor skills is a much better tactic with a higher percentage chance of working under pressure. Unfortunately, the LE officer has little other option but to draw the weapon from the holster. Here a LOT of repetition is key. And this must include repetition in realistic scenarios such as the ones in the video.

Distraction

One other interesting lesson from the video is that in many instances, Dan goes to draw the weapon soon after handing over ID or some other activity. This is another key point. The LE officer is distracted and focused on something other than what the suspect is doing. This is important. As I have said numerous times,

Beware the distracting question or action from someone you consider a possible threat!

This is very relavent for self defence purposes as well as LE. This requires us to ignore some questions for a few moments in case the person does something quickly. This also means not looking away to where the person may be pointing. It also means not looking down at our watch when asked the time. These are just some ways an attacker may seek to distract us. This is a very common tactic. And it works.

Expect a Knife to be Possible

In the UK, Australia and Canada (as well as likely many other similar countries), the knife or edged weapon is the most likely weapon used in attacks today. This statement has come from research I have done into real statistics from those countries. In the US, a handgun is the most likely, followed by a knife. In the lead up to any possible physical encounter we all need to be looking (not constantly), at the hands of the other person. The knife may not be there straight away. This does not mean we can tick it off the list. Throughout, we need to watch for the person going to draw a knife. This is another key lesson from the video from a self defence perspective. A knife can be used even on the ground, so watch for a draw there as well. In many instances in the video, we can see the LE officer did not see Dan going for the weapon straight away. This was largely due to them being distracted.

Generally, a knife is secreted away in the waist area. Watch for them going for that area. This could be the front or the back. This is something that Wim mentioned in his comments about the same 21 foot rule video. As soon as a likely attacker goes for that area, assume a knife is being sought. Obviously, take the context of any discussion into account.

No Gun, So What Do We Do?

In the footage, the LE officer had a pistol. We will probably be unarmed. True, but the lessons from this video is not so much about technique, but about awareness. The earlier you can see a threat, the sooner you can react to it, thus shortening down that 21 foot distance. The only way you can see a threat early is by looking for it. The only way you can be looking for a threat action is if you are not distracted.

Be aware and maintain your awareness.

But what do we do? What technique can we do instead of the pistol draw? Obvious question. But this is not one that can be answered well purely online. That is not the point of this article. Seek out your own training providers in this regard. One good example of knife defence is STAB knife defence. Check it out. But technique requires hands on. Whatever it is you do, make it gross motor!

Image via sethfrantzman

STAB Knife Defense System Video

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Wed, 09 Mar 2011 20:46:00 +0000

The STAB knife defense system is certainly a good one. This is a solid video on knife defence. I encourage everyone to watch this all the way through, it is that important. It is 17min and 20sec of your life, invest it in learning this stuff.

The STAB knife defence system is alive and it is all about controlling that knife bearing limb. This is 90% of what effective knife defence is all about. Controlling that knife bearing limb.

At Low Tech Combat, we discuss realistic knife defence a lot. The things we suggest for a realistic and effective knife defence system is evident in the STAB system.

For further considerations and info on realistic knife attacks and defence, check out the following:

and on Aliveness for those who are not fully aware of what that term means:

Aliveness: Common Sense or Controversial?

Has anyone done any STAB courses or training? What do you think of the video? Too simplistic? Incomplete? Share your thoughts below in the comments section.

ISR Matrix: The Definitive Review and Interview

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Wed, 23 Feb 2011 09:48:00 +0000

ISR Matrix is a self defence system which teaches a linear response that aims to overcome an attack in a progressive manner. The defenders response can be scaled depending on the nature of the attack. In particular, the response is scaled according to the legal use of force continuum. For a more aggressive attack, more force can be used where necessary. Where little real threat is present, control is used to neutralize the attack.

This organic ability within the system is one of its strengths. Although ISR Matrix is targeted primarily at the Law Enforcement (LE) and Armed Forces (AF) communities, they also cater to civilians. It is well understood that LE and AF personnel need to adhere to strict use of force guidelines however, most self defence systems for civilians ignore such a reality. Everyone needs to be concerned with use of force. A person defending against an attack can legally use too much force purely out of a reaction or overly aggressive training and end up in court and then prison. CCTV is everywhere. This is very important.

Review and Interview

This post is an independent review of ISR Matrix so that subscribers and readers of Low Tech Combat can better understand the system and make an informed decision as to whether they should pursue opportunities to participate in one of the ISR Matrix courses. Included is an exclusive interview with Dave Pauli who is the Australian representative for ISR Matrix. This in itself is excellent reading! Some of the key strengths and weaknesses of the ISR Matrix system will be explored as well.

UPDATE: Since first writing this review, the writer of this post (Adam @ Low Tech Combat), has participated in an ISR Matrix course, so this post has been updated where necessary. Not much has needed to be changed actually. Indeed many of the comments at the bottom of this post (which are numerous and positive) make more sense since having now done a course. The quick version, it is highly recommended!!

Note: This is a long post, even for Low Tech Combat standards.

ISR Matrix was founded by Luis Gutierrez in 1996. It is based on the principles of Aliveness. Luis Gutierrez is also the vice President of Matt Thornton's Straight Blast Gym. Therefore, we can see straight away that the system is very much focused on closing and clinching. This is how the system pressure tests its students. This is how the founders and instructors are able to test their system and prove that it works. Can they apply their system against a 100% resisting opponent in realistic scenarios? With much of the focus being on the LE and AF community, the focus is teaching that which works in real dynamic environments, within the use of force continuum.

ISR Matrix

ISR is an acronym which provides an overview of the entire system.

"I" stands for Intercept.

"S" stands for Stabilize.

"R" stands for Resolve.

The 9 Core Components

Within ISR Matrix there are 9 core components.

Within the "Intercept" phase there are the "Helmet", "Dive" and "Arm Drag".

Within the "Stabilize" phase there are the "Wrist Weave", "Harness" and "Underhook and Pike".

Within the "Resolve" phase there are the "S Position", "Back Rides" and "Arm Wrap and Knee Ride".

Overall, the system teaches a 3 stage response whereby the defender intercepts by either outflanking or closing aggressively with the attacker and achieves a controlling position to momentarily stabilize and neutralize the attack. When physically engaging, this is the first response to all attacks. From that moment and position of stability, the situation and resolution options are quickly assessed and the defender choses how to resolve the situation with due regard to the nature of the attack, the likelihood of it continuing and the legal considerations of the use of force continuum. The defender may chose to disengage, restrain or indeed apply striking techniques. This the beauty of the system in a day and age of legal prosecutions and a widespread network of CCTV cameras spreading through society.

Within the Use of Force Continuum

In a self defence setting, a simple locking or restraining hold may be all that is required to stop the threat. Remember that most assaults occur between people who know each other. You do not want to knockout uncle Bob just because he has been going through a rough patch and has had a few too many drinks at a family bbq.

For an attacker who is still being aggressive and is still trying to attack the defender, further techniques can be used to stop the attack from a controlling position where the attacks are mitigated. Where there may be more than one attacker, a more destructive technique could be used. The person being held could be positioned between the defender and the other attackers or forcefully directed into them. Striking, dynamic takedowns and forcefully directing attackers into obstacles is always an option. At any time, the defender can disengage if required.

The point is, once in this controlling position, an appropriate technique can be deployed depending on the level of threat. From these stabilising positions, the defender can think. This is very important. Thinking under pressure will enable smarter decisions to be made rather than just reacting through an entire encounter. It is known that in a real encounter, under pressure and stress, thinking rarely happens. This is normal. These stabilising positions facilitate and enable the defender to think. The advantages of this should not be overlooked. ISR Matrix has obvious advantages to any practitioner.

Aliveness is Central

One other aspect of ISR Matrix which is also key to its success and growing popularity is its ability to train its students in the system gradually and progressively. At first, the system can be taught slowly until it is understood and then it can gradually be stepped up in intensity by having the "attacker" resist the moves more and more until they are resisting 100%. This is important.

Indeed, as an opponent resists, this leads to follow up transitions. The resisting opponent determines what technique the ISR Matrix defender will employ. They are not trying to force their techniques on the aggressor. This is one of the aspects of the training that impressed the writer of this review. The defender can easily transition from one hold to another, based purely on how the aggressor tries to resist from a stabilising hold. This happens to a good standard in a very short period of training time on an ISR Matrix course.

Like has been said many times here at Low Tech Combat, any system that aims to be teaching self defence as one its training benefits (be that self defence courses or martial arts), needs to be utilizing Alive training drills, so that students can apply their techniques and tactics under pressure.

Sensory Depravation and Overload

Once proficiency has been gained in utilizing the 9 Core Components against resisting opponents in various scenarios, there may be further additions to the training, venue permitting. Music is turned up loud. This is to overwhelm the sense of hearing. The lights are turned off. This is to limit the use of sight, humans most powerful sense. Lights are flashed on and off from a torch and shined over the place and into the defenders eyes. All of this aims to take the student out of their comfort zones and raise the heart rate and apprehension.

In such a state, no fine motor skills will work. Such lengths are gone to because in real situations, the conditions may not be ideal as well. ISR Matrix is designed to work regardless of environmental conditions and stressors. Drills such as those briefly described above greatly enhance the participants confidence in the event of experiencing similar stressors in the future.

