What makes MA coaches qualified to teach self defence?

tallaght01

I'm not talking abut the physical aspects of it. I'm talking about the other stuff.
There's lots of groups now claiming to teach things like "awareness" and "de-escalation" etc etc. We've all seen them.

They're starting to piss me off, to be honest, as I doubt there's much evidene that these techniques work, and I doubt that most of the instructors are doing anything but teaching verbatim from a course or a book.

Am I missing something here? I've had a few girls at work asking about them, and I basically told them that I'd be as qualified to give them self defence tips as most of these guys (and I would be very unqualified to give them self defence tips).

Does even a law enforcement background make you an expert in avoiding trouble? Presumably the experience of a copper walking through an estate at night is very different from that of a young girl walking though the same estate.

My gut feeling is that it's a load of mickey, but I'm happy to be proven wrong.

Sid_Justice

There are no relevant qualifications for self-defence teaching. What makes anyone qualifed to teach self defence?

tallaght01

Sid_Justice wrote: »

There are no relevant qualifications for self-defence teaching. What makes anyone qualifed to teach self defence?

That's my point. It just happens that most of the instructors seem to be MA instructors. I'm trying to work out why they think a MA background gives them any kind of SD knowledge.

My ma used to go to a lass in the community centre years ago, run by the local kenpo instructor. Nice enough bloke, but no reason to think he'd know how to "de-escalate" an attack situation.

arybvtcw0eolkf

I can't answer that one as I've never done any self defence course's as such, done a stupid knife defence seminar which when it came down to a real life situation (twice) it proved to be nothing like the real thing.

Yomchi (Mod here) teaches a self defence class in Cabra, and works closely with some high profile names in the game.. Plus he's got real life experience as a bouncer in Dublin to draw on so I'd like to see his input here.

Sid_Justice

One presumes that if you spend at least 5 minutes in one of those 'not sporting martial art's that you justify what you do based on the principle that it has self -defence application. Thus, you'd expect those guys to go out of their way to do a little bit of research into the topic. I've never heard of a Judo/Boxing guy be a self-defence expert in their spare time but every other Karate guy seems to be.

Craptacular

Sid_Justice wrote: »

I've never heard of a Judo/Boxing guy be a self-defence expert in their spare time

Isn't Boxing "the noble art of self defence"?

arybvtcw0eolkf

Craptacular wrote: »

Isn't Boxing "the noble art of self defence"?

Well if you want to put it like that, Jigoro Kano (the founder of Judo) says of Judo 'The gentle art of attack & defence", but in Judo your penalized for defending!..

SorGan

Craptacular wrote: »

Isn't Boxing "the noble art of self defence"?

the op is talking about so called experts in soft skills,

I'm not talking abut the physical aspects of it. I'm talking about the other stuff.
There's lots of groups now claiming to teach things like "awareness" and "de-escalation"

Doug Cartel

I once went to an explicit "self defence" place just to see what they were doing. (It was in Scotland, so don't worry I'm not talking about anyone here.)

They *were* really big on teaching de-escalation and awareness, it's true. Unfortunately, their idea of de-escalation was to distract the guy by talking to him while you set him up for a sucker-punch.

I think his qualifications were a black belt in some kind of pressure point jujutsu, and a psychology degree.

yomchi

tallaght01 wrote: »

I'm not talking abut the physical aspects of it. I'm talking about the other stuff.
There's lots of groups now claiming to teach things like "awareness" and "de-escalation" etc etc. We've all seen them.

They're starting to piss me off, to be honest, as I doubt there's much evidene that these techniques work, and I doubt that most of the instructors are doing anything but teaching verbatim from a course or a book.

Am I missing something here? I've had a few girls at work asking about them, and I basically told them that I'd be as qualified to give them self defence tips as most of these guys (and I would be very unqualified to give them self defence tips).

Does even a law enforcement background make you an expert in avoiding trouble? Presumably the experience of a copper walking through an estate at night is very different from that of a young girl walking though the same estate.

My gut feeling is that it's a load of mickey, but I'm happy to be proven wrong.

Hi mate,
It's a bit of weird question tbh. There are no secrets or special training needed to try talk your way out of a situation. I remember making a silly traffic maneuver one time and pissing the guy off to the right of me, he blew his horn and and waved his fist with expletives, I raised my hand up and said - "sorry mate!" to which he just waved its ok - that's just a very simple real life example of de-escalating a situation, or in other words not bringing it to the next level where physical confrontation is necessary. So as you can see, it's not really a special nor secret attribute, however it is under utilised by a lot people and many wouldn't see it as an option in any conscious sense.

Soft skills like awareness and de-escalation are taught a lot more at places that teach self protection concepts which is a lot more rounded than your normal self defence courses that you attend at your local leisure centre, where you're taught how 'react' to an assault already in motion.

In self protection circles there is an emphasis on awareness and avoidance, at the end of the day that is good self protection skills. Awareness is a lot more than just being alert and switched on and I don't mean in any paranoid sense. It can cover understanding body language and the MO of a potential attacker, again nothing mystical about any of that and nothing that can't be found by doing some research. Does it work? That depends on you, but there are certain traits that will be noticeable and certain scenarios that will unfold in certain ways, again studying these and talking to people who have carried them out is one way of understanding them.

Why it pisses you off I'm not sure. If you're interested you can pop along to a class sometime if you like as it's a pretty big topic which won't get much justice done to it on the forum.

As for qualifications, where would that come in and who would qualify you? You can add that to any martial system btw.

SanoVitae

Doug Cartel wrote: »

They *were* really big on teaching de-escalation and awareness, it's true. Unfortunately, their idea of de-escalation was to distract the guy by talking to him while you set him up for a sucker-punch.

Geoff Thompson actually uses the distraction technique as part of his Fence approach. Rather than make the guy "look the other way", it's in the form of a question asked to cause a temporary "brain freeze" in the attacker, giving you enough time to land a KO punch.

It's the very last resort though and Geoff has a whole system to de-escaltion techniques which he recommends using before engaging in any violence.

yomchi

SanoVitae wrote: »

Geoff Thompson actually uses the distraction technique as part of his Fence approach. Rather than make the guy "look the other way", it's in the form of a question asked to cause a temporary "brain freeze" in the attacker, giving you enough time to land a KO punch.

It's the very last resort though and Geoff has a whole system to de-escaltion techniques which he recommends using before engaging in any violence.

Yeh quite true, and you're right misdirection or deceptive kinesis is something than can be used on a subject that is highly likely to kick off, again understanding what to look for will improve your chances of knowing if and when a subject is going become violent and therefore enable you to use such tactics. Having said that, this type of stuff predates Geoff Thompson by 1000's of years. Sun Tzu wrote about artiface in the Art of War. Geoff however made it relevant and sexy in the 2oth century

The brain freeze you mention is probably better explained as pattern interruption which is an NLP term. It simply means engaging the brain to create an 'open state'. Again nothing mystical about this, any brain engaging question will stimulate a response. The brain is a question answering machine. An open state creates a hesitation, albeit momentary in the subjects intent which allows you an in. But you answered that spot on.

SanoVitae

yomchi wrote: »

The brain freeze you mention is probably better explained as pattern interruption which is an NLP term.

I'm actually an NLP Trainer - I thought "brain freeze" would be easier to understand though!

yomchi

Yeh I guess it is a bit simpler alright!

Furious-Dave

Isn't brain freeze when you eat too much ice cream in one go and you get this cold ache in your forehead?

