Pressure Testing

Colm_OReilly

Just thought I'd start a new thread in response to Lemmings posts and his and Kev's arguments.

In order to make any technique into a realistic skill one must constantly apply restrictions in terms of space available, resistances on behalf of your opponent, and time in which to execute the skill. Please note that there is a big difference between a , technique and a skill. Go to my website and check out "On Technique Vs Skill" on the Articles page for a description of what I'm talking about.

Often times, people will attack combat sports and other such arts as "not realistic" because they have limitations imposed on them. To answer these questions and more I'm going to quote Paul Sharp, who runs an SBG in Illinois. It's worth noting that Paul Sharp is a Law Enforcement Officer, so he wants to know what works everyday. He has 'pressure tested' his techniques and his training in real life situations. So he can speak from experience I think.

From http://www.straightblastgymillinois.com


As someone that is part of a group of guy's that are frequently dismissed as simply sport fighters I hope I have something useful to add.

Why the assumption that you can beat us without rules when you can't beat us with rules?

Those rules happen to protect both of us, it would seem that most have forgotten that small yet significant point. Whats keeping me from maiming you for life when I get position and you obviously can't get away? The rules, take those rules away and I'll curb your ass right after I knock/choke you out.

Why the assumption that a combat sports athlete will try to take the fight to the ground?

My last two fights, outside the recent gym incident, were started and finished on my feet. Another gym member also finished a fight this past weekend while standing outside a BK in the downtown area. One cross was all it took. We have had gym members do some real damage in street fights using aspects of their Clinch game. A close friend and gym member dumped his girls ex on his bean right in front of their house.Beautiful Suplex according to those present, the ex had to betaken away by ambulance. A Suplex will leave you seeing stars on a throwing mat, I can't imagine the damage done on concrete. Yes that one went to the ground, but only so the ground could be used as an immoveable object.


Why the assumption that we don't train and carry weapons?

I've completed numerous firearms courses, several members of the gym are MP-5, Handgun, Carbine and Shotgun instructors. We have one member that was a MOUT instructor in the military and another that is one of the few certified to teach Rapid Deployment Tactics. Throw in numerous certs for O/C, stick, less lethal and some other minutia and I think we have a handle on the weapons/tactics thing. We are also installing a lock box so that those that carry on a daily basis have a secure area to place their weapon(s) while training.

Why the assumption that my opponents friends will get involved?

Don't you think my friends, that also happen to be athletes, are just about salivating at the thought of my opponents buddies getting involved? Why should I have all the fun? And just who do you think will have a better handle on using the bottles, chairs and tables that are in the vicinity? I would imagine that an athlete that can Power Clean 375 could probably swing a mean table. In another event at a club in the west side of Chicago one of our guy's used a table to plow two of the clubs bouncers into a wall breaking one bouncers collar bone. Think of the damage he could have done if he only would train realistically.....

To sum it up lets look at it this way. What kind of guy usually does well in sports? Competitive, highly motivated, focused, pain tolerant, highly conditioned, strong and has way too much testosterone.

Now take that guy, and tell him he can bite, eye gouge, pick something up and hit his opponent with it, and you have an animal that most people can not handle. I see it on a regularbasis in my gym and the other SBG's around the country.

-Paul "Diplomat" Sharp



I hope that answers a lot of peoples questions. If it doesn't, or people disagree, please feel free to question it and we'll explore it together.

Also, as far as ritualisation goes, in what I'd call Alive gyms, those that train the delivery systems I've mention, there's far less rituals and rules than I've seen in TMA's.

Peace and Love Y'All,

Colm

Lemming

Originally posted by Colm_OReilly
Often times, people will attack combat sports and other such arts as "not realistic" because they have limitations imposed on them. To answer these questions and more I'm going to quote Paul Sharp, who runs an SBG in Illinois. It's worth noting that Paul Sharp is a Law Enforcement Officer, so he wants to know what works everyday. He has 'pressure tested' his techniques and his training in real life situations. So he can speak from experience I think.