Interview with the ISR Matrix Australia Head Representative

Low Tech Combat has been in touch with Dave Pauli, who is the head ISR Matrix representative in Australia. I have asked Dave to answer some questions about ISR Matrix for the subscribers and readers of Low Tech Combat. Dave has surprised me very much with some very comprehensive answers which make very interesting and informative reading. I got a lot out of it. I am sure you will get a lot out of this interview as well.

Let’s get into it.

Adam @ Low Tech Combat:

What do you feel are the 3 best aspects of the ISR Matrix system?

Dave ISR Matrix:

The core ISR techniques enable the participants to train with high levels of intensity for extended classes with practically zero risk of injury. High levels of intensity in training are essential for the participant to have confidence in themselves and the system and to burn the system to memory. Systems that rely on bone breaking, joint manipulations and so on simply cannot be tested under pressure in training.

All ISR techniques are truly multi-purpose and interchangeable, offering a lot of bang for your buck across a wide range of situations. Less is more… fewer techniques means quicker reaction times and more training time available to build expertise in each of those skills. This aspect, along with the emphasis throughout the ISR on structure based defence, dominant positioning, environmental control/situational awareness and ready transitions between techniques and use of force options ensures street applicability.

The training method and the people behind it cannot be overlooked. The ISR Board of Directors is comprised of some of the finest sworn law enforcement and military use of force training professionals worldwide. The proven coaching methods and techniques have been refined in their own successful and progressive MMA gyms and within their special operations teams. We have one instructor that served in a military special operations unit followed by over 30 years on a busy full-time SWAT team, all the while training and competing in functional combat sports. Most have over 20 years experience at the sharp end.

The ISR approach has been validated by the ISR Board of Directors, both in competition against trained resistors and in the streets, jails and night clubs from Iraq and Afghanistan to the United States, Canada and Australia where the bad guy is not bound by rules. The ISR material has been tested under extreme levels of resistance during our internal R&D and the team routinely beat up on each other to validate the truth in combat. I have not seen this level of commitment nor this level of operational and training expertise evident in other systems that I have trained under.

Adam @ Low Tech Combat:

What are the 2 biggest shortcomings of the ISR Matrix system?

Dave ISR Matrix:

Currently the single largest shortcoming of the ISR is that demand is close to outstripping supply. Our ISR Matrix LE Instructor Trainers remain full-time Law Enforcement Officers and run MMA gyms part time. ISR Matrix is in demand worldwide and although we regularly conduct courses for various agencies, we simply don’t always have the instructional staff on hand to readily deal with every short notice course request that comes our way. That said we are not about to compromise on the training standards required of ISR Matrix Field Instructors and Instructor Trainers.

Further to the above, we simply don’t have the time, the staff and in many cases the interest to create a full-time marketing division to raise awareness of the ISR and the extent of our training programs. We are well known in LE/MIL training circles amongst the better units as that’s our core business. We aren’t as well known in civilian circles as some of the better known systems out there that are run by retired Officers or civilians. ISR was established in 1996 and only advertised to civilians in the past couple of years. ISR Matrix has 3 different streams and numerous levels and modules available within those streams.

ISR is best known for the subject control material, however there are further training modules available that integrate with our core material such as ground survival and escape, attached and unattached striking, vehicle based combatives and clinch with cloth, all of which are exceptional and battle tested programs in their own right. All too often, potential students and sometimes even those that have trained with us for one course, have an incomplete view of the depth of the ISR system.

Adam @ Low Tech Combat:

What areas of ISR Matrix are likely to evolve in the future?

Dave ISR Matrix:

Although we continually pressure test our material, the actual techniques themselves will likely not evolve a great deal. They have stood the test of time over hundreds of years in their respective combat sports and thousands of encounters over 15 years of our own internal R&amp;D. That said in the unlikely event that we find something more functional we will pressure test and adopt it if it meets our needs and enhances the system.

Our training methodology is undergoing continuous subtle refinements as we closely monitor developments in adult education, sports psychology, performance under stress and use of force training research. We are often developing new drills to teach or reinforce our proven tactics in a more efficient manner. We recognize the limitations placed on training budgets and training hours and seek to develop the finest possible exponents within the constraints of Departmental realities in training.

We are continually getting operational feedback from our course graduates, workplace liasions, Field Instructors and Instructor Trainers that are actively involved in high threat law enforcement and armed forces operations worldwide. As a specialist training provider without a large instructional cadre and without restrictive hardcopy “doctrine” we are well placed to quickly respond to emerging threats and new developments and nowhere is this more evident than our ISR Matrix AF stream where there is always an abundance of new variations and drills to be dissected at each of our regular Instructors summits.

We have been reluctant to release manuals and instructional DVD’s in the past given concerns over quality control and the potential for people to take this intellectual property and teach it as their own without ever having attended a course or properly understanding the material. However as the ISR grows in popularity and demand from our affiliates thirst for knowledge increases, some of our clinch with cloth material will be offered in instructional DVD format and some of our core material will become available in manual format.

Adam @ Low Tech Combat:

What is one of the best drills used in the ISR Matrix courses?

Dave ISR Matrix:

From the very first low pressure drill, through to the last high pressure drill, each drill has its place and is a stepping stone that contributes to the students success. That said it’s not possible to identify the best drill as they are all important for the students development. Feedback from students indicate that the better drills are those that prove challenging to their previous skillsets and highlight the importance of choosing function before form, especially in low light environments and confined spaces. ISR isn’t about aesthetics, it’s about what works in the real world.

Adam @ Low Tech Combat:

That’s fair enough Dave, there may be no ‘best’ drill, but could you just explain one of the basic drills found in ISR matrix for the readers of Low Tech Combat?:

Dave ISR Matrix:

I could take the easy option and give an example of a simple drill, but that would be both short changing you and not giving an accurate picture of the ISR. A single drill in isolation would appear to be "just another tool for your toolbox" or just another party trick. What's more important to ISR than the drill itself is the desired learning outcome of our systematic progressive drilling. A key strength of the ISR is the ability to control, assess and reassess while transitioning to other core techniques within the matrix. We don't train to get stuck in a rut by over training a certain pattern with a compliant partner.

Although there is a small selection of techniques in the ISR, there is an infinite number of drills or sequences available. Each drill I teach is an evolution of the previous drill and a step to the next drill. We introduce new drills every few minutes throughout the course by inserting another variable, another movement, another tactical consideration and/or another element of subject resistance and 99% of our drilling involves degrees of resistance (aliveness).

My aim through drilling and stimulus response training is to have students reach a stage where their initial physical control response to a hostile act occurs without conscious thought, leaving the students mind free to consider the situation, the environment, their options and consequences for selecting a course towards resolution - i.e. restraint, disengage, induce trauma or employ a weapon or other tactical option. Think of it as instilling tactical problem solving ability on the fly.

To answer your question, an example of a basic drill that illustrates my point in layman's terms could be: the subject throws a punch (any punch), you cover, intercept and take up a modified clinch then push him away to disengage to safety. That's an example of a basic drill and it's a drill that won't work all the time, that's why I chose it to illustrate this example.

ISR students however would constantly train a series of minor environmental, situational and subject variations, drawing on tactics from the rest of the ISR where necessary to enable that tactic to apply with a wider range of situational and environmental considerations - i.e. rather than the student learning a single technique, they now have a functional and adaptable skill with the ability to apply it to multiple situations and problem solve mid fight.

Adam @ Low Tech Combat:

Fundamentally, cases of Assault and other attacks such as Muggings and Robbery are quite different to each other with different mind sets, approaches etc. One is very Predatory in nature (muggings and robbery) and one is what we call Alpha Male in nature (Assaults). What type of attack does ISR Matrix mostly concentrate on?

Dave ISR Matrix:

While an understanding of criminal methodology and profiling is a most useful pre-fight self defence skill, when a fight breaks out, the reason why a fight erupted is of secondary concern to actually dealing with the fight. ISR picks up where the other systems leave off in that a students first course especially, the training is almost all about the in-fight. We don't engage in drawn out reality based style scenarios that may try to establish or deal with an attackers motives when we can instead be drilling and attaining proficiency in functional self defence skills. With that in mind, we train for probability not possibility.

Historically speaking, with a background in training private security, corrections and police, ISR students are at risk from a physical assault ambush during a field interview or resistance during restraint. That's primarily what we train towards. A committed attacker will most likely come at you with either punches, a tackle, a grab or push and ISR deals with that very well.

An attacker who resists the control and restraint process is another typical threat that is thoroughly addressed by ISR. Given that our tactics are functional and multi-purpose there's no reason why they can't be utilized in other less common self defence scenarios that become physical. For the hardcore RBSD scenario fan, many utilise the ISR Matrix tactics in conjunction with their existing pre-fight awareness and communication skills.

Adam @ Low Tech Combat:

Will someone be proficient at dealing with most self defence situations after doing one ISR Matrix course? Please expand.

Dave ISR Matrix:

ISR deals with probability, not possibility. If you are seeking an intensive course that offers tangible benefits and measurable success in dealing with common assaults then you have come to the right place. ISR training instills immediate instinctive reactions to these common attacks and students are physically performing well after 3 days, far better than an equal amount of time spent training in less functional systems or with a less functional training method. We will perform around 1000 repetitions of each technique in a course under progressive alive resistance through many different drills and thousands of technique transitions.