I'm a big fan of Peter Consterdine, who adds 'Freeze' as the third 'F' onto Fight or Flight, as when there is too much going through the brain in a self defence situation than it can cope with. I would also add that people will freeze when a situation arises in a manner other than what they have trained for i.e. on a wet night outside a club, rather than the warm, well-lit environment of a dojo, devoid of any threat or aggression, and the brain goes "wait! this isn't supposed to happen".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7N1PX1lulVM

In response to the OP, I have found that a lot of MA coaches don't distinguish between fighting and self defence. Pre-fight management isn't part of their system and so they don't consider it as an essential part of self defence. They also don't have the experience to realize that what they are training simply won't work. This, to me, is the most likely reason why a lot of MA coaches consider themselves SD coaches.

Added: Is that Lee Morrison towards the end of the clip?

Michael O Leary

The head of our organisation, Keith Kernspecht, considers himself a friend of Geoff Thompson and said that he is jealous of Geoff who coined the term, "3 second fighter" which Keith feels describes Wing Tsun perfectly.

His "Blitzdefence" (based on Wing Tsun) borrows heavily from Geoff's work however he acknowledges it. The classic Wing Tsun guard and stance is slightly modified to be in line with Geoff's "fence". The Blitzdefence programe is two things.
1. Simplified Wing Tsun for beginners.
2. The body language (fence) used before the fight. As soon as the fight beings it is pure Wing Tsun.

I was also impressed with some of Lee Morrison's stuff and I remember Baggio said that Lee had a Wing Chun background. I can see that in some of Lee's forearm strikes which in Wing Tsun/Chun is called a fak-sau.

Regards,

Michael

Doug Cartel

yomchi wrote: »

... again understanding what to look for will improve your chances of knowing if and when a subject is going become violent and therefore enable you to use such tactics.

This is one of the important things that I think a lot of people miss.

Knowing the difference between somebody who's screaming and roaring, but basically just blowing off steam, and somebody who's fuming and getting ready to knock you in the head as hard as he can. The kid who's trying to look tough in front of his mates but is basically ****ting himself inside, and the one who genuinely wants to take your stuff.

Knowing what kind of situation you actually are in, and how to talk to these people to minimise the chance of it kicking off, combined with subtly manoeuvring yourself so you don't end in a corner or whatever if things go South should be a priority. Distracting them so you can land a hit should be way down the list. At last that's what I think.

tallaght01

Doug Cartel wrote: »

This is one of the important things that I think a lot of people miss.

Knowing the difference between somebody who's screaming and roaring, but basically just blowing off steam, and somebody who's fuming and getting ready to knock you in the head as hard as he can. The kid who's trying to look tough in front of his mates but is basically ****ting himself inside, and the one who genuinely wants to take your stuff.

Knowing what kind of situation you actually are in, and how to talk to these people to minimise the chance of it kicking off, combined with subtly manoeuvring yourself so you don't end in a corner or whatever if things go South should be a priority. Distracting them so you can land a hit should be way down the list. At last that's what I think.

That is, presumably, very true. But what makes yomchi or me or you in any ways qualified to take money from people to tell them what will work in that situation. Btw, it wasn't yomchi's website that got me thinking about all this. The only reason I mention him is because he posted a reply.

If you're a big guy like Geoff Thomas, your experiences of talking down some hot head are very likely to be different than how mine would be if I did the same thing.

Or hitting pre-emptively....does it work? or does it make the attacker mad, and end up in worse injuries? I don't know.

I'm just wondering how most people can know what the best things are in general to do in situations that are so rare as to preclude most of us from having much experience of what works for a diverse type of people.

NLP is interesting to talk about, and the theory is nice. But, again, does it work in situations like this. NLP may or may not work in many different situations....but what about in a sexually motivated attack? A mugging? a domestic?

Doug Cartel

tallaght01 wrote: »

But what makes yomchi or me or you in any ways qualified to take money from people to tell them what will work in that situation.

I'm not trying to take anyone's money, I'm just some loud-mouth on the internet, and never claimed to be anything else.

NLP is interesting to talk about, and the theory is nice. But, again, does it work in situations like this?

NLP doesn't have any scientific basis, and lacks credible empirical evidence.

tallaght01

Doug Cartel wrote: »

I'm not trying to take anyone's money, I'm just some loud-mouth on the internet, and never claimed to be anything else.

Sorry that was just a general comment that could as easily have read "what makes me, Dudley Moore or makikomi in any ways qualified....."

It's not about singling a person about. It's about what, in general, makes an MA practitioner competent to teach about how rapists attack etc.

yomchi

tallaght01 wrote: »

That is, presumably, very true. But what makes yomchi or me or you in any ways qualified to take money from people to tell them what will work in that situation. Btw, it wasn't yomchi's website that got me thinking about all this. The only reason I mention him is because he posted a reply.

If you're a big guy like Geoff Thomas, your experiences of talking down some hot head are very likely to be different than how mine would be if I did the same thing.

Or hitting pre-emptively....does it work? or does it make the attacker mad, and end up in worse injuries? I don't know.

I'm just wondering how most people can know what the best things are in general to do in situations that are so rare as to preclude most of us from having much experience of what works for a diverse type of people.

NLP is interesting to talk about, and the theory is nice. But, again, does it work in situations like this. NLP may or may not work in many different situations....but what about in a sexually motivated attack? A mugging? a domestic?

With the best of intentions I think you have a very skewed understanding of what is involved in general self protection training. About my qualifications and money firstly - I don't claim to know everything nor do I or any other SP instructor claim to have all the answers, i'm an instructor under Lee Morrison where I've trained for coming on 6 years now the training fits nicely into my part of my work life and a previous job and above all I really enjoy the training, I find it very useful and I like to let other people know that. What we train in are concepts and options. As for money, I charge a tenner. Ii have a course coming up for women who are friends of friends and family who asked me to run it, it will run from 11 til 4 and it will cost... a tenner.

So with that out of the way,

If you're a big guy like Geoff Thomas, your experiences of talking down some hot head are very likely to be different than how mine would be if I did the same thing.

Geoff Thompson isn't not a big guy, but he had a big reputation which was a result of the mans confidence and demeanor which manifested in his intention to deal with someone, violently or not. Size has zero to do with it.
It's not about the size of the dog in the fight, it's about the size of the fight in the dog.

Or hitting pre-emptively....does it work? or does it make the attacker mad, and end up in worse injuries? I don't know.

Yes absolutely both. If you've honed your BL cues and you decide there and then to hit first then you better make sure you're clinical and committed. The results are simple, it works or it doesn't. If it doesn't work well then you better have an alternative. In SP circles we train attachment and follow up except for where enough distance is created to escape, escape being the preferred option always.

There is empirical evidence available that pre-emption works, bundles of it. I'm surprised being a Kravist that you haven't covered any of this. Pre-emption has worked for me and I can guarantee you there are lads on here who have knock out punches, all they need to do is throw them. Makikomi I'm looking at you

I'm just wondering how most people can know what the best things are in general to do in situations that are so rare as to preclude most of us from having much experience of what works for a diverse type of people.

Bizarre and generalistic, who are most people and what are the best things and what situations are you referring to?
Threats may be rare, but they do happen would you agree? And would you agree it's better to have a response to a threat and not need it, than to need it and not have it? Again you do train in Krav don't you? Is none of this covered?

NLP is interesting to talk about, and the theory is nice. But, again, does it work in situations like this. NLP may or may not work in many different situations....but what about in a sexually motivated attack? A mugging? a domestic?