My apologies if anyone thought I was rubbishing any arts in the above aforementioned thread. I was not. What concerns me is people thinking that unless it's a "pressure-tested" (a phrase I intensely dislike) art then it's somehow inferior. What worries me out of this attitude again is the incredibly false sense of security that it can bestow upon the student, and they might begin to equate beating an opponent inside the ring with taking on every tom, dick, & harry on the street.

It all depends on what you want to take away from your study. Indeed it can, and does sometimes, go beyond the martial aspect if you want to delve deeply into it. If you want to learn how to "win" a fight then by all means, such arts might suit you. Then again perhaps not. The question 'Who are you?' determines who you are.

But as I've mentioned elsewhere, the essence of M.A. was, in historical terms, and still is to survive. Not to "win or lose". These are concepts that have been fostered by competitive association. I feel that many of these arts - or at least the instructor which might be more correct - fail to teach anything of the where, how or why and focus solely on the application. As with everything else in life, you can be told how to do something, or you can be shown how things are created, what their purpose is etc. thus giving you a greater chance of adaptability.

And that's what it all comes down to in the end I feel. Adaptability. To be able to adapt your study to modern life, to assimilate it and combine it with your own life experience. To understand what went before so that you can improve upon tomorrow. And simply survive.

I think another important thing to note is that training isn't "realism". By it's very nature it never really can be. The best it can do is try to prepare you for the reality. Then it's all up to the individual and how they deal with it emotionally, psychologically, and phsyically.

As someone that is part of a group of guy's that are frequently dismissed as simply sport fighters I hope I have something useful to add.

Why the assumption that you can beat us without rules when you can't beat us with rules?

Those rules happen to protect both of us, it would seem that most have forgotten that small yet significant point. Whats keeping me from maiming you for life when I get position and you obviously can't get away? The rules, take those rules away and I'll curb your ass right after I knock/choke you out.

Rules are good. Rules have a purpose. Typically to protect people or ensure that things don't go wrong. But his assumption on beating people without rules when not able to beat them with rules is, in my opinion, flawed. Outside of a controlled environment there are no rules - rule of law not withstanding but that's another subject - the street is a harsh, unforgiving place. If you apply rules whilst dealing with someplace that has no rules then you're quite possibly going to come off the worse for wear.

I can see where he's coming from in that both the MA student & the opponent are on an equal footing, but you'd be surprised at how subconciously little rules & courtesies inside a training environment can slip into everyday life. I know I was. I've had to unlearn some habits I picked up in my former art. Suddenly you can find yourself (or worse not even realise it) fighting with one hand pscyhologically tied behind your back in the worst possible situation.

Why the assumption that we don't train and carry weapons?

I've completed numerous firearms courses, several members of the gym are MP-5, Handgun, Carbine and Shotgun instructors. We have one member that was a MOUT instructor in the military and another that is one of the few certified to teach Rapid Deployment Tactics. Throw in numerous certs for O/C, stick, less lethal and some other minutia and I think we have a handle on the weapons/tactics thing. We are also installing a lock box so that those that carry on a daily basis have a secure area to place their weapon(s) while training.

That is a moot point in my opinion. Are you prepared to use your weapon outside of a controlled environment? Are you prepared to face the emotional, physical, and legal consequences of both revealing & subsequently using a weapon that you are carrying? Once you've pulled a weapon you've escalated a situation to the near point of inevitability because you have failed to take human psychology into account. If you crush an opponent yuo make an enemy. If you allow them a route out of a confrontation that allows the saving of 'face' then they don't have to be. Backing someone into a corner, whether it be physical or psychological does not a good resolution make.

I should also ask why you are carrying a weapon in the first place. Does it make you feel any safer? Or more paranoid?

Why the assumption that my opponents friends will get involved?