After 3 days hard training, students with no previous martial arts background are able to consistently deal with larger, stronger, fitter and better trained attackers. The many testimonials on our website speak volumes of the speed at which our students develop functional skills. That said, more is always better and a students performance and understanding improve dramatically on subsequent courses – another reason why we don’t award instructor status after just one course.

Adam @ Low Tech Combat:

Can you provide some real world examples of some people who have done an ISR Matrix course and have applied what they learnt in real situations?

Dave ISR Matrix:

There are many. Some that immediately come to mind –

A bouncer that successfully applied a torso control technique on an aggressive patron only hours after his first day of ISR training.
Numerous watch house officers who have earned reputations as the go to guy to restrain hostile prisoners because they have demonstrated functional subject control skills.
A Crowd Controller who was jumped by six offenders in a hotel and was able to defend himself until backup arrived without suffering injury or escalating to higher levels of force.
A Police Officer that witnessed a brief demonstration of just one ISR technique and used that technique successfully on numerous occasions despite never having practiced it themselves.
A friend of a student who avoided an armed robbery or assault with a weapon in Indonesia because one of our students had talked with him about some of the pre-threat cues that were integrated into our ISR drilling.

Adam @ Low Tech Combat:

If you had to give away one secret about self defence, what would it be?

Dave ISR Matrix:

Nobody ever won a fight, there’s always consequences and rarely is anyone deemed a hero. The best you can hope for and indeed train for is to go home in one piece, surviving the fight, the trial by media and the courts with your integrity, bank balance, employment and relationships still intact. Training appropriately to achieve this outcome is vital.

Adam @ Low Tech Combat:

What is one thing from the ISR Matrix system that readers of Low Tech Combat can take away right now to enhance their self defence skills?

Dave ISR Matrix:

Adopt an instinctive non-diagnostic, ambidextrous response that stops you from getting knocked out. All else fails if you are unconscious. Surviving the physical assault ambush, immediately gathering your senses and countering appropriately are essential to self defence. Question, test and filter your current techniques via alive resistance and only retain that which is functional - better still, save yourself the decades of research and development and come an learn it direct from us to get it right the first time!

Adam @ Low Tech Combat:

Dave, thanks very much for your comprehensive answers. Its been thoroughly enjoyable.

Dave ISR Matrix:

Thanks for the interview Adam, it’s been a pleasure.

Great stuff. I am sure will all agree. Now we will have a look at what can be perceived as being the strengths and weaknesses of the ISR Matrix system.

Strengths

Legal considerations covered by operating within the use of force continuum.
Alive training allows for pressure testing and quick learning times.
Gross motor techniques work under pressure.
Realistic physiological responses are stimulated.
Technique selection and progressive training methodology ensures safe training despite the high level of intensity.
Emphasis on training for position later lends itself to striking and combatives from a position of safety.
Once foundation skills are established, there are further modules available to address ground and striking applications that integrate with the foundation skills

Weaknesses

Lack of training at the pre-fight stage.
Use of strikes are limited in the earlier stages of ISR Matrix training modules.
Closing can be unnecessary/dangerous in civilian circumstances.
Closing can be a bad choice if an attacker turns out to be a trained grappler.

Conclusions?

Let's address the weaknesses first.

Lack of training at the pre-fight stage -

ISR Matrix is unashamedly interested solely in the actual combative phase of any conflict. It lets other systems deal with, and teach, the pre-fight aspects such as recognizing the nature of the approach and pre-attack signs and indicators. This allows the system to focus purely on drilling and attaining proficiency in the physical responses of any type of physical encounter. If you are interested in learning about and understanding the pre-fight stage of conflict, ISR Matrix courses are not for you. If you want to quickly achieve a good level of physical skills, this is the course for you.

Use of strikes are limited in the earlier stages of ISR Matrix training modules -

From such a base where control is first sought (as in ISR Matrix training modules), strikes can easily be delivered from a position of control. In particular, elbows and knees. This is why in earlier modules, the focus is on first achieving that control or position. One can argue that this weakness is actually a strength in that attempting to apply strikes from a poor position or even trading blows is a poor tactic. The ISR trainers are generally Combat Sport coaches so in later modules, striking is covered well and effectively. Once a base in achieving a good position has been attained, strikes are then taught in later modules. For people who like striking, they just need to wait and learn the fundamentals of control first. And then they can unleash their awesome strikes hehe.

Closing can be unnecessary/dangerous in civilian circumstances -

The topic of closing vs not is a larger topic than there is room for here. Some like to close, some like to stay away from an attacker. Some like to control the attacker, others like to stay away from their weapons. The approach used by ISR Matrix in their civilian modules is always to escape where possible.

It is the belief of both ISR Matrix and Low Tech Combat that closing is actually the better option as that is the best place to control the encounter from. Less force can actually be used. Strikes are not necessary, but possible. Once control has been achieved in close, it is easy to disengage if necessary. Closing does not have to mean going nuts and going for the knock out elbow or pulling out an eye. Attempting to evade and slip and dodge an incoming attack from a distance can be seen to be a high risk approach as eventually, one of the attacking techniques will probably hit their mark.

Closing can be a bad choice if an attacker turns out to be a trained grappler -
The argument of closing against a grappler can be said also of trading blows with a Muay Thai expert or boxer. There are no final solutions. If you do close and the attacker is a trained grappler, then it really is not your day. Such a scenario is very unlikely. The opposite can be said to be true. Much more people have a basic understanding of striking and that is the most likely basic skill set (or simply behavior), of an attacker. Choosing to close is most likely to move the conflict into your strength area (up close) which mitigates the attackers most likely strength (strikes). There are no final solutions.

Less people in society are trained at grappling range than striking range. This gives a little advantage to anyone who closes rather than tries to 'box' an aggressor. Closing to a position of advantage (such as an aggressors back), is obviously a good thing, even against a grappler. As is often the case as well, grappling range often just happens regardless of either persons intent to close to that range.

Thoughts?

Much of these weaknesses once they have been looked at, are not really weaknesses at all but can be seen as strengths in a solid reality based self defence approach.

With these weaknesses considered, along with the strengths, Low Tech Combat has no issue with recommending ISR Matrix as a Low Tech Combat approved training provider. Such training with a basis of Aliveness and Use of Force (Legal) concerns is absolutely vital in todays day and age for anyone interested in time effective self defence training. We can see a similarity between what ISR Matrix offers and what Low Tech Combat offered as a possibility some time ago as to what would make an excellent Reality Based Self Defence (RBSD) course.

Upcoming ISR Matrix Courses

Of note, there are numerous ISR Matrix courses coming up soon around the world. You can check out when one is coming to a place near you soon HERE.

What Do You Think?

What are your thoughts? Have you participated in an ISR Matrix course? What did you think? If not, do you intend to do one? Do you have any questions for Dave? If you have any, I will contact Dave and let him know and give him the option of replying here. Leave your thoughts below.

25 of the Best Comments from YOU

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Fri, 07 Jan 2011 03:05:00 +0000

I thought it was time to showcase some of the BEST comments from subscribers and readers of Low Tech Combat. What a good way to begin 2011 by showcasing the best of YOU :) This is a BIG thank you to those who take the time to craft an interesting comment on some of the posts here. From MANY of them I have gained a better insight into the topics I write on. Thank you very much.

And here are 25 of the best in no particular order.

From Phil on the post Can You Be Stabbed With a Knife and Not Know It?

I heard of a case of a police officer and his partner who was in a gun fight with an armed offender. They shot the suspect dead. They proceeded to check each other for injury as it was at very close range. His partner noted that his shirt was shredded where a bullet had apparently passed through his shirt missing him. When he saw that, he relaxed knowing that he was not injured. At that point the vasoconstriction released and the bullet wound in his shoulder began to gush blood. He had not felt it because of the adrenaline and the vasoconstriction had prevented the bleeding until he made the psychological distinction (which then resulted in a physical response) that he was out of danger.

Great article.

From AFJ on the post How Hard is it Really?

I agree with a lot of what you say, but I would like to offer a few contrary observations. I believe that you both overestimate the time required to train for a violent struggle, and you conversely underestimate the level of threat one might face. This sounds a bit contradictory, but I observe:

1) The skill set one must develop for a violent confrontation is not complicated. Gross motor skills, as you note. If it takes you more than a year of serious work-outs to learn those skills, then I think you should question either the complexity of your technique or the complexity of your tactical plan. Vastly more difficult to develop than skill is the capacity to form the genuine intent to harm an attacker. Years of learning ever more intricate technique will not compensate for a lack of intent.

I realize that your figure of five years is merely an example, but to even talk in terms of years of training is, in my opinion, to go well beyond what is required and you end up overemphasizing physical technique. Now, if we're talking about gaining the knowledge to successfully train others for combat, then five years or so is probably a good starting point.

2) Dividing threats into two basic scenarios or types is useful, so long as we avoid being too stereotypical in our depictions. Examine the videos you have linked from your post "Violence" and try to categorise them cleanly as Alpha Male or Predatory. As archetypal poles of types around which to group instances of violence this division might work, but when it leads to an almost dismissive tone towards "Alpha Male drunks," I think there's more harm done than good. The psychology of human motivation is, obviously, complex, and this includes the motivations for violent assault. We recognize complexity in ourselves and we must likewise recognize that complexity in our hypothetical attacker(s).