Again you're understanding of where NLP fits in to any of this is skewing your point. The only NLP made reference to in this thread was pattern interruption. This is not rocket science, mystical or secret it a very simplistic everyday occurance. For the purpose of understanding it it is given a label and a place in scheme of things. The next time you're in a conversation and your mobile rings and your conversation with the person stutters for a second - you've been pattern interrupted by a piece of plastic with no qualifications of training

If you're really interested mate in any of this please do come for a class or a chat that's a genuine offer as I know my micky is bigger than yours anyway

cheers

Barry.Oglesby

What qualifies anyone to teach self defence?

Most people would say experience, but then having a lot of experience fighting indicates that you get in a lot of fights, so avoidance (everyone's first step) is hardly your forté is it?

The what next? Avoidance? Well, I successfully avoided getting in any fights for the last 2 years. So I suppose I'm pretty well qualified to teach avoidance then. All I need to do is come up with a "syllabus" and I'll be set.

I'm being ridiculous of course, but with no quantifiable results available, there's no method of knowing whether "self protection" training really works. Who is to say what's right and what's wrong in this arena? I remember someone putting me on to a famous "self protection expert" about doing a seminar about 4 years ago. I went on his website and read his stuff. I almost choked on my chips laughing at the irony. Basically this guy boasted that he'd had X number of fights, I can't remember the number but it was in the thousands. He had lots of old war stories and lots of them finished with some variation of that Partridgism "needless to say, I had the last laugh". And yet the first piece of advice he offerred? Avoid fighting at all costs. Brilliant. Sage like advice from a man who by his own admission has failed to follow his own advice thousands of times.

Self protection classes make people "feel" safer, which may well be enough if that's what you want. It always reminds me of the quote "there's nothing so uncommon as common sense". A friend of mine in LA makes €150 an hour giving people advice such as "when you feel uncomfortable on the train, change carriage slowly and without urgency", and "avoid walking alone late at night". Who doesn't know this stuff!

The same guy, who shall remain anonymous as he is reasonably well known, says that the people who come to him are also likely to invest in life coaching, NLP courses to learn how to "influence" others, attend conferences on "how to get ahead" and so on. He describes himself as "the military arm of the SHAM (self help and actualisation movement) " with a smile. Yes he knows this stuff is all just common sense, but as long as someone's willing to pay, he's willing to take. He's been a martial arts coach for years and made nothing. Now he has a nice house and can put his kid in a better school. He likes that better.

ncef

Ive been training and teaching self defence/karate classes for the last 28 years. I started when i was 18. I wanted to learn how to defend myself and counter attack in a real fight situation. I did. Thanks to the Kenpo Karate that i was taught, and i continue to teach. My definition of a self defence situation is when a urgent and instant need arises for you to react to a threat, and de-escalation should never play a part. The hospitals are full every weekend, usually of people who were on the recieving end of unprovoked attacks, and i suspect all untrained in self defence. An example of many self defence techniques that we would regularly pratice, would be against straight punches,hooking punches,kicks and punches,knife attacks,overhead club attacks,one and two hand lapel grabs,bear hugs from front and rear (arms pinned and arms free),shoulder grabs,front and rear chokes,arm locks,head locks, hair grab etc. 300 approx.
Regards,
Daithi

Doug Cartel

ncef wrote: »

My definition of a self defence situation is when a urgent and instant need arises for you to react to a threat, and de-escalation should never play a part.

So I guess the question is: Have you just picked a definition of self defence that best fits what you're already doing with your karate?

The hospitals are full every weekend, usually of people who were on the recieving end of unprovoked attacks, and i suspect all untrained in self defence.

How many people are in the hospitals? How many as a result of being attacked? What percentage of these attacks were unprovoked?

An example of many self defence techniques that we would regularly pratice, would be against straight punches,hooking punches,kicks and punches,knife attacks,overhead club attacks,one and two hand lapel grabs,bear hugs from front and rear (arms pinned and arms free),shoulder grabs,front and rear chokes,arm locks,head locks, hair grab etc.

Again, are these self defence techniques, or simply techniques you have labelled as self-defence? (eg, what distinguishes a "self-defence" move from the other karate moves?) How realistic are the defences of overhead club attacks and bear-hugs from the rear - does anyone actually attack this way?

Furious-Dave

Doug Cartel wrote: »

Again, are these self defence techniques, or simply techniques you have labelled as self-defence? (eg, what distinguishes a "self-defence" move from the other karate moves?) How realistic are the defences of overhead club attacks and bear-hugs from the rear - does anyone actually attack this way?

I'll answer The techniques in Kenpo are like mini 2 person forms. Their purpose is to gradually introduce the use of Kenpo principles on a training partner. The techniques become more complex as the practitioner rises through the belt system. Some of the techniques are simple and probably functional if trained properly, but most are unrealistic, unnecessary, or far too complex.
Kenpo is all I'm training at the moment, and as much as I like training in the club I'm at, I often find myself asking "why don't you just hit him?" or "why not just pick him up and dump on his back?" when we're doing syllabus work.

tallaght01

yomchi wrote: »

With the best of intentions I think you have a very skewed understanding of what is involved in general self protection training. About my qualifications and money firstly - I don't claim to know everything nor do I or any other SP instructor claim to have all the answers, i'm an instructor under Lee Morrison where I've trained for coming on 6 years now the training fits nicely into my part of my work life and a previous job and above all I really enjoy the training, I find it very useful and I like to let other people know that. What we train in are concepts and options. As for money, I charge a tenner. Ii have a course coming up for women who are friends of friends and family who asked me to run it, it will run from 11 til 4 and it will cost... a tenner.

So with that out of the way,



Geoff Thompson isn't not a big guy, but he had a big reputation which was a result of the mans confidence and demeanor which manifested in his intention to deal with someone, violently or not. Size has zero to do with it.
It's not about the size of the dog in the fight, it's about the size of the fight in the dog.



Yes absolutely both. If you've honed your BL cues and you decide there and then to hit first then you better make sure you're clinical and committed. The results are simple, it works or it doesn't. If it doesn't work well then you better have an alternative. In SP circles we train attachment and follow up except for where enough distance is created to escape, escape being the preferred option always.

There is empirical evidence available that pre-emption works, bundles of it. I'm surprised being a Kravist that you haven't covered any of this. Pre-emption has worked for me and I can guarantee you there are lads on here who have knock out punches, all they need to do is throw them. Makikomi I'm looking at you



Bizarre and generalistic, who are most people and what are the best things and what situations are you referring to?
Threats may be rare, but they do happen would you agree? And would you agree it's better to have a response to a threat and not need it, than to need it and not have it? Again you do train in Krav don't you? Is none of this covered?



Again you're understanding of where NLP fits in to any of this is skewing your point. The only NLP made reference to in this thread was pattern interruption. This is not rocket science, mystical or secret it a very simplistic everyday occurance. For the purpose of understanding it it is given a label and a place in scheme of things. The next time you're in a conversation and your mobile rings and your conversation with the person stutters for a second - you've been pattern interrupted by a piece of plastic with no qualifications of training

If you're really interested mate in any of this please do come for a class or a chat that's a genuine offer as I know my micky is bigger than yours anyway

cheers

I still don't get this. At all.

The money issue was specifically a general comment. You may charge a tenner or 50c or 100 euro per hour. But a transaction is taking place, in which somebody gives you something in exchange for your knowledge of self defence. So this implies the teacher knows more about the subject than the student.

I'm not sure, either, what I was "generalising" about. The point you were responding to was a simple enough one....ie that very few, if any, of us, have enough experience of the broad range of attacks on the broad range of people being taught self defence. ie is a self defence instructor familiar with the specific issues facing a tiny lady about to get sexually assaulted in her remote home, and with the carjacking victim, and the unprovoked attack on the lone male, the racially motivated attacker etc. All of these types of attackers will presumably have a different mindset, and will react differently to different stimuli than other. Same with the victims. Makikomi may be able to throw a knockout punch. But what about the middle aged lady, or the small guy facing a much more powerful attacker?