<SNIP>

And just who do you think will have a better handle on using the bottles, chairs and tables that are in the vicinity? I would imagine that an athlete that can Power Clean 375 could probably swing a mean table.

You'd be surprised at the alarming efficiency & novel application with which johnny scumbag can wield whatever comes to hand. A predatory instinct is most definitely something not to be underestimated. Something that johnny scumbag seems to have copious amounts of unfortunately.

In another event at a club in the west side of Chicago one of our guy's used a table to plow two of the clubs bouncers into a wall breaking one bouncers collar bone. Think of the damage he could have done if he only would train realistically.....

It might be asked why the guy in question had to do that in the first place.

To sum it up lets look at it this way. What kind of guy usually does well in sports? Competitive, highly motivated, focused, pain tolerant, highly conditioned, strong and has way too much testosterone.

Now take that guy, and tell him he can bite, eye gouge, pick something up and hit his opponent with it, and you have an animal that most people can not handle. I see it on a regularbasis in my gym and the other SBG's around the country.

Whilst I'll agree with the jist of what he's saying, I think he's also failing to take into account that most people don't feel comfortable giving in to such primal behaviour and basic moral conditioning kicks in. It takes a special breed of people to truly act with such unhesitant savage, primal predatory behaviour. And we all know who I'm more or less referring to .....

I hope that answers a lot of peoples questions. If it doesn't, or people disagree, please feel free to question it and we'll explore it together.

It's certainly worth taking on board what he's saying, but at the same time I can't help but feel it has a very narrow focus. I also get the impression that his logic is that because we, the MA students, have some sort of armed/unarmed training we are therefore automatically better than joe bloggs without taking into account human nature/behaviour/morality.

Don't get me wrong, what he says is correct - just not THE definitive last word on the subject as I feel, again, that he's looking at/approaching this from a narrow focus.

Also, as far as ritualisation goes, in what I'd call Alive gyms, those that train the delivery systems I've mention, there's far less rituals and rules than I've seen in TMA's.

I have an excellent article on "ritual" combat at home somewhere. Must dig it up. Written by a N.American police officer - in Toronto me thinks - too if I recall, and his observations on how human confrontation takes place. You'd be surprised at some of the content and how subconcious it is.

Runfree

Long but worth reading.

Colm thank you for that post. Now I totally understand where you are coming from but once again I have to go Lemmings way.

I ain't going to quote either of you but just feel that some MA give students a false sense of security as Lemming mentioned by using such words as pressure-tested.

Cheers,

RunFree

Colm_OReilly

What concerns me is people thinking that unless it's a "pressure-tested" (a phrase I intensely dislike) art then it's somehow inferior

If you're not sparring with as little rules as possible, day in day out, finding out what works for you and what doesn't, then to me, what you're doing is inferior for the purposes of combat athletics and self defence.

What worries me out of this attitude again is the incredibly false sense of security that it can bestow upon the student, and they might begin to equate beating an opponent inside the ring with taking on every tom, dick, & harry on the street.

When I did Kenpo, I thought I could kick anyones ass. Maybe I didn't say that out loud, but I certainly thought it deep down inside. When I started training in jitz, and learnt some thai, I had a rude awakening. And everyday my ego is kept right in check by sparring guys who are better boxers, better wrestlers, and better submission artists than me. In my experience, it's incredibly rare to see someone who trains in the kind of places I train in thinking they're invincible.

I can see where he's coming from in that both the MA student & the opponent are on an equal footing, but you'd be surprised at how subconciously little rules & courtesies inside a training environment can slip into everyday life.

We strive to train as close to reality as safety will allow. How do you propose that someone trains themselves more realistically?

Are you prepared to face the emotional, physical, and legal consequences of both revealing & subsequently using a weapon that you are carrying?

I should also ask why you are carrying a weapon in the first place. Does it make you feel any safer? Or more paranoid?