I fully appreciate the need to develop self confidence, but to accomplish it by building a contemptuous image of an assailant is, I believe, a serious mistake. This assailant has the primary advantages of choosing the time and place, and choosing the conflict. He has the initiative, he has the intent, and he has the belief that he will win (otherwise why start it?). Or, he is out of his mind and irrational, or drugged/intoxicated. Neither situation is to your advantage. You might be assaulted by a hardened ex-con, just out of a ten year lock up and seeking to finance his new freedom with whatever your house contains. You might have a fender-bender with a bodybuilder just peaking on a steroid rage. You might happen to be the next person in a borderline paranoid's path when he decides he's mad as hell and won't take it anymore, and the look on your face makes him reach for a knife. Hypotheticals, sure. And unlikely. Just as facing a serious assault from anyone is statistically unlikely in most of the developed world. But to reduce your expectations of violence to drooling schoolyard bullys or sly predators who will avoid you 'cause you're a stud, well, that's simply flawed thinking. Everyday in every city in the world there are violent encounters that do not fit easily into this scheme, and bad men daily walk the streets.

My revision to your post is essentially this...Winning and surviving a physically violent encounter isn't especially complicated and training for it need not take up a huge amount of our time...but it can still be hard as hell.

From Sifter on the same thread,

Which is why soldiers at higher levels who receive hand to hand combat typically drill it for many hours each day, every day, for maybe three weeks. Intense, basics, repetitive, but not for years. We all get absorbed in 'Hollywood' fighting, movies, that promote spinning back kicks and techniques requiring years just to learn. I think some of the reality stuff, Krav Maga, WW2 Fairbairn stuff, is more like what is needed. Plus immense conditioning, something I need to improve greatly.

From Anon on the post Overseas Travel Dangers: Know Them, Here's How

Security strategy depends on what it is you're doing overseas. Moneyed businesspeople working in high-risk areas would benefit from a no-nonsense book like "Still The Target" or "Beyond the Bodyguard". Aid groups will benefit hugely from this free manual: http://www.odihpn.org/publistgpr8.asp

Your risk, and your security strategy, depends totally on your role and mandate, your relationship with the groups in the place you're operating, your exposure, things like your nationality, gender, manner of dress and behaviour, etc.

Plan in advance what level of risk you can accept, where you can and can't go, how to make local connections, etc. But once on the ground, get up-to-date info from allied groups and locals. Conditions change all the time.

From Marc G. on the post TMA v Modern Systems

"...fundamentally, the practise of martial arts aims to teach skills which give one the ability to successfully defend and counter any physical attack that may come their way."

I couldn't agree more. Everyone has the right (and I think even the resposibility) to defend themselves.

"The threat we face on the streets today are very different than the threat faced in south east Asia hundreds or thousands of years ago which is what TMA were developed for and is still today, essentially, the focus of these systems."

I do not neccesarily agree. I think violence is violence and the same basic techniques of number superiority and and armed thugs is still the same as ever. Guns add a new dimension to it, but that is about the only practical difference. And, many of the modern asian arts (Karate for example) were developed for exactly the individual man defending himself.

"Its my belief that the study of the classics, some of these listed above, combined with hard, effective training is actually a pinacle in the history of hand to hand or low tech combat..."

I agree as well. There is something of value in many of the martial arts. And they all have their strengths and shortcomins. There is nothing wrong with absorbing what is useful from many...as long as you are actually training and learning reliably, not just to pad a martial resume youmight say. It is the intent and intesity of the training that make a superior martial artist...not a "superior art".

http://actionkaratearts.com/why-we-train/machineguns-and-the-martial-arts/

http://actionkaratearts.com/traditional-karate/well-dont-we-all-have-style/

And, to those "Anonymous" commenters out there...if you are going to bother to make negative comments...that's fine, but at least don't hide while you do it. Identify yourself somehow (nickname, first name, number, something...)

From Ed on the same thread,

Adam,

First, thank you for opening what seems to be an infected wound in the MA community. By all means, lets lance it, let it drain and hopefully it will heal with minimal scarring.

I come from a military/law enforcement background and have twenty years or so in the arts. Funny thing tho, I started in a more "Immediately Practical" training system in the 80s. I don't know if they invented the term MMA yet. I discovered I was searching for something and found it in Aikido. In addition to my Dan ranking, I also am a Law Enforcement Firearms, Defensive Tactics Instructor, and Impact Weapons Instructor.

15 years later (with dozens of real applications with people who really wanted to really wanted to hurt or kill me) I have learned that Aikido and similar arts can be very effective in the real modern world. That being said...

We are not talking about "TMAs v. MMAs" here. What we are talking about is separating the "Sports" or "Hobbies" from the path of warriorship. A warrior wears no label. He honestly inventories his surroundings and threats and compares them to the tools he already possesses. If his arsenal contains an effective response, great, he works to perfect the employment of that tool. If it does not, he MUST (becuase he is a warrior, not a student of a specific style) seek out an answer to the problem. If that search crosses the TMA/MMA border in either direction, so be it.

For keeping that dialog open, thank you.

Ed

From IronMongoose on the post 50 Year Trends in Violent Crime in the US

Several sociologists and economists have suggested that the drop-off in violent crime in the early 90's was due to the liberalization of abortion laws 20 years earlier.

Many of the people whose demographic properties put them at high likelihood of committing those crimes, were killed before they were even born. 20 years later, when they were at the "peak" of their would-be crime career, we first notice that they're nowhere to be found. That's the drop-off in violent crime stats.

It's a controversial theory. Conservatives hate it because it seems to suggest abortion has an upside. Liberals hate it because it blames crime on a certain "type" of person, and has creepy eugenic implications. But they've done multiple-baseline comparisons that seem to support the model. I think it's pretty plausible.

From hsoiblog on the same thread,

Another reason is gun laws.

In the late 1980's and early 1990's we started to see the movement towards the legal carrying of concealed handguns by law-abiding citizens. For a good illustration of the growth, see this animated GIF:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a8/Rtc.gif

Brief explanation of the legend: "unrestricted" is just that. "Shall-issue" means the state shall issue the carry license once criteria are met (e.g. must be of particular age, must not be a felon, must pass tests, etc., exact requirements vary from state to state)... but the point is, once the requirements are met the state shall issue, no allowance is given for some administrators personal opinion or bias. "May-issue" allows some administrator (e.g. local sheriff) control over who may or may not get a license, e.g. in New York they routinely deny average citizens, but rich people, movie stars, sports stars, etc. get granted for whatever arbitrary reasons. And "no-issue" is simply that.

So anyways, you can see how over the years the "right to carry" has grown, and correspondingly, violent crime has dropped. Does this correlation equal causation? Not necessarily, but many studies have been done examining this data and evidence is strong.

Or to put it in a simple way, criminals don't like getting shot. :-) There was a burglar arrested in my town last year. He was responsible for about 50 burglaries, but all of small businesses. After he was finally arrested they discovered why: because he knew he was in Texas and that many people in Texas have guns in their homes and he didn't want any part of that.

http://hsoiblog.wordpress.com/2009/03/29/smart-criminal/

So your guess of laws changed? Yes, in part.

From Todd I. Stark on the post Alpha Male v Predatory Threats

This is a very good concept, and one I've found extremely useful myself as well.

I follow a similar distinction in my thinking, but with a slight variation. I distinguish social violence in general (intra-species basis in social emotions) from predatory violence (coming from inter-species behavior).

My reasoning is that essentially, when our species preys on itself, it is leveraging mechanisms evolved for predator/prey interactions with other species. Bur our species evolved with powerful selective pressure for social interaction, both cooperative within groups and aggressive between groups.

The reason for the difference is that the two types of interaction use different neurobiological mecchanisms, and so the implicit underlying rules that we follow tend to be different.

Predatory violence is what happens when we "dehumanize" someone and treat them purely as a target. All but a very small percentage of us start out with a powerful inhibition against killing another person outright or using them as piece of meat (see Grossman's "On Killing" for the argument). Various kinds of training or indoctrination or social-political forces can conspire to overcome that inhibition.

Most human interaction is not predatory, it is rather social, and both domestic and "alpha male" patterns fit into that category for me. Just because there is an abuse of power and sometimes becomes lethal doesn't make it predatory for me, you have to look more closely at the process leading up to the danger points.

When we train people to kill, we are essentially teaching them to dehumanize their opponent and invoke predator-prey thinking. Some forms of military combatives and "reality" training are based on this principle. According to some, this is presumably neccessary because the other guy is trying to kill us, so we have to fight on his rules. I think a more flexible and human strategy (although more difficult) is to be able to distinguish the types of interaction and train for each accordingly.

It's a matter of making the basic distinction (predator/prey vs. social interaction); and assuming that either we should prepare for the most lethal but least likely type (predator/prey) or the more likely type (social); and then whether taking a predator stance is really the best choice in each case.

The most important heuristic for me is that social violence can generally be deescalated or defused, and predatory violence generally cannot, it can only be avoided, defended, or constrained by force.

The distinction is very similar to arguing with a rational vs. irrational person. In the former case, you present evidence and make arguments and reasonably expect to listen to each other and come to some consensus. In the latter, you set boundaries and establish alternative strategies and focus on the small things where you can be effective, you don't bother trying to argue. However, if you guess wrong in either case, you are going to be less effective.