I know you say "size means zero" and "pre-emption works". But how do we know that? I spend a significant part of my life analysing and generating "empirical" evidence, and I'd be seriously impressed if the available evidence managed to take into account of all the different variables that would be present in an attack situation, and come up with any meaningful conclusions.

I work in healthcare, and have dne a lot of A+E in Johannesburg, where there's some of the highest assault rates on the planet...carjacking, robbery, gang related, sexual assault, and various combinations of the above. I've also done A+E in Glasgow, where we had the highest knife crime rates in the world at the time. I spoke to patients in detail about their attacks, but I still wouldn't regard myself as qualified to tell them how they should avoid attacks.

I do Krav. But I do it for exercise. My instructor is a better fighter than me, and we train what we learn under stress, so that's fine. I'll listen to him when it comes to fighting stuff. Sure, we look at escaping situations etc, but it's pretty much 100% about the rumble. I doubt he's any more qualified than me or you to tell rape victims how to de-escalate an erection.

So, I'm still confused. Well, if I'm being honest, I'm not as much confused as skeptical. And that's no harm. Lots of people don't like Krav or combatives or lots of other classes out there, and that's fine. I guess I just don't like some of the self defence classes that are sold to people. I'll probably just have to learn to live with it.

SanoVitae

tallaght01 wrote: »

I doubt he's any more qualified than me or you to tell rape victims how to de-escalate an erection.

Now I'm confused.....

pearsquasher

In my opinion "Self Defence training" is VERY different to "martial arts training" in general. The popular perception is that they are the same.... and in some cases they might well be labled the same thing. I mention "self-defence" on my own website but stress the difference between what that is and what I teach, when people walk through the door. I'm also honest about my own experience.

Mainly I teach the so-called hard-skills - locks, throws, strikes, weapons with a goal of deal with mulitple attackers with weapons. Thats an extreme situation but it allows for very interesting training in my opinion. It's hardly "Self Defence" though!

Self Defence, to me, is more about so-called soft-skills, psychology, de-escalation, awareness etc. Some of it leaks over in what we do and is interesting too.

I'm not sure if you can really teach soft-skills in a dojo per se.... I think you need experience be it simply growing up in a tough environment, or learning on-the-job. So much of it involves mental perceptions and attitude and emotive issues... very hard to learn/teach in a class. These soft-skills can be at least learned about in such publications as the excellent "the gift of fear" and www.nononsenseselfdefence.com. Learning th3ese skills themselves is a whole other matter. I know plenty of soft-skills savy folks who don't know how to move properly and would fall over their own feet no matter how verbally astute they are.

I recently declined the offer to teach both a womans self-defence class and a security personel class because I honestly did not feel right about doing so given my lack of experience in criminal law, womens psychology, social studies and all those things that need to be transferred into the mind of a student in such a class. I probably could have put a simplified hard-skills course together but I would not have felt comfortable saying to a student in either class "This will help you if you are physically assaulted". Its a bit more complicated than that.

BUT for my long term MA students.. I can see their confidence and attitude devolop on the right side of what's needed for both soft-skills as well as hard-skills. It's a long process requiring weekly dedication and perseverence and is more about what is nurtured than what is taught. This methodolgy is not really suitable for a short term "self-defence" course in terms of time-lines and goals but it can lead to self-defence ability in the long term, physical and verbal.

Just own opinion.

Lastly, if you're interested, I cannot recomend http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/ highly enough. Nothing in it goes against what I've learned in the Bujinkan.. but plenty in there is highly critical of the average "Self-Defence" class. It should be read top-to-bottom by all MA students and I would have certainly stolen everything from it had I took the teaching post I mentioned earlier!

yomchi

The point you were responding to was a simple enough one....ie that very few, if any, of us, have enough experience of the broad range of attacks on the broad range of people being taught self defence. ie is a self defence instructor familiar with the specific issues facing a tiny lady about to get sexually assaulted in her remote home, and with the carjacking victim, and the unprovoked attack on the lone male, the racially motivated attacker etc. All of these types of attackers will presumably have a different mindset, and will react differently to different stimuli than other

You are presuming incorrectly. Irregardless of what the motive is, the mindset or theintention is harm, physical harm. It matters little if the person is hit first before a sexual assault or if they are hit as part of a racially motivated assault - the intention is the same and this misunderstanding is where a lot of the KM schools of thought fall down.

Understanding the motives of any particular type of attacker is very important. Motives dictate tactics, tactics will dictate proxemics but one thing remains a constant and that is intention. As long as one is conscious and coherent they stand a chance to fight to protect themselves.

To fully understand the motives of a sexual predator well then these motives need to be researched and studied. Information is widely available, likewise the motives of a violent xenophobe or homophobe etc etc are widely available. To present a case study to a class and stimulate a debate and discussion on it is the I.D.E.A.L method of teaching a subject. You must present the student with the information on the subject before you can deal with it. Would you agree?

Debating and discussing motives allows people to understand tactics, from this, avoidance becomes very relevant. You cannot present a tactic such as awareness and avoidance without presenting case studies on predatory tactics - all of which are widely available. You could fire straight into training escapes and physical applications to a live assault but then you're only teaching people to fight off the back foot which is essentially self defence - in this case the person is already losing.

In a nut shell - understanding tactics allows you to avoid them.

I know you say "size means zero" and "pre-emption works".But how do we know that?

Who's we?
Simplify things here and remove the word "pre-emption" because all that means is to be proactive and intercept (something Bruce Lee advocated back in the 1960's) - what we are intercepting with is a strike, so you could boil your question right back to - does hitting work? I don't really need to answer that one for you do i? Either way here are a few real examples for you to ponder.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAx5cLTJ3Ek&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vBJLUQBdhQ&feature=related

And while your there, here's a few examples of those 'tiny ladies' you may have referred to, seems they've got more balls than most and they don't train either so they have no skill standing or on the deck, what they do have is pugnacious intention, a resource available to everyone in the right circumstances http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2009/03/new_york_is_a_city_of_tough-as.html

I'll listen to him when it comes to fighting stuff. Sure, we look at escaping situations etc, but it's pretty much 100% about the rumble.

So you're effectively taught how to 'rumble' without any pre conflict or post conflict modules? What about the effects of adrenalin, are these mentioned? Either with the attacker or you in mind? If not, there is a big hole in the training, but if you are only going for the exercise well then that is fine i guess.

I doubt he's any more qualified than me or you to tell rape victims how to de-escalate an erection.

Apart from your comment being without tact it does show the obtuse angle you're coming from with regard to any of this subject.

I still don't get this. At all.

Crap. I didn't see this bit.

yomchi

ncef wrote: »

Ive been training and teaching self defence/karate classes for the last 28 years. I started when i was 18. I wanted to learn how to defend myself and counter attack in a real fight situation. I did. Thanks to the Kenpo Karate that i was taught, and i continue to teach. My definition of a self defence situation is when a urgent and instant need arises for you to react to a threat, and de-escalation should never play a part. The hospitals are full every weekend, usually of people who were on the recieving end of unprovoked attacks, and i suspect all untrained in self defence. An example of many self defence techniques that we would regularly pratice, would be against straight punches,hooking punches,kicks and punches,knife attacks,overhead club attacks,one and two hand lapel grabs,bear hugs from front and rear (arms pinned and arms free),shoulder grabs,front and rear chokes,arm locks,head locks, hair grab etc. 300 approx.
Regards,
Daithi

Without going off in a tangent, have you ever wondered how in a 3 second tits up 'oh ****' moment which one of those 300 techniques you're going to respond with?