Paul Sharp is a police officer, hence he carries weapons and at times I'm sure is forced to use them. I'm also equally sure that he'd love to walk around all day helping old women cross the road and not have to carry a piece. But right now his job requires him to use a weapon.

I think he's also failing to take into account that most people don't feel comfortable giving in to such primal behaviour and basic moral conditioning kicks in. It takes a special breed of people to truly act with such unhesitant savage, primal predatory behaviour.

I disagree, when forced to defend yourself or your siblings people can do some pretty nasty things. If you get the chance, read Gavin DeBecker's Protecting the Gift. There's some anecdotes that will show you what the average person can do if pushed.

But really here Paul is countering the straw man argument that often comes up. What about someone biting, scratching etc etc? You take a fully conditioned athlete and pit him against a scumbag, what's to stop the athlete biting as well as dishing out a tasty slamming to end the confrontation. If I can take you down, hold you down and punch you or choke you out, what do you think I would do if you, the guy on bottom, starts trying to bite me or grab my scrotum?

I also get the impression that his logic is that because we, the MA students, have some sort of armed/unarmed training we are therefore automatically better than joe bloggs without taking into account human nature/behaviour/morality.

I'm sorry if I gave the impression that I was better able to judge human nature. But as a coach and combat athlete, I do understand how fights progress. If I wanted to understand culture I'd talk to an anthropologist, animals, a zoologist, fighting, a martial artist.

I have an excellent article on "ritual" combat at home somewhere. Must dig it up. Written by a N.American police officer - in Toronto me thinks - too if I recall, and his observations on how human confrontation takes place. You'd be surprised at some of the content and how subconcious it is.

Cool! If you know the title and author maybe its posted online somewhere, I'd love to have a look at it.

Hey Lemming, did you get my PM?

Peace and Love Y'All

Colm

vasch_ro

Colm would you not say that most martial arts are pressure tested .

I'm sure you had sparring in Kempo ? When you spar generally its not prearranged
you do not know what the other person is going to do, if its a competition they would probably be at a similar skill level or superior , hence the pressure ,

I would imgaine that you would only use techniques that you have found effective
in sparring before , its a live situation (alive ) but a controlled situation there are rules

as you so able pointed out "Those rules happen to protect both of us"

columok

Hey Lads,

Saw the thread and couldnt resist signing up and giving my 2c.

Lemming.

I think you have some interesting points.

Having studied traditional martial arts for years (aikido, karate) and made a move to BJJ and Vale Tudo recently, certain glaring facts have made themselves apparent to me.

What concerns me is people thinking that unless it's a "pressure-tested" (a phrase I intensely dislike) art then it's somehow inferior. What worries me out of this attitude again is the incredibly false sense of security that it can bestow upon the student, and they might begin to equate beating an opponent inside the ring with taking on every tom, dick, & harry on the street.

The more realistic and interactive nature of a sparred art like BJJ has driven home to me the danger of streetfighting. Unlike what I learnt in aikido, I now realise the intense difficulty of taking on more than one opponent. One angry,drunk, violent attacker is tough enough never mind 2,3 or more. As a result the idea of getting in a fight is far from appealing, because I know theres a good chance of getting the crap knocked out of me. Therefore the idea of a false sense of security is fraudulent. I regularily take on better,fitter and stronger opponents in training. I have no doubt about my abilities (or the lack of therein ) and similarily my coaches and more experienced fellow trainees have the same. We dont see ourselves as invincible ninjas/samurai/monks/pirates. We dont subconsciously attract trouble to impress girls with our kickass moves. Were just not interested!

But as I've mentioned elsewhere, the essence of M.A. was, in historical terms, and still is to survive. Not to "win or lose". These are concepts that have been fostered by competitive association. I feel that many of these arts - or at least the instructor which might be more correct - fail to teach anything of the where, how or why and focus solely on the application. As with everything else in life, you can be told how to do something, or you can be shown how things are created, what their purpose is etc. thus giving you a greater chance of adaptability.