From Elias who shared an educational account on the same thread,

Hi Adam, I wanted to share a story with you; this happened to me yesterday.

I was on my way home from training, catching a train in a sketchy neighbourhood at 9.30 PM.

As I was descending an escalator, I saw a guy looking at me; I thought it was a little suspicious, but didn't really think anything of it. When I looked again a few seconds later, he was still watching me, so I was pretty sure he marked me.

I'm a 22 year old male, but I'm told I look a few years younger than that. I weigh about 160 lb and am around 5'6. I am short sighted and was wearing my glasses, and I use a schoolbag to carry all my training stuff, which is why I think he marked me.

Anyway, I happened to be going in the opposite direction, so when I saw him switch platforms I figured it was on; he entered the train on the opposite end that I did, but he walked the entire length of the train (I think he did this in order to check I had boarded).

I made absolutely sure I knew where he was sitting and then adjusted my position so I could see his hat; however, when we got to the city he exited the train as fast as he could; I followed him as subtly as I could to make sure he left the station, and then took extra precautions on the rest of my way home, as there are a couple of stations within running distance of the city, on my line.

I believe that this was an attempt at a predatory attack; he thought he had singled out a weak, unaware victim; I think that when he realised that I was aware, he decided to bail.

I couldn't judge whether or not he could fight, but I have been training Krav Maga for a little over two years, and also I was aware enough to notice that he was sketchy.

Do you have any thoughts?

From Ikigai on the post Punch on the Street or Not?

Interesting discussion. Bill Hayes (Shobayashi Shorin Ryu Karate) always says 'hard to soft, soft to hard.' In that he means, use your hard knuckled fist to strike soft vital areas like floating ribs, nose, mouth, and solar plexus. Use your soft surfaces (palm of the hand) to strike hard surfaces like the head and joints.

From BK Price on the same thread,

A recent article in Black Belt Magazine (I think from March 2008, but I could be wrong) discussed the fact that clenching one's fist is a natural, instinctive reaction to the fight/flight reflex. Flexing of the hands, clenching the fists is one of those things that we often see as "pre-fight" indicators and supports this notion.

So whether punching with a fist or not is best may not really be a choice. If you know the fight is coming, sure strike with open hand strikes to the head but if you are caught off guard (as in the majority of actual fights), then you may end up throwing punch anyway.

Blauer teaches in his SPEAR course that its best not to try to resist instinct. Rather, to progress from "primal" to "tactical" in the shortest means possible. This would suggest the same for hand techniques. Instead of trying to resist the urge to punch to the head, it may be better to simply learn how best to punch to the head to minimize potential injuries. You can't necessarily train an instinct out of your system, but you might be able to manage that instinct the best way possible.

Just a thought.

From BossMongo on the same thread,

I agree with Ikigai, and BK beat me to the punch (no pun intended) by bringing up the SPEAR.

One thing I would add, though, is that the line of reasoning that "you will fight as you train" is not thought through to its conclusion. If a boxer's abilities are debilitated by the loss of his gloves, and his chances of injuries are increased, then it is because he is not training as he expects to fight. Don't think anyone can really count on having the time to wrap and tape his fists and then pull his gloves on on the street.

That said, I think that if the fist is trained and conditioned for punching, it is thoroughly functionally sound and reliable. However, most people only ever throw a naked fist "in extremis," and then complain that naked fist punches are dangerous when they break their hand. Spend a thousand hours on a hard makiwara, and I think that you can reasonably claim that your fist is now 1)more dangerous and 2) less susceptible to injury than the boxer who employs his naked fist for the first time on the street.

If the ungloved fist is to be regarded as a primary piece of the fighter's tool box, then training time should incorporate naked fist training and conditioning.

From AFJ on the same thread,

While palm strikes do protect the knuckles from a shattering impact, they bring up the distinct possibility of catching a finger or two and wrenching them violently backwards if you are even slightly off. Even with the fingers curled inwards, any impact above the lower palm and its direct line with the wrist has the potential to cause painful and debilitating injury to the tendons in the area. This isn't to say that palm strikes should be avoided, of course, just that they carry their own risks of personal injury.

As for punching, I believe that one of the better strategies to reduce the risk is to consider Jack Dempsey's style. He wrote that you can punch harder and safer if you target along the ring finger's knuckle. The idea is that the impact here will almost always involve the knuckles of the middle finger and the little finger as well, not the exposed and solitary index knuckle or the middle knuckle alone. It might seem that this would expose the little knuckle which is the weakest, but in practice it's almost hard to end up landing with the pinky alone. While this certainly doesn't eliminate the risk, I believe it reduces it. Further, this feels like a more natural punch for me, allowing a stronger locked wrist.

Of course, the best answer is to always hit just what you aim for...

From Zara on the same thread,

Since our primary focus is self-defense we teach open hands in the form of palmheel strikes to the nose or chin (either straight or rising) and cupped hand strikes to the ears (packs a huge whallop when you put the entire body behind it as you always should with any striking technique). For SD open hands definitely is better than closed fist since you’re far less likely to injure your hand and wrist but it is indeed true much depends on the way you train and perhaps even more so on the fact whether you’re a man or a woman: men almost instinctively clench their fists when there’s trouble and in fighting they will throw punches, whether they’re trained or not. Women tend to favor open hand strikes naturally and it’s much better suited to them since their wrists are generally weaker and their knuckles more fragile. I think boxing is a great art and a very useful skill to have in your SD arsenal but it needs to be modified and turned away from the pure sports-context: the defenses are generally the same (parries are always useful and actually the best way to defend a straight punch) with the exception of the cover that definitely needs to be higher as you recommend (however I wouldn’t go so far as to put the elbows in front of your face since it exposes the entire body and it’ll be a lot more difficult to defend low blows which can be just as damaging as shots to the face, at least when they’re aimed accurately at the solar-plexus and the liver. You should be able to take some punishment on the forearms and if you lean into the incoming blow you’ll greatly lessen the impact. Of course the moment you feel impact on your guard you should automatically respond with a combination of your own otherwise you’ll be acting as a punching-bag and sooner or later you’ll get hit. Personally I don’t favor covering up but in some situations you have no choice and if you don’t have it ingrained into your system you’ll be in serious trouble.

In any case: if you plan on using bare knuckled boxing punches or you know that’s what’s going to come out naturally train for it: do push-ups on your knuckles, strengthen your wrists, do rounds on the heavy bag without taping your hands or even wearing gloves (start lightly, it’s also a good idea to get a lighter, softer bag if you’re going to be doing this regularly) … You’ll immediately feel when your punch is perfectly aligned and this is what’ll break your wrist in a streetfight, when this can happen to a boxing great as Mike Tyson then it definitely can and most likely will happen to you unless you prepare for it. Boxers tend to be very careless in the way they keep their wrists or the exact spot they punch (of course it’s hard to accurately target a moving opponent) since they don’t have to worry about injury as they have a padded surface to strike with and the hands are so taped in they can’t even move an inch.

Here are some excellent posts on the subject that I highly recommend to all boxers or martial artists who are serious about SD:

http://oldstylemuaythai.blogspot.com/2009/10/bareknuckle-boxing-for-beginners.html

http://oldstylemuaythai.blogspot.com/2009/11/bareknuckled-vs-gloved-six-thru-ten.html

Regards,

Zara

From Anon on the post The Best RBSD System

40 hours is about a good length for a program, but few people of "average fitness" will be able to hold up doing consecutive eight-hour days of new and vigorous activity with contact. Five consecutive Saturdays, or a couple evenings per week for a few weeks, would work out better.

1) Active and inactive sections should be alternated. 1.5 full days at the beginning before you get into the real combat stuff isn't the smartest way to go about it. Break it into memorable 1/2 to 1 hour modules which are alternated with the hitting, grip breaks, etc.

2) Dovetailing with the above, "spaced practice" makes for better retention of learned material.

It doesn't take a lot of time to teach the principles of detection, avoidance, deterrence, and defusion. Repetition and application IN SCENARIOS, spread over the course of the training, and linked-in with the combat skills, will reinforce it much better than trying to cram it all in at the beginning.

3) CQC basic movements should be taught before the weapon defence, since the students will draw on some of the movements, such as kneeing the peroneal nerve after acquiring outside-two-on-one on the knife-arm.

4) You're missing multiple-attacker training, ethics, and jurisprudence.

You're on the right track, but you're not going to get a good, working program until you break it down into finer pieces, and figure out how they should be optimally sequenced.

From BK Price on the post Improvised Weapons, Grips and Holds

Weird coincidence, I was just writing up my lesson on improvised lessons this past weekend. This post is very helpful, thanks. If you don't mind, I'd like to use some of your pictures for illustrative purposes. I'll give you full credit and a link to your blog.

When I teach improvised weapons, I teach that there are six (possibly seven) ways to use any object that you come across. My "attention getting step" for my students is: You walk into your house/apartment/room and find someone in the process of burglarizing it. Before you can leave, they turn on you with a knife, you reach out and grab the first "equalizer" you can find, how do you use it?