Michael O Leary

yomchi wrote: »

Without going off in a tangent, have you ever wondered how in a 3 second tits up 'oh ****' moment which one of those 300 techniques you're going to respond with?

Hi Jon,

Just as aside and without going off on a tangient myself, this is our approach. The reason why I bring it up is not self promotion but to highlight our approach to your question.

While there are 100s of potential attacks, some will be more common than others. This follows the general rule in risk management where you prioritise risks by looking at the likelihood of a risk occuring and its impact.

Of those risks most likely to occur and which have the biggest impact we address them using Pareto's Principle or the 80/20 rule. We use a smaller amount of techniques (the 20) against a greater number of attacks. (the 80).

Rather than learning more and more Wing Tsun combinations, we would have a core smaller amount of techniques which we would work more intensively.

Anyway, just my contribution.

Regards,

Michael

yomchi

Hi Micheal

Combative principles are much simpler in contrast, irregardless of the type of attack the physical application of it is a constant, ie - someone crashes distance and attempts assault.
Combative principles will dictate that the attackers intention be removed through ballistic impact primarily to the head with the result being knock out, knock down or enough of a pause to either follow up or high tail it. Each range is taught with that in mind and therefore each range is drilled accordingly keeping everything gross motor for obvious reasons.

All the best

tallaght01

yomchi wrote: »

You are presuming incorrectly. Irregardless of what the motive is, the mindset or theintention is harm, physical harm. It matters little if the person is hit first before a sexual assault or if they are hit as part of a racially motivated assault - the intention is the same and this misunderstanding is where a lot of the KM schools of thought fall down.

I'm on my way to work, so I don't have time to answer properly, but this is the kind of thing I'm taking about. How do you know what you've said there is true? I could just as easily argue that some type of attackers will run as soon as a person fights back, but some won't. I could say it, but it doesn't make it true. From my (pretty superficial) course on criminal psychology, the motives, determination and "repelability" of rapists, gangbangers and xenophobes are all remarkably different. I don't think KM schools fall down on this issue at all, as they don't deal with it.

yomchi

tallaght01 wrote: »

I'm on my way to work, so I don't have time to answer properly, but this is the kind of thing I'm taking about. How do you know what you've said there is true?

Are you doubting that the intention of a sexual attacker or any person violently assaulting another person is to cause physical harm? Because that is what I said, how do I know it's true? It's not algorithms dude .

I could just as easily argue that some type of attackers will run as soon as a person fights back, but some won't. I could say it, but it doesn't make it true.

But it is bloody true. Are you drunk mate? seriously?
There is much chance of anyone running away as they are to stay and continue the assault, I'm not trying to be smart but I can't understand how you don't get that. What other outcomes are there? They certainly won't be beamed up by Scotty. They either finish the assault and satisfy the motive trivial or otherwise or they don't for what ever reason, be that the person fights back, someone intervenes or etc etc..

From my (pretty superficial) course on criminal psychology, the motives, determination and "repelability" of rapists, gangbangers and xenophobes are all remarkably different. I don't think KM schools fall down on this issue at all, as they don't deal with it.

I see your superficial course and I raise you a FETAC course courtesy of Mr Kilroy :cool:

But the word you are looking for is recidivism, and of course the motives are all different as I have already said all of this. What remains constant is the intention which is to cause physical harm which results in the motive being satisfied.

I spend a significant part of my life analysing and generating "empirical" evidence, and I'd be seriously impressed if the available evidence managed to take into account of all the different variables that would be present in an attack situation

.....

I work in healthcare, and have dne a lot of A+E in Johannesburg, where there's some of the highest assault rates on the planet...carjacking, robbery, gang related, sexual assault, and various combinations of the above.

.....

I've also done A+E in Glasgow, where we had the highest knife crime rates in the world at the time. I spoke to patients in detail about their attacks

.....

my (pretty superficial) course on criminal psychology

And...

I still don't get this. At all.

Either you're a fantasist or a bad listener/observer to life, but either way you have enough experience in your own life there to understand the difference between motive and the intention needed to carry it out. Working in that hospital would have helped you understand that people do get hurt in physical assaults, some worse than others and all for different reasons but the results are all the same - physical harm.

In studying recidivism we covered the case study of Jerry Brudos and Thomas Vanda, if you read up on them their cases cover two different motives with the same assaultive intention on their victims.

tallaght01

yomchi wrote: »

But it is bloody true. Are you drunk mate? seriously?


Either you're a fantasist or a bad listener/observer to life

I can ignore the above shyte, on the grounds that you didn't pay any attention to the structure of the sentence you were quoting for the first line :rolleyes:

To address one of your other points, I wasn't talking about recidivism, either. As, in my understanding of that particular topic, through the prison work I'm involved in, it's not usually applied to a situation that's occurring in the here and now. It's about the medium to long term rehabilitation. That's how we talk about it in the prison service, but maybe the SD community use it in a different way. Doesn't really matter either way, I guess, as you know what I'm talking about.

The real point is that you're not answering the question. It's not about whether an attacker wishes to cause physical harm or not. They may be just wanting money, and have no intention of fighting if you fight back, or the opposite may be true. This isn't the central issue.

The point is that you talk about signals these people give off for starters....body language etc. How do SD teachers know how to interpret the body language of a rapist or a xenophobe or a mugger or whatever? How many people have watched all of these types of attackers in action, with their different mindsets, or how many studies have seen analysed the body language of these types of attackers in enough detail to draw conclusions that can be applied at a population level to different groups of victims?

Then, when you interpret the signals, you presumably advise people on what to do. If you're advocating a clatter and run approach, then fair enough. I can see the merit in that. I don't buy the NLP stuff, purely based on anecdote. I've often been in semi stressful situation and, to use your own example, not noticed my phone going off. For example, at the end of a resuscitation I might notice I've a few missed calls that I didn't notice. Of course I'm not focussing on my phone, while an attacker is focussed on their victim. And that may be the difference. Or it may not. What I'm asking is how do SD teachers know it is. How do they know the "brain freeze" thing works.

Then, of course, there's the de-escalation stuff etc. I'm not saying situations can't be de-escalated. I'm asking how you know the proper way to do it. If it's experience, can you genuinely apply those same principles to a tiny lady? Or a meek, timid man? No amount of paper cuttings of old ladiess fighting off a mugger changes the fact that an attacker will look at me differently than an elderly woman and will, in my opinion, react differently to a show of assertiveness, depending on whether it's coming from me or Dame Judy Dench. So how do we apply an individual's experience to a situation involving a person of different age, sex and body size. Again, a youtube video of a girl giving a bloke a clatter sheds no light on this, as the physical side was never the issue.

I just want to know about the interventions, and nothing else. The stuff you tell people to do. The body language and verbal clues to look for. The de-escalation strategies, the awareness stuff. How do you know it works? What level of evidence is there for its effectiveness?

I may be a simpleton, but I know when someone has lots of evidence to hand, they usually have no trouble in telling me what it is. I'm willing to be wrong. I can live with being a wrong, boozing simpleton. But so far, no one has ever explained this to me without getting personal and answering the questions they would like me to be asking, rather than what I'm actually asking.

Michael O Leary

yomchi wrote: »

Combative principles will dictate that the attackers intention be removed through ballistic impact primarily to the head with the result being knock out, knock down or enough of a pause to either follow up or high tail it. Each range is taught with that in mind and therefore each range is drilled accordingly keeping everything gross motor for obvious reasons.