I havent found that more "philosophically" perceived arts teach any thing different than situational self defence. Conversely BJJ guys (or boxers,judokas etc.) have strong experience in sparring and can adapt to new rules, new techniques etc etc etc. You need some kind of tangible experience to adapt with. Without some experience in some kind of physical resistance you have nothing to adapt. Like a football player trying to learn a new dribbling technique never having played a game of football.


With respect to the validity of competition to give combat ability, I agree that simulated competitive or training combat doesnt compare to the fierceness of real survival situations. I dont know anything that does. If someone, for whatever warped reason, really wanted to be the toughest SOB in the world they should go out and join the army and go to war. Thats real survival combat. Anything else is just playing around! I havent found that BJJ/MMa or Vale Tudo guys see what their doing as a survival art, a martial art or warrior training. They treat it as a sport. It just so happens to translate to be the most combat effective sport/martial art around.


Sorry if my views appear arrogant. On encountering BJJ/MMA/VT guys on forums like this, when I studied Aikido, I always thought that they were arrogant/aggro. I now realise that they view combat skills as a scientific product. Either what you do can produce scientific results of some kind (i.e. it works under as unrestricted conditions as possible with resisting opponents) or it doesnt. If you went to an archery school and every day practiced archery and you werent improving at hitting the target better, then youd have to question the training process. Martial arts are no different.


Sorry for the long post. Wake up. Im done:)


EDIT: Adjusted nonsensical jibberish from rushed post!!

TwoKingMick

You take a fully conditioned athlete and pit him against a scumbag, what's to stop the athlete biting as well as dishing out a tasty slamming to end the confrontation.

Had to register, just for that.

Colm_OReilly

Originally posted by vasch_ro
Colm would not say that most martial arts are pressure tested .

I'm sure you had sparring in Kempo ? When you spar generally its not prearranged
you do not know what the other person is going to do, if its a competition they would probably be at a similar skill level or superior , hence the pressure ,

I would imgaine that you would only use techniques that you have found effective
in sparring before , its a live situation (alive ) but a controlled situation there are rules

as you so able pointed out "Those rules happen to protect both of us"

Vasch,

That's a common misconception by most people. In Kenpo, the sparring I did was quite removed from any sort of combat sparring. Either you did points sparring, or zero head contact sparring, or no leg kicks or back strikes or clinch work.

By placing all these restrictions on your sparring, people tend to either

a) hit harder than is required for educational purposes. They lay in (usually) one hard body shot on another. This is because of the frustration of having such restricted rules, or the fact that you need to proove you're a hard man and you can hang with or dominate your sparring partner.

b) shrug off any shots that land, because 'in the street' you could do x, y or z

I know these things because I thought them myself, and heard other people say them. And overall you begin to believe that you are much better equipped to spar, fight or defend yourself than you actually are. And since your sparring can't shatter these self-delusions, you continue to believe them.

Then I did a few minutes of boxing, and holy hell did I get owned! Now I can't really delude myself about my abilities. If I think I can't beat Johnny Example in Sparring, I'll have to spar him to find out. And if I don't step up and spar him, well then I can't acurately judge my skill in comparison to him.

Varsch if you're around Dublin South/South-West maybe you'd like to pop down to the gym. I always find it a lot easier to get these ideas across to people in person.

That invite goes to everyone on the board.

Peace and Love Y'All

Colm

columok

Transferred from the Newbie Questions thread!


Lemming:

you said in the other thread!



quote:

---

I'm wary of words like "Pressure tested" or any art with the word "Combat" in it because it smacks of ritualisation to me. And that defeats the purpose of martial arts imo.

---

In my experience "pressure tested" martial arts tend to be the least ritualised of all martial arts. Less ceremony, tradition and filler and more performance.

Also not meaning to reiterate Kevs point too much but what do you train in and what approach does that art take.