For offenisve use, I divide the weapons into four categories: Smash, Stab, Strike and Slash. The weapons fall into these categories based on whether they are narrow or wide or if they are long or short. A narrow, long weapon is used to slash at an opponent. A narrow short weapon is used to stab an opponet. A wide, long weapon is used to strike and a narrow, short weapon is used to smash.

I also provide a hierarchy of use for those weapons that can be used for multiple types of attack suggesting that priority should be:

1. Stab

2. Slash

3. Strike

4. Smash

The idea being that you want to use any edge you have to stab or slash because it will cause more damage. Stabbing is more effective than slashing because it typically does more internal damage ("On Killing" discusses this in greater detail as well as why people generally do not like to stab vs. slash). Striking is higher in priority than smashing because you can get more leverage from the swing and because the range can provide you more reactive distance from your opponet.

Defensively, I recommend using objects either as Shields or as Surprises. Shields is pretty self-explanatory, you pick something up that is large enough (or deeep enough) to stop a weapon from being employed against you. Surprises are smaller objects (typically) that can be thrown into an opponent's face to temporarily blind or startle them.

My last catefory is Structure which references the ability to use the environment around you as a weapon by "smashing" your opponent into it. Things like bathroom sinks, resteraunt counter tops, curbs, etc.

I also discuss ways to choose between weapons if you have enough time for that (you're being chased and you get into the kitchen a few seconds before you opponent). Things like "heft," "focus," and "durability."

I've seen towels and ropes recommended as weapons much as you do, but I've never studied a system that uses anything like that, so I have no reference for using it, let alone instructing it. I've trained with nunchucks, of course, but in most cases, they are just "strike" type weapons. You can entagle folks with them as well, but that's never really be a training area for me.

BTW, the 7 S concept is built upon the 4 S method taught by the Modern Combatives Group. I've never trained with them, so while I know they use the same 4 offensive labels that I use here, I don't know anything more than that. I didn't intend for this to be a "six minutes abs is better than 7 minutes abs" sort of thing. I just liked the brief article they had about it and I thought about how I would teach the same concept.

Also, I would recommend Marc "Animal" MacYoung's book on the same topic. Completely different categories and a lot more emphasis on the actual employment techniques.

From John W. Zimmer on the post 11 Key Differences Between Training and the Real Thing

Some of the surprises I've found in real fights were beer on concrete and flip-flops did not mix. In that fight I landed on my butt (slipped on the beer) after the first kick and then got up and used hands the rest of the fight.

I discovered that you fight the way you train. I did lots of point fighting and in some fights I would hit the guy with a back knuckle and then have to do it again (after realizing what the heck I was doing).

I had tunnel vision when I drank too many beers and found I could not do any spinning moves (not that this was a good idea anyway but as I said, you fight the way you train.

Great point about unknown persons... in the bar when I was a bouncer - it was the guy you did not know about that was the danger.

I've always said that you would get into a fight when you were too sick, tired, drunk, injured or such so your training had better get you through...

As far as consequences - I used to have to fight in the pre-cell phone camera era... I would really be worried about one-sided pictures in today’s mindset. One cannot simply disappear to avoid questions and a he said/he said situation. Now everyone has a camera and might actually accuse you as being the aggressor just because you won the fight.

Excellent points in this post.

From Anon on the same thread,

A huge difference, and one that screws up more martial artists than any other I know, is judgment. See, in class you don't usually need to exercise judgment - you don't have to decide if you have the legal ability to throw down, decide when and really have to figure out if the situation is no longer salvageable with words and only violence will resolve things. In class you get ready to spar and the teacher gives the word and it's on.

In the street you have to Observe what's happening, Orient to the threat, Decide what to do and then Act (OODA loop). Rarely does most civilian training introduce and train this process, which leaves the mental wheels turning like a hamster wheel under critical incident stress - spinning for all they're worth but not really going anywhere.

From John W. Zimmer on the post Real Combat is Raw

Interesting - I took this post as injecting a little realism into fighting. Most people that have only gotten into fights in grade school do not really understand for a couple of minutes - anything goes. All conventions of normal society are on hold and your own response to the aggressor is what is important.

If it takes biting, scratching and yes screaming to distract - do it. I've always ended up fighting when I was injured, drunk, or sick so being able to regroup and win is the most important. It would be nice if fighting could be planned and one could pick the probable opponents but this is not the case.

I for one like the fact that you are trying to make people realize that they just might have to come out of their comfort zone if then end up having to defend themselves or family.

Keep up the good posts!

From Boss Mongo on the same thread,

Adam,

I think Anon needs a snack; his blood sugars appear to be getting a little low.

I concur training should start with the worst case scenario and expand from there--to include nonviolently avoiding a confrontation with an agitated musclehead in the Wal Mart parking lot.

In my professional community we start with the LINES training (Linear Infighting Neuro-muscular-overload Engagement System; basically applying as much blunt force as possible in the shortest time possible to the most efficacious locations of the target's body) and then grow from there. I'd posit that the more tactics and techniques with which one becomes proficient and the more nuance and finesse one can apply to a given situation, the further one slides on the scale from "martial" to "artist."

I would submit, though, that your descriptors of the modern battlefield apply to a very narrow dimension of armed conflict, and that the modern battlefield we actually find on the ground is a lot less antiseptic than you--and, unfortunately, a great number of operational planners--seem to think. Both theaters of war are rife with examples of soldiers and marines involved in close, personal combat employing their firearms (as clubs), edged weapons, and field expedient bludgeoning devices.

Enough of this has happened that, while it probably cannot be described as common, it is statistically significant. Enough so that the US Army has revitalized its hand-to-hand training manual and programs. Of particular interest, these situations have validated the need for groundfighting. Of course, groundfighting on a broken/paved surface in full "battle rattle" is a little different than putting on a gi and rolling on a mat. And, too, I have issues with the Army's training program, which is best described as Gracie Jiu-Jitsu meets the Ranger Regiment. Still, a lot of missions require a dirty, dumb grunt to do the job, rather than a pristine, smart bomb.

From IronMongoose on the post Real Case Studies Highlight Most Attacks Occur Between People Who Know Each Other

When Tony Blauer first discovered this little factoid in the 1980's, it was what stimulated him to look into defusion techniques and the whole pre-contact part of his system.

I have always said that if you have the choice between living in a city with high violent crime and one with high property crime, pick the one with high violent crime, because it's relatively unlikely to touch you.

Most heavy-duty violent crime occurs between people in drug distribution, gambling or other criminal activities, or between intimate partners (e.g. spouses), or among people who have been drinking, or in places where people are drinking. It's ridiculously easy to avoid.

Of course, there are limits. Those cities with ridiculously high violent crime are those where lots of people are mugging or raping strangers... that's exactly the sort of thing you want to avoid.

From progressivedefence on the post Senshido's Shredder

Hi mate,

Just to provide an explanation of the sometimes cryptic claim that the Shredder "bypasses the flinch response", it isn't because the Shredder is so quick or non-telegraphic, it is because of the feral nature and constant momentum.

Allow me to explain. If I am to strike you on the half beat (for example, with a jab-cross combo,) even if I manage to get the jab off non-telegraphically and you don't flinch, you are instinctively going to flinch and/or cover the same target before the cross arrives. This is why a jab-bodyshot combo will hit more often than a jab-cross.

Now, when we shred we attack something ferociously, say a hammerfist to the nose. Now since we're moving on the quarter beat, as you flinch away from that strike I've already grabbed your ear and ripped it. As you flinch away from that my hand is at your throat, or your hair, or I'm kneed your thigh, or struck your groin, or spat in your face. You see, by constantly applying the principle of "closest weapon to closest target" in tandem with non-telegraphy, I 'bypass' your flinch mechanism by staying one step ahead of it. This is what makes the Shredder so devastatingly effective. The nervous system is completely overwhelmed and feels like it is being attacked from all angles. As such, the most common reaction is for the person to go fetal - our most primitive defensive structure.

I'm happy to expand further, but hopefully that helps.

Joe Saunders

Senshido International

From IronMongoose on the post Grappling When Weapons May Be Involved

You are exactly right when you say that we need to train grappling against an armed attacker NOT because we'd choose to go to the ground with them, but because it CAN happen.

The same reasoning that says "don't train against an armed assailant on the ground" would also, logically, say, "why train for self-defence AT ALL?" No one WANTS to be attacked... you should always avoid or defuse. Don't let it go physical, and don't bother training for the possibility of it going physical.

Of course, that's absurd. ALL training is contingency training. Winding up on the ground with an armed assailant is one very significant contingency that needs to be addressed.

It is NOT advantageous to be on the ground with the attacker. Yes, you can bring him to the ground with a controlled takedown--that is a different issue entirely. An actual groundfight or grappling match with a knife means all body parts are in close proximity to all others, which means more opportunities for holes in your body. It also means that you forfeit the possibility of stunning and running. This being the street, all the other disadvantages of being on the ground are in play: hazards on the ground surface, the risk of multiple assailants coming into play, etc. etc.

One option that presents itself more on the ground than standing, is to smash and grind the bad guy's hand against the ground surface as a disarm. (Standing, the concept can also be used with walls and objects.) This surely isn't a REASON to WANT to go to the ground with an armed attacker, but it's an option that should be trained.

Tony Blauer had a vid on weapons defense on the ground. He kept going for a modified mount where his shin pinned the bicep of the knife-bearing limb.