Combative principles Wing Tsun principles will dictate that the attackers intention be removed through ballistic impact primarily to the head with the result being knock out, knock down or enough of a pause to either follow up or high tail it. Each range is taught with that in mind and therefore each range is drilled accordingly keeping everything gross motor for obvious reasons.

Thats why I like talking to people like you. I am not interested in trying to exploit the differences in what we do by "trying" to compare the best in what I do with the worst in what you do. I would rather examine the things both of our disciplines have in common and put any differences in context.

paxo

tallaght01 wrote: »

I'm not talking abut the physical aspects of it. I'm talking about the other stuff.
There's lots of groups now claiming to teach things like "awareness" and "de-escalation" etc etc. We've all seen them.

They're starting to piss me off, to be honest, as I doubt there's much evidene that these techniques work, and I doubt that most of the instructors are doing anything but teaching verbatim from a course or a book.

Am I missing something here? I've had a few girls at work asking about them, and I basically told them that I'd be as qualified to give them self defence tips as most of these guys (and I would be very unqualified to give them self defence tips).

Does even a law enforcement background make you an expert in avoiding trouble? Presumably the experience of a copper walking through an estate at night is very different from that of a young girl walking though the same estate.

My gut feeling is that it's a load of mickey, but I'm happy to be proven wrong.

Hi Tallagh01
IMO these skills do work, but and it's a big but like any skill they work best for those who practice them regularly or need to develop them because of the environment they are in. As an extreme example I would guess that soldiers in a combat zone very quickly develop a high level of awareness. In this type of situation they would function in a state of hyperarousal. However once the stimulus is removed they would gradually return to their previous levels.

Jeff Cooper the American handgun shooting expert ( WW 2 & Korean war veteran ) developed a coloured coded approach ie White, Yellow, Orange and Red. He viewed this as a level of awareness or mindset rather than a specific response to danger

In White you are unprepared and unready to take lethal action. If you are attacked in White you will probably die unless your adversary is totally inept.

In Yellow you bring yourself to the understanding that your life may be in danger and that you may have to do something about it.

In Orange you have determined upon a specific adversary and are prepared to take action which may result in his death, but you are not in a lethal mode.
In Red you are in a lethal mode and will shoot if circumstances warrant.
I mention his war experience as presumably his experience influenced his thinking

Marc MacYoung has some interesting things to say on the topics of awareness/avoidance/self defence

http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/self-defense.htm#aggression

I hold the view that police are required to do the opposite to avoiding trouble, in fact they are sent in to deal with it. However based on my own experience they are usually good at deescalating aggressive situations. IMO they are able to use their deescalation skills effectively because if the situation goes pear shaped they have access to weapons, restraints, other officers and they are usually young and reasonable fit blokes.

Speaking for myself I think a little common sense goes a long way to avoiding a lot of trouble

Cheers
Paxo

yomchi

tallaght01 wrote: »

through the prison work I'm involved in, it's not usually applied to a situation that's occurring in the here and now. It's about the medium to long term rehabilitation. That's how we talk about it in the prison service, but maybe the SD community use it in a different way. Doesn't really matter either way, I guess, as you know what I'm talking about.

No, recidivism can be defined as repetition of criminal or other antisocial behavior governed by motives. What prison work are you involved in? I'd be interested in asking you some questions about some research I am currently involved in. Would that be ok? Genuinely.

The real point is that you're not answering the question. It's not about whether an attacker wishes to cause physical harm or not. if you fight back, or the opposite may be true. This isn't the central issue.

I answered your questions many times.

They may be just wanting money, and have no intention of fighting

These are generally termed as chuggers and or beggers.

The point is that you talk about signals these people give off for starters....body language etc. How do SD teachers know how to interpret the body language of a rapist or a xenophobe or a mugger or whatever?

I see now where you are confused. Don't confuse behavioral patterns which can be observed immediately post conflict and the predatory nature of sexual deviants. I'll take a minute to explain the differences.

Pre conflict behavioral patterns will include some obvious and not so obvious indications as to whether the subject has violent intention towards you again the motive may differ but the intention is a constant. The adrenal effect on the subject will provide some 'give aways' such as - immediate and focused tunnel vision on you, the inability to but words together and hence resulting in single syllable use, the most obvious however is a shift in weight as they pull their strong side behind as they line you up. There are many more obvious ones but these all relate to in this instance to an aggressive subject in front of you.

Human communication consists of 93 percent body language and paralinguistic cues which refers to the non-verbal elements of communication used to modify meaning and convey emotion. Paralanguage may be expressed consciously or unconsciously, and it includes the pitch, volume, and, in some cases, intonation of speech (Borgg circa 1960)

Albert Mehrabain suggested in his studies;
that it comes to two conclusions. Firstly, that there are basically three elements in any face-to-face communication:

* Words
* Tone of voice
* Nonverbal behaviour (e.g Facial expression)

Secondly, the non-verbal elements are particularly important for communicating feelings and attitude, especially when they are incongruent: If words disagree with the tone of voice and nonverbal behaviour, people tend to believe the tonality and nonverbal behaviour.

It is emphatically not the case that non-verbal elements in all senses convey the bulk of the message, even though this is how his conclusions are frequently misinterpreted. For instance, when delivering a lecture or presentation, the textual content of the lecture is delivered entirely verbally, but the non-verbal cues are very important in conveying the speaker's attitude towards what they are saying, notably their belief or conviction.
[edit] 7%-38%-55% rule

Understanding as best as possible the motives of sexual predators are different. Again there are several studies available and all the case studies I have covered thus far carry similar traits. - (1971). Silent Messages (1st ed.).

Sexual deviants or predators will operate relevantly to their motives. There was one case study which I have here which tells of a woman who was being unconsciously groomed by a work colleague. Her colleague started to make sexual references to her. Her timid response to him indicated to him that he could continue with his probing, he moved onto pinching her behind and then rubbing himself off her as he past her in the office. She remained timid and embarrassed by his behavior but what it told him was that he was going to get away with it, what she didn't realise is that she was being sexually harrassed.The result came at the christmas party at the office when drunk he forced himself on her fondled her breasts and tried forcefully to put her hand down his trousers. The build up to this happening was carried out over months of probing.

Contrast that to a similar situation which happened in Edinburgh in 2007;

The same sexual probing was being used on a woman with a different mindset. While she didn't mind the sexual innuendo and participated in it due to her personality, when her colleague made an unwanted move on her (he put his hands on her side under her arms to 'move her out of the way' but his fingers touched her breasts purposely) she reacted with a strong verbal boundary in which she commanded in a loud manner allowing everyone in the office to hear: " Don't you dare take liberties Simon, the next time you put your hands on me there you're going to regret it"

Right there and then her verbal boundary which would have been congruent with her demeanor and posture told him he can go no further while bringing the attention of the entire office to the carry on. He crawled up his own behind, needless to say.

So there are sure signals at play, whether the motive be sexual or otherwise a victim is carefully selected. The fact the word predator is used would suggest that there is a prey to be had.

Then, when you interpret the signals, you presumably advise people on what to do. If you're advocating a clatter and run approach, then fair enough. I can see the merit in that.

Run at all costs if you can yes.

I don't buy the NLP stuff, purely based on anecdote. I've often been in semi stressful situation and, to use your own example, not noticed my phone going off. For example, at the end of a resuscitation I might notice I've a few missed calls that I didn't notice.

You've taken my example out of context and inserted your own, the two are not comparable.