Are you saying that the only adequate training is street training. Is that what you engage in?

Not trying to troll or offend. Just trying to figure out where you are coming from!

vasch_ro

I realise that combat sport and sparring are different , but with each others style
they are still pressure testing,
I'm sure when people are graded in Kempo they have to spar and perform under pressure , the rules may be limited but they still have to perform and utilise

Timing , Motion , footwork against an unco- operative opponent

H'mm timing . motion and footwork why does that ring a bell ?????






my two cents(european cents that is )

columok

I'm sure when people are graded in Kempo they have to spar and perform under pressure , the rules may be limited but they still have to perform and utilise

Not really pressure. More fear of failure or fear of embarrassment than fear of getting hit in the face. Seldom in gradings to people really go for each other.

Also I would consider the kind of sparring form that Kempo would take to be boxing/thai boxing done badly. If you watch the world Karate championships (full contact) and watch the way the guys fight, it becomes bad boxing/thai. A lot different to the way the guys train in forms and one step sparring.

Boxing has evolved in a pressure environment to be the best way of beating a resisting opponent with your fists. Its constant refinement through experience that makes boxing work and evolve. Obviously a rules system exists but Id pity the fool (sorry to go all Mr. T) that told Roy Jones Jr or Oscar de la Hoya that their boxing is limited in the context of the street. There is so much money in boxing that if some martial arts practitioner had magic death touches that they could use in a fight they would enter the ring. There arent any rules in boxing, that I know of, that prohibit magic death touches so...

You might say, that for philosophical reasons they mightnt fight in a ring. There has to be some kung fu/Karate guy that would do it for the money (See UFC 1-4). The reason they arent world kickboxing/thai boxing/boxing champions is???

The same is true of Vale Tudo/MMA fighters. I owe no loyalty or allegiance to BJJ. If I found something that worked better for me, Id probably change. It just so happens that BJJ has proved itself in competitions and for me in my experience. If I felt that Kempo techniques could work Id use them. It would be in my interest. Ive tried Wado Ryu, Shotokan, Aikido, Shaolin, Ninjitsu techniques in VT and didnt find that they worked. Therefore I use my wrestling/judo/thai/boxing/BJJ whatever cause I try it in training and it works. I try it against full resistance and it works. If it didnt work I wouldnt do it.

Colm_OReilly

Vasch,

Columok pretty muched summed up what I would have said. I'd just like to add one thing.

In a Kenpo/Kempo class, you probably spend about 40 minutes working your technique with a partner or against air. No resistance is offered, and its all preset.

10 or so minutes will be a warmup, and the last 10 sparring (not everyday will you spar either).

When you spar it resembles none of the techniques you have practiced for the last 40 minutes. Also, your sparring doesn't improve your techniques like in the way a few rounds of stand up will improve your jab.

BTW where do you train man?

Peace Out,

Colm

vasch_ro

In my own experience within gradings for trad karate people fairly much went for you and it was open season , although it was not quite full contact and not quite semi contact either , I suppose its hard to let go , its like Neo when he first is told that everything he knows is a computer generated interactive simulation called the Matrix, but I keep thinking to myself how can so many people be wrong ?

Have traditional martial arts drifted so far, as to be totally unrelated to combat ?

It seems to me to make sense that unless a particular martial art/sport is pressure tested than it must be inferior than one that is not , only in the sense of combat effectiveness, I think some people are trying to say on this thread that TMA's offer more than just combat effectiveness , this brings us into the realm of the influence of the zen mindset on japanese arts .

I train with you colm in UCD, but I like to keep u on your toes ........

columok

V. impressive ninja work their Baloo!

vasch_ro

okay i admit it , I've been training with the UCD Ninjitsu Club !!!;)

columok

Bump for a great thread with some unreplied to points!!

Naos

*looks to ground*

columok

*whistles innocuously and walks away refusing to make eye contact*