SouthNarc has an interesting clip on Youtube where he modifies omaplata and gogoplata to address weapons scenarios: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeX1PyKKuYk

Go for an improvised weapon? NO NO NO NO. Everything has to be thought of in terms of time and space--white space, reactionary gap, reaction time, whatever. If you and the guy are in clinch range and the guy has his hand on a knife, priority is to control that knife/hand. Now is not the time to be thinking, "Hmm, well there's a pen in my chest pocket... if I switch to scarf hold I'll be able to pull it ou--"

That knife is going into you NOW.

Remember the Tueller Drill? Now how many feet apart are you when you're in a wrestling match?

That's right--ZERO.

From Bob on the same thread,

Back in the prison days we were strongly discouraged from spending too much time on the ground in a one-on-one situation. This because an inmate's pal could attack you while you are busy grappling.

That having been noted, I can remember at least a dozen times where 3-5 officers wrestled with an inmate on the ground who had an improvised weapon. In fact part of our PPCT training covered motor nerve strikes that were employed in a group setting to get the inmate to let go of the weapon. Big difference here is that it was 3-5 wrestling an armed inmate vs. one-on-one on the street.

The street has different variables than prison. However, it seems logical that self-defense should cover some basics about wrestling one-on-one with a knife-wielder.

Our interactions on my blog and my current class have got me thinking about grappling and weapons. So far I have not found the ideal system. Some seem to come at it from an unrealistic stand-up perspective while others come at it from an unrealistic ground fighting perspective.

The truth has to be in the middle -- right? If you or any of your readers is aware of a "system" that does a good job of balancing striking, grappling, and weapons defense I'd love to hear about it.

So far Krav Maga has risen to the top of my list - though I'm not sure if they cover weapons on the ground.

How good are these comments? Very insightful. Again I would like to shout out a big thank you to all of the subscribers and readers who have left comments here and added to the topics being discussed. Let's keep things going into 2011. I look forward to hearing from you all in the future.

Best of 2010

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Wed, 29 Dec 2010 10:28:00 +0000

This is the final post from Low Tech Combat for the year. In this post, we will highlight the best posts that were published here on this blog as well as highlight some of the best stuff from around the web that we shared via Twitter and Facebook. The posts from here are listed under different topics and the Twitter stuff is listed under their topics as well.

I hope you enjoy looking back over 2010. I am sure you will find some interesting stuff you have not seen before. That goes for you subscribers and followers as well. I know you all live busy lives and no-one gets everything. So this is a kind of catch all as well.

Before we get into it, I would like to hint that next year will see a couple of big things
(for Low Tech Combat anyway), being brought to fruition which I am very excited about. These will be exclusively for our subscribers as a kind of thank you for your interest in the topics covered here at Low Tech Combat. Besides the posts which will continue, the new... umm, things :) will be only for our small and exclusive community. Stayed tuned next year for more on this...

Let's get into it shall we?

Best Posts of 2010
Core Topics

Aliveness: Common Sense or Controversial?

ATM Card Skimmers Exposed!

Do Your Thoughts Lead to Consequences?

Senshido's Shredder

Functional Strength Training for Combat

What Controls You, Your Instincts or You Mind?

Cyber Security Tips

Do Power Strikes Reign Supreme over Combinations?

Case Studies and Analysis of Real Attacks

News: 69yr old Ex Wrestler Fights off Attackers

News: Man Attacked by 6 Muggers

Can You be Stabbed with Knife and Not Know it?

Real Case Studies Highlight Most Assaults Occur Between People Who Know Each Other

News: Knife Attack in UK

Would You Have Fallen Prey to These Real Knife Attacks?

50 Year Trends in Violent Crime in US

Grappling with Weapons

Low Tech Combat Videos

Know Your Pre Attack Indicators

Understanding Assault: Street Fights

Videos from the Web

Knife Defense with Paul Vunak

Bus Attack Video

Found and Shared On Twitter
Some Quotes

“You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.” -Winston Churchill

"The mind is like a parachute. It works best when it is open." - Rickson Gracie

"Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle." - Plato

"We all must suffer from one of two pains, the pain of discipline or the pain of regret." - Jim Rohn

"The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing." - Albert Einstein

"Great minds discuss ideas, Average minds discuss events, Small minds discuss people." - Eleanor Roosevelt

"The practice of non-violence is still rather experimental on our planet, but its pursuit, based on love and understanding, is sacred." - Dalai Lama

"Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work." -Thomas Edison

"Good decisions come from experience, and experience comes from bad decisions." - Author Unknown

"What we have done for ourselves alone dies with us; what we have done for others and the world remains and is immortal." - Albert Pike.

Interesting News Stories

Man stabbed to death chasing down muggers http://tinyurl.com/yzma75n Terrible story

News story about mugging. BEWARE the testing question! http://tinyurl.com/y8cha8m

Man robs 76yr old women while sitting on toilet on 3rd floor of building complex. http://bit.ly/4DUl7g

Watching Cage Fighting helped man thwart Robbery attempt! http://tinyurl.com/yca67xq

19yr old uses claw hammer to strike co-worker in head 4 times after being asked a question! http://tinyurl.com/y9bqs7f

An armed mugger ended up shot with his own gun http://tinyurl.com/y86d948

Another robber gets shot with his own gun http://bit.ly/dmf9D4 let em have it!

Absolutely senseless knife attack http://tinyurl.com/y8vl7j2 2 stabbed more than 30 times!

73yr old man hits other man with cane and then stabs him with a small knife inside a bank! http://tinyurl.com/3yay25x

Burglars Use Facebook to Pick Targets http://mashable.com/2010/09/11/facebook-places-burglars/

Marine Dies Defending His Wife: http://mil-com.me/djWHzM

In the US, the FBI say 80% of crime is committed by gangs http://j.mp/7uf8Ob

Other Stuff I Was Reading With Interest

Checking out brand new eBook by @IkigaiWay It looks very well done. Be sure to have a look! http://tinyurl.com/ycnk9uv

Legalise MMA in New York? http://www.markstraining.com/2010/01/legalise-mma-in-new-york.html

So Flash Entertainment, now 10% owners of Zuffa, will be building an arena for the UFC to have shows in located in Abu Dhabi. Interesting.

FAST Defence self defence against a weapon video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKCKo8YR9ns&feature=youtu.be&a

Self protection tip: In danger at ATM? get card retained then make a big fuss. No mugger would rob an angry person with no money

Airplane theft more common than u might think. http://abcnews.go.com/m/screen?id=9554898

Excellent article examining the various types of threat out there http://tinyurl.com/ylzmoyq well worth a read

How to Win a Fight: Self-Defense Strategies for the Untrained Fighter: http://bit.ly/aOl2DQ

How to build a home made medicine with Ross http://tinyurl.com/2fqp7uo

Glucosamine, though good, has quite bad health effects http://bit.ly/cU7bQ2

Excellent article on the merits of Combat Sports for men http://tinyurl.com/23r2adq

Chatting with Marc "Animal" MacYoung about human combative behaviour and other things on a MA forum http://bit.ly/exvm1G

Four Case Studies of sudden violence http://bit.ly/h1vsTH Are you prepared?

65 Martial Arts and Survival Ebooks. http://bit.ly/hMeUvF

How to train on a slippery surface, Part Two - Training on ice. Good times. http://ow.ly/1amKdX

How to implement realistic scenarios into your training and classes/courses from a SWAT trainer http://bit.ly/gEzBao

Cool Videos

MMA conditioning video MMA Conditioning with Matt Pack http://bit.ly/8EaxIZ

Tony Blauer in one of the best videos on the net! The startle/flinch response http://tinyurl.com/yf2s95q

MMA FAIL http://i.imgur.com/zt5eI.gif

New...ish RossTraining compilation video http://tinyurl.com/yel57b3 Great strength and conditioning stuff. Amazing ability!

Best Mike Tyson video of all time http://rosstraining.com/blog/2010/01/28/mike-tyson-tribute/

Crazy awesome spinning heal kick knocks out opponent cleanly! http://tinyurl.com/yax7456

Amazing Slow Motion Video of Olympic Weightlifting... http://bit.ly/9EkwgR

Eric Ingram's remarkable modified Gracie jiu-jitsu from wheelchair http://bit.ly/9tq1IR

2010 Dog Brothers gathering of the pack http://youtu.be/nTKqYkvmdkU Awesome!

Interview with GSP about Training http://bit.ly/fcIspY

Found and Shared on Facebook
It is a new feature from late 2010.

Pictures Worth 1000 Words - Inspiring collection of images

Rendell vetoes self defense bill for outside home Self Defence legal stuff in US

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bx796zSg5gs&feature=player_embedded - Video showing a Zebra not giving up against a Lion.

Conclusion for 2010

Well thats it. You may want to bookmark this page and come back to it over the next few days so you can go through it all properly.

Hope your 2010 was great and 2011 is even better. We will be back and posting sometime early in 2011. Happy holidays!

Image via jessi.bryan

Grappling when Weapons are or May be Involved

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Sun, 12 Dec 2010 12:44:00 +0000

Grappling with weapons opens up another dimension to Low Tech Combat. The above image is from a real incident where a Law Enforcement (LE) officer was attempting to apprehend a suspect. You can see that the suspect juuuust has a hold of the pistol grip and is actively going for the weapon. The magazine is out of the weapon and on the ground. Even someones sunnies are on the ground. It is on.