What I'm asking is how do SD teachers know it is. How do they know the "brain freeze" thing works.

Milton H. Erickson (Psychologist) suggested;
A confused person has their conscious mind busy and occupied, and is very much inclined to draw upon unconscious learnings to make sense of things. A confused person is in a trance of their own making - and therefore goes readily into that trance without resistance. Confusion might be created by ambiguous words, complex or endless sentences, pattern interruption or a myriad of other techniques to incite transderivational searches. Transderivational is a fundamental part of human language and cognitive processing. Arguably, every word or utterance a person hears, for example, and everything they see or feel and take note of, results in a very brief trance while TDS is carried out to establish a contextual meaning for it

So rather than take my word for it, you'd probably get better answers from experts in the field. Again studies are widely available.

Then, of course, there's the de-escalation stuff etc. I'm not saying situations can't be de-escalated. I'm asking how you know the proper way to do it. If it's experience, can you genuinely apply those same principles to a tiny lady? Or a meek, timid man?

You see de-escalation needs to be used in context, I think in respect to your position your not putting any of these concepts into the correct context.

If someone is intent on causing you harm, they will endeavour to cause you harm whatever the cost. Violence for violence sake. Take another example where deescalation might work - you've spilled a drink over someone in a night club or pub, the other person is now very agitated whether you like it or not your response conscious or otherwise will dictate the persons next move.

You could put your hands up apologise profusely act genuinely concerned and offer to buy another drink, or you could seem uninterested because you look like a sap in front of your mates, say sorry but not say it genuinely enough to deescalate the other persons rising temper. This is a very general example made simple to get the point across. I have however given you an example of a traffic move I made that pissed this guy off, I could given him the finger which may have resulted in him getting out of his car, but I decided I am in the wrong presented an open palm and made sure he knew I said sorry, he was happy with that.

So where does it all fit? In context. De-escalation is not a skill that you teach someone because everyone has used it in all sorts of different ways in all different walks of life. What we do say in SP circles is that it is an option that you have before anything goes physical, if you are teaching how to perform in-conflict without presenting options to avoid it well then in my opinion you are being reckless.

So how do we apply an individual's experience to a situation involving a person of different age, sex and body size. Again, a youtube video of a girl giving a bloke a clatter sheds no light on this, as the physical side was never the issue.

Again you seem to have the context wrong with respect. You did question physical side because you asked was pre-emption workable. I said pre-emption meant intercepting first with a strike, so remove the label and boil it back to hitting which means your question was "does hitting work" - I posted two examples of it working in two different situations. You can see where understanding behavioural cues can become useful.

So how do we apply an individual's experience to a situation involving a person of different age, sex and body size

You seem fixed on the physicality of the individual, again that's why I posted the news paper with report of timid old ladies being able to fend for themselves, so can it be done - obviously.

I just want to know about the interventions, and nothing else. The stuff you tell people to do. The body language and verbal clues to look for. The de-escalation strategies, the awareness stuff. How do you know it works? What level of evidence is there for its effectiveness?

Well I hope I have explained it as best as I could, like I said at the very beginning it's very hard to get all of this across in a forum. I don't tell people to do anything you can only provide options, workable options taken from past experiences of my own and many many others. As for evidence as to whether awareness works.. seriously. If it didn't work people would be killed en masse by traffic.

Listen I tried my best to answer your queries I apologise for the smartness of a previous post and in that apology I was hoping you would allow me to discuss your own experiences in the prison service and the health service in which you have worked internationally. You sit on some great real world experiences and I'd appreciate exploring them. Would that be ok?

ncef

In reading some of the replys, im probably wasting my my time getting involved in this conversation. So ill finish with this.
Ive given you my definition of Self Defence.
On the second point, you should take time to visit one of the main Dublin hospitals early on a Sat, Sun, or Monday morning, and it might open your eyes.
Thirdly, anyone that practices anything repeatedly over a long period of time has a better chance of reacting in the way that they've been training, than someone that dose'nt.
But maybe your referring to instant Self Defence Courses.(Learn how to defend yourself in 6 weeks, or 8 weeks! )
Proficiency in anything is dependant on how often you pratice.

Maybe your very young or have lived a very sheltered life, but i've seen the results of bottle and heavy weapon attacks across the head, and not so long ago a female student of mine was dragged in a lane while waiting for a bus on a main street in Dublin at 11.30 on a Friday evening.
The techniques you mentioned are ones that would most likely be used by those that are trained, who may find themselves in the situations i've just mentioned.
P.S. Although the female student of mine suffered a degree of trauma, and wont frequent that bus stop ever again, she was'nt injured (except for some skin damage on her hands) and was able to call a taxi to get home. She did what she had done in training even though she was'nt aware of what she was doing at the time. She just remembers the attacker letting go and hitting the ground and her running away as fast as she could.
Regards
Daithi

Doug Cartel

ncef wrote: »

On the second point, you should take time to visit one of the main Dublin hospitals early on a Sat, Sun, or Monday morning, and it might open your eyes.

Why don't you give me a breakdown of what that's like? You know with numbers and stuff. I've heard they're full of eejits locked out of their scull who had accidents or were picking fights. Maybe if the locked eejits knew karate, they'd be sorted.

yomchi

Hi Daithí,

ncef wrote: »

In reading some of the replys, im probably wasting my my time getting involved in this conversation. So ill finish with this.
Ive given you my definition of Self Defence.

I read your definition which was...

My definition of a self defence situation is when a urgent and instant need arises for you to react to a threat, and de-escalation should never play a part. The hospitals are full every weekend, usually of people who were on the recieving end of unprovoked attacks, and i suspect all untrained in self defence. An example of many self defence techniques that we would regularly pratice, would be against straight punches,hooking punches,kicks and punches,knife attacks,overhead club attacks,one and two hand lapel grabs,bear hugs from front and rear (arms pinned and arms free),shoulder grabs,front and rear chokes,arm locks,head locks, hair grab etc. 300 approx.

So you've been trained to react to threats with an array of 300 different reactions. I then asked...

have you ever wondered how in a 3 second tits up 'oh ****' moment which one of those 300 techniques you're going to respond with?

Not to mention that premeditated action will ALWAYS beat reaction rendering any form of traditional blocking completely useless. Either way I'd like to hear your response to that approx 300 technique conundrum.

On the second point, you should take time to visit one of the main Dublin hospitals early on a Sat, Sun, or Monday morning, and it might open your eyes.

Firstly, I would like to genuinely accept your offer to visit the hospital some evening (I'm assuming you also work in a hospital somewhere) as you know you can't just walk in off the street and roam around the A&E of any hospital. So if you are genuine then so am I, I would love to. What it might open my eyes to I'm not so sure as I have stated again and again and again throughout this thread that people do get physically harmed in assault situations. So are we up for that or not?

Thirdly, anyone that practices anything repeatedly over a long period of time has a better chance of reacting in the way that they've been training, than someone that dose'nt.

I never said they didn't and in fact I would whole heartedly agree as it is something I promote in my own training. Could you point me to the piece where I said something in the contrary to this?

But maybe your referring to instant Self Defence Courses.(Learn how to defend yourself in 6 weeks, or 8 weeks! )

Umm, no I'm not.

Maybe your very young or have lived a very sheltered life, but i've seen the results of bottle and heavy weapon attacks across the head

33 last Thursday dude, and not one ye's wished me a happy birthday
Sheltered life? We all have our crosses to bear matey.

not so long ago a female student of mine was dragged in a lane while waiting for a bus on a main street in Dublin at 11.30 on a Friday evening.
The techniques you mentioned are ones that would most likely be used by those that are trained, who may find themselves in the situations i've just mentioned.
P.S. Although the female student of mine suffered a degree of trauma, and wont frequent that bus stop ever again, she was'nt injured (except for some skin damage on her hands) and was able to call a taxi to get home. She did what she had done in training even though she was'nt aware of what she was doing at the time. She just remembers the attacker letting go and hitting the ground and her running away as fast as she could.