But seriously, this is a dangerous situation, caught well in this image. Apparently the suspect was out of jail in just a few months. Many LE officers are shot with their own weapons. This means that the suspect got up close and personal. They probably got the weapon while they were grappling/wrestling with the officer. A tough situation where hormones would be racing freely through the arteries and veins.

It is not only LE officers who need to deal with worrying about weapons whilst grappling. Recently we came across a case where a fight went to the ground between two women which resulted in one woman being stabbed in the back of the neck whilst grappling. Numerous people have discussed this very subject and we will have a look at what their thoughts are as well. We will finish with a couple of videos of how we can train for this possible eventuality.

Knifed During Groundfight

The incident was in Windsor which was the scene of two women fighting outside a bar. One woman (34 yrs old) grabbed the other (27 yrs old) in a head lock and wrestled her to the ground where they continued to grapple for a while.

Friends eventually broke the fight up and only then realised that the 27 yr old had been stabbed in the back of the neck and was bleeding.

Nobody saw the knife.

The 27 yr old was rushed to hospital and received surgery for the non life threatening injury. This case again highlights that people can be stabbed with a knife and not know it. I bet the other girl, and the bystanders did not expect a knife to be used. Most people would not think about it. When people see two people fighting on the ground, they assume it is a fist fight so to speak. This is not always accurate as we have seen.

Preferred or Not, it May Happen

I don't think anyone would like to be rolling around on the ground with an attacker who has a knife. But sometimes, as in the case above, it may just happen. Brian VanCise pondered this very possibility:

I do not really want to be grappling with an opponent on the ground with a knife in their hand. That is simply a difficult task to deal with and since your mobility is restricted you will have a harder time dodging a knife thrust or slash. Certainly I would like to be standing up and mobile. However, we do not always get to choose the battleground or whether we will be vertical or horizontal.

Is Grappling Bad Against a Knife Wielding Attacker?

Marc "Animal" MacYoung has strong thoughts on the matter as well when he discusses what he calls "knife fighting lies". In that article, of particular relavance to this post is what Marc calls "Lie #10 - Grappling with a knife". In that piece Marc explains:

While demonstrating an empty-handed with one of them, he tackled me and took me to the ground... Anyway, when we hit the floor I realized that there was no way I could contest this guys strength, he was a bull, full of muscle and grappling skill. The thing was I had landed next to a practice knife that I calmly picked up and dragged it across his throat.

and goes on...

Do not attempt to "grapple" with a knifer. Once on the ground, you are not guaranteed to be able to control his knife arm well enough to prevent him from carving you up. If it were a barehanded fight, then you can often prevent him from being able to generate enough power to effectively strike you, but a knife doesn't need power, it just needs to touch you. And if you are attempting to control his arm while on the ground, he will wiggle free and repeatedly cut you until you can no longer continue to resist.

Now Marc has some good points here. I agree that it is bad to 'tackle' someone with a knife. Very bad.

However, I think his point of view ignores a couple of things.

Immobilising on the Ground is Easier than Standing

Yes, when trying to control the attackers knife bearing limb on the ground, the knifer may 'wiggle free' and cut you. But seriously, trying to do the same thing standing is MUCH more difficult to do. A knifer can more easily move around and thrash whilst standing.

On the ground, with good control, there are far fewer opportunities for the knifer to wiggle free. Immobilising the knife bearing limb on the ground has a much higher percentage chance of succeeding than doing the same thing standing. So while I agree that tackling a knife attacker is a stupid thing to do (not so bad against a stick), it is a better place to immobilise a knife bearing limb. Once a knife is immobilised, a counter can be applied of your choice, whatever that me be for you.

But How do we get Safely to the Ground?

Working in reverse order, how do we get a knife attacker to the ground safely and securely so we can immobilise the knife bearing limb? You may not have to worry about this one. You may just end up on the ground without meaning to. It happens. Not preferred but a real possibility. And you probably won't have control of that weapon...

But for techniques if you choose to... this is largely dependant on what techniques you use. At Low Tech Combat, we tend to avoid prescribing specific techniques, just overall tactics, strategies, perspectives and viewpoints. Any technique that facilitates you closing and entering safely against a knife attack is good, particularly if escape is no option and there are no other weapons around.

Instead of staying standing and trying to maintain control of the knife bearing limb and then countering, do some form of take down from here. The best option is when the close, enter, immobilise and take down happen all at once. This gives the knifer less chance to struggle free from the immobilisation. As the take down is finished, it should end up with the knife bearing limb immobilised, you free to stand up if you need to quickly and also where a counter of choice can be applied. Juggernaut provides just one good example of how this can be done with an explanation and video.

What Do Other People Think?

There is lots of discussion out there about the whole matter of maybe having to grapple/wrestle someone when weapons may be involved. In a Filipino Martial Arts forum some time ago, there were some interesting comments. There is a wide range of opinions out there proposing different tactics and views on the subject matter. Some are as follows:

...nerver ever fight knife with empty hand..Ruuuuuuuuuuun! If a person really wants to hurt you with the knife...you be bleeding before you even know it...sinawali will give you that empty hands move you need for practice...just my opinion!

Fair enough on that one. Hopefully we can run.

You probably don't want to close on a guy with a knife... There is the simultaneous block with one hand/thrust to the eyes with the other hand, which is tricky, or the crossing parry and pass, which kind of assumes the other guy's free hand won't come into play. Also the double-handed control of the arm holding the knife, which is also dicey. Of course, if you don't do something, maybe you die. Other thoughts?

We have covered that one already. As can be seen, trying to control the knife bearing limb whilst standing is a 'dicey' approach. The commenter has no real reason why closing is bad. This is actually a common view. When we look into it, we can see that being on the ground can be advantageous, though still overall bad. If you do not close and immobilise that knife bearing arm, the knife will continue to be a threat and it can be slashed and stabbed into you any number of ways, really fast.

...Even worse is the effect of the UFC on the MA newbies, who think shooting for a takedown is the strategy that beats everything even on the street. Going for a double leg takedown without being totally sure that the attacker is unarmed is just suicidal.

Agreed. I am sure there are instances of double legs working quite well on the street (I have seen some awesome footage of that actually some time ago), it is high risk when the possibility of a knife being inserted between the ribs next to the spine is considered. But again, this does not mean we should not train grappling or wrestling with weapons. Particularly knives and sticks. These things happen and we need to have familiarity with such situations to better our chances of surviving them.

...I worked as a bouncer in a Strip Club and while taking an unruly patron out for being a numb skull his buddy ambushed me from the side burying a blade into my right pectoral area, puncturing the lung...trust me waking up to the taste of a cold respirator bit taped to your mouth sucks!

Another good example of how two people can be in a normal grappling situation where everyone thinks it is just someone being escorted out of a club. And then a knife appears from somewhere else... Something to consider.

At close quarters, sensitivity training is also useful, since one may be too close to see the blade. Here we tend to grab the weapon hand and hang on, while using the other hand to apply a beat-down if possible, but this is theoretical, since I haven't ever been attacked with a knife.

Sensitivity training certainly sounds worthy of consideration. It also raises the important point that we need to be actually aware there may be a weapon that can be drawn later on, mid rumble.

Unfortunately, there is a risk of having to defend a knife while rolling on the ground. It is as simple as gettiing in a fight, falling or being brought down and the guy pulls a knife. Paco's point of improvised weaponry is well taken especially for those who have no general experience in grappling. Use what is available.

Exactly. If you do somehow end up on the ground and a weapon is drawn or you think the attacker may have one...

Look for an improvised weapon of your own!

Great advice.

Lets Have a Look at Some Videos

Not a bad drill. Obviously, both of these people may have died a couple of times each. However, they were just drilling. They were on the ground wrestling with the new dynamic of a knife being involved. Also, not many knife wielders attack like they were but regardless, the video provides some good food for thought.

Stepping up the Tempo a Little Now..

This type of training is a little closer to reality and is a step up from the last video where the training was more at the drilling level. This is a bit more intense.

So yeah, weapons can be found in real fights on the ground, you need to be prepared for that. Hopefully this post has gone some way to aiding you in your training and mindset.

Opening Image by 7mary3

Check out the Facebook Page!

noreply@blogger.com (Adam Low Tech Combat) — Sat, 11 Dec 2010 00:59:00 +0000

Low Tech Combat now has a Facebook Page! If you are on Facebook, be sure to pop on over and ‘Like’ the Page :) CLICK HERE NOW!

Once you have Liked it, you will stay updated on interesting news stories, statistics on violent crime, interesting discussions, posts, videos and a whole lot more. Don’t worry, your news feed will not be inundated. The updates will just trickle along and will not be annoying.

Best of all, the updates will be exclusive to the Facebook Page and will not be published on the main site so there will be no doubling up. You will need to 'Like' the page to get these updates.

At the moment there are a whole lot of interesting links shared, some very nice imagery to browse which is some of the nicest imagery from this very site, there are the two exclusive Low Tech Combat videos and a discussion area which will feature some interesting talks in the future. There will also be one or two new features on there coming soon...

It is only a new Page so be sure to share it with all of your Facebook friends. You never know, they may just learn something that will make the difference between them becoming involved in a violent encounter and them being able to avoid it.

CLICK HERE to check it out.