This is an excellent example of everything I've spoken about, thank you for posting it.
Paxo mentioned in his post this;

Speaking for myself I think a little common sense goes a long way to avoiding a lot of trouble

And I couldn't agree more, but the only problem with common sense is that it ain't that common as depicted in the story of this young woman who, alone on a Friday night decided she was going to stand at a bus stop at 11.30pm (maybe not even knowing if the last bus had left) adjacent to a lane way.

Now in my first few posts I mentioned this;

Motives dictate tactics, tactics will dictate proxemics but one thing remains a constant and that is intention

So this guys motives we don't know as she got away, his tactics were to wait in an environment that suited his intentions, his intention was to do damage (I assume he wasn't taking her on a dance) proximity wise he got close enough to put his hands on her and drag her, pretty confident in the fact that no one would see, however by the sounds of it he was trying to drag her to a secondary location. While your friend was completely unaware or ignorant of the environment, as well as the time and the fact that she was alone which unfortunately led to her walking straight into the environment of her attacker.

After all of that she decides she's going to get a taxi. See where common sense isn't always available?

I'd be keen to get the details of this attack, did she ring a taxi first or the Gardaí? Presumably she would have informed the Taxi driver of what had happened, the taxi driver should then have reported the fact that he had a woman in his car who had "already" being subject to an attempted rape/murder (we don't know) which covers his own arse in case she's a loon.

So assuming all of this, there must a report on it somewhere? Woman don't get dragged up lane ways on Dublin's main streets without a report of it somewhere - the reason I'm asking is that case studies like these are excellent for presenting examples of how being unaware of the differences of dark lane ways at bus stops at 11.30pm at night and, the comfort of a taxi home.

Can I come visit your hospital?

Michael O Leary

yomchi wrote: »

Hi Daithí,

33 last Thursday dude, and not one ye's wished me a happy birthday

Happy Birthday Dude!

yomchi

Michael O Leary wrote: »

Happy Birthday Dude!

Gentleman as ever Michael

Flygimp

yomchi wrote: »

Hi mate,
It's a bit of weird question tbh. There are no secrets or special training needed to try talk your way out of a situation. I remember making a silly traffic maneuver one time and pissing the guy off to the right of me, he blew his horn and and waved his fist with expletives, I raised my hand up and said - "sorry mate!" to which he just waved its ok - that's just a very simple real life example of de-escalating a situation, or in other words not bringing it to the next level where physical confrontation is necessary. So as you can see, it's not really a special nor secret attribute, however it is under utilised by a lot people and many wouldn't see it as an option in any conscious sense.

Soft skills like awareness and de-escalation are taught a lot more at places that teach self protection concepts which is a lot more rounded than your normal self defence courses that you attend at your local leisure centre, where you're taught how 'react' to an assault already in motion.

In self protection circles there is an emphasis on awareness and avoidance, at the end of the day that is good self protection skills. Awareness is a lot more than just being alert and switched on and I don't mean in any paranoid sense. It can cover understanding body language and the MO of a potential attacker, again nothing mystical about any of that and nothing that can't be found by doing some research. Does it work? That depends on you, but there are certain traits that will be noticeable and certain scenarios that will unfold in certain ways, again studying these and talking to people who have carried them out is one way of understanding them.

Why it pisses you off I'm not sure. If you're interested you can pop along to a class sometime if you like as it's a pretty big topic which won't get much justice done to it on the forum.

As for qualifications, where would that come in and who would qualify you? You can add that to any martial system btw.

yomchi you wouldn't be a fellow kiwi by any chance... with the jake the musk avatar...? Not many of us in the suburbs of Galway

As for self defence I grew up with the bro's in Auckland - polynesian style no time for talking when they start clicking after a few beers ready to take your head off and beat the wife... just enough time to survive!

Self defence = street wise with quick fists and brains. All this **** with the for arms - when punching power comes from the shoulders following through on the balance of the hips in close quarters...
When it comes to it... always keeps your arms free in a pub or night club. Be aware of your peripherals. If any one comes into your personal space that is not family or a loved one make sure your feet a pivoted and your looking at the four inches behind the skull of the intruder to follow through on with the first jab and follow through with the right or left hook depending on your preference.
Just don't talk, plenty of time afterwards to bleet.

yomchi

Afraid not my friend, I am however a true fan of you guys. Warriors all

Forest Master

Michael O Leary wrote: »

Combative principles Wing Tsun principles will dictate.............

Yeah, I'd love to see any of these moves work in a real situation:

Barry.Oglesby

If you need to keep your wits about you or your arms free in a pub, then you're in the wrong fvcking pub end of story.

Flygimp

yomchi wrote: »

Afraid not my friend, I am however a true fan of you guys. Warriors all

No worries yonchi... we'll call you an honorary kiwi any way;)


Would you be able to give a 35 year old kiwi with two lovely Irish kids some advise all the same yomchi.

I'm living in Galway. I grew up with rugby, cricket and boxing. I'm 6 foot 3 and 16 stone and street wise. I know how to throw a combination of punches and keep my feet in balance and know for a tall person your weakest link is your legs... BUT these days I really would love to take a self defence course or something similar for the craic and fitness and to meet friends... etc... Could you recommend something for an old guy like me who has nothing to prove apart from having a beer and waring down the size of his spare tyre?

Cheers,

Brent.

SorGan

Flygimp wrote: »

No worries yonchi... we'll call you an honorary kiwi any way;)


Would you be able to give a 35 year old kiwi with two lovely Irish kids some advise all the same yomchi.

I'm living in Galway. I grew up with rugby, cricket and boxing. I'm 6 foot 3 and 16 stone and street wise. I know how to throw a combination of punches and keep my feet in balance and know for a tall person your weakest link is your legs... BUT these days I really would love to take a self defence course or something similar for the craic and fitness and to meet friends... etc... Could you recommend something for an old guy like me who has nothing to prove apart from having a beer and waring down the size of his spare tyre?

Cheers,

Brent.

judo...cant go wrong:)

Flygimp

Barry.Oglesby wrote: »

If you need to keep your wits about you or your arms free in a pub, then you're in the wrong fvcking pub end of story.

Agreed in a perfect world! But Barry I'm sure if the sh*t hits the fan there's certain mates you'd like watching your back... god knows we've all been there. I was always lucky my best mate was Fijian, 6' 4' and in the NZ armed defenders squad, only thing you'd see with the lights out was his eyes and that's the last thing you'd see...

yomchi

Flygimp wrote: »

No worries yonchi... we'll call you an honorary kiwi any way;)


Would you be able to give a 35 year old kiwi with two lovely Irish kids some advise all the same yomchi.

I'm living in Galway. I grew up with rugby, cricket and boxing. I'm 6 foot 3 and 16 stone and street wise. I know how to throw a combination of punches and keep my feet in balance and know for a tall person your weakest link is your legs... BUT these days I really would love to take a self defence course or something similar for the craic and fitness and to meet friends... etc... Could you recommend something for an old guy like me who has nothing to prove apart from having a beer and waring down the size of his spare tyre?

Cheers,

Brent.

Maybe a bridge club or something?
Chances are the last thing you need to know is how to protect yourself. You are natural built for Judo though and there's nothing like sport training to wear of any spare tyre!