Criminal Thinking – Clint Overland

Ok so maybe many of you reading this may have wondered at the thought process of your everyday criminal.  Maybe, just maybe, you have thought to yourself “Just what in the Hell was this guy thinking when he did this?” Or perhaps you might have thought to yourself or discussed among your friends and colleagues what drives the people to do what they do?

Well friends I am here to shed just a little illumination upon this subject from going on 30 plus years of dealing with criminals, idiots and subhuman monsters.

First, you must take out all personal accountability and responsibilities from the equation.  Criminals, idiots and subhuman monsters refuse to accept that they are the reason for their own hardships.

Secondly it is always, and yes I mean alway,s someone else’s fault for what happened to them. By this I mean that you reading this are to blame for being robbed, raped or killed. It is never the criminal, idiots and subhuman monsters fault at the time it happens. You shouldn’t have been where you were. Dressed the way you were or acting like you did. Or maybe you should not have been in the way of them getting what they want.

For the past 2 years I have worked as a detention officer for a small rural county in West Texas. It’s much like bouncing but with better insurance and backup. Most of the time!

I have listened to inmates conversations that cover everything from sexual assault to burglary to drug dealing. I watch them lie, cheat and con their loved ones for money and support.  Have listened to their phone calls as they play upon their own families need to believe that they are being unjustly incarcerated and abused. The list of what they will do to get what they want is endless.

Now I am going to discuss a very disturbing subject.  Sexual Assault., Rape and Child Molestation.

These are not normal well adjusted perpetrators.  Each and every one is a monster in camouflage.  They may be a well respected member of your local community.  A colleague or family member that has never given you anything to doubt that they are not what you think they are. They are male and female, of all ages, educational level and economic background.

I will list a few of the monster’s I have dealt with over the last year.

One of them drugged and raped his three adopted children and 2 natural born children.  He told them that they were his little sex angels and only good for his daddy cock to but shoved in them. His defense was that he just couldn’t help himself because he had overwhelming urges.

Another two were arrested for the mother holding her 6 year old daughter’s head while the boyfriend sodomized the child’s mouth. There were other things involved I won’t go into.

Their excuse was that they were so strung out on Meth that they didn’t realize it was wrong. Caught in the act they still plead not guilty until they copped to a plea deal.

Can you in your worst nightmares try and reason anything like this. The rapist I have dealt with in their minds nothing wrong with what they did. Oh they may cry and act disgusted with themselves at court and to their families but amongst one another they laugh and brag about it.

I could go on and on about what I watch and listen to everyday but I think you understand.  Everyone reading this will have their own doubts about what I am writing and that’s great. I challenge you to do this. Go make friends with a few local detention officers or prison guards. Ask them to tell you how bad their jobs really are. Ask about the monsters they guard. You will find each and every one of them has the same type of stories and worse.

 

Rookie To Pro, Its All The Same – Mark Hatmaker

“Diligence passe sens” (“Great is drill.”) Henry VIII

A common request among combat rookies and even intermediate players (and if we are honest some long-timers still think this way, too) is “What’s next?” or “What’s the next super-secret neato technique to master?” And I get this attitude, I mean who doesn’t want some new bit of information to chew over, some new skill to toy with and occupy the mind? For some, familiarity breeds contempt and if most of us don’t feel contempt for what we know we must do, we can at least admit that sometimes another day in the gym working on variations of the same things as we did last week can occasionally lead to a bit of staleness.
But, despite the occasional battle with “This again?” we must come to terms with and embrace the fact that this is the way of all great and serious endeavors. Let’s look to other sports for illustration.

If we were to step onto the court of any winning basketball team during practice, would we expect to see something unlike what we see in a basketball game itself, that is, athletes working on passing, shooting, rebounding, the full court press, et cetera?

In football practice from Pop Warner to the NFL you will see variations of the same drills and plays.

In tennis you will not see athletes forgoing tried and true serves in favor of developing jumping  spinning back serves with a half-gainer twist.

In a good boxing gym you will see amateur and pro fighters alike working the bag with the exact same arsenal.

In good MMA gyms you will see good double leg takedowns and the same handful of go-to submissions being worked by rookies and pros alike.

In other words, if even those at the top of their games, those who play their given games for money are subjected to the exact same regimen as the beginner (with a difference in intensity, of course) than why would any of us not at that particular level expect to do something different to get to that same status?

There is a sometime tendency to see Drills as finite in that once a particular skill has been honed to an acceptable useful level we get to move on and leave it behind as we play with the next toy.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Manny Pacquiao still hones and drills the exact same jab that any 1st day boxing rookie must work on.

Demian Maia still throws hooks in and uses the same rear-naked choke that any strip mall aspiring blue belt understands.

You can go on and on with examples of tactics and techniques that you are introduced to in your first year of training being much of the basis of what you will see emerge victorious in rings and octagons the world round.

We must not approach drilling as a soon to be reached destination with some threshold arrived at where we get to stop. Drilling must be a continuous process as we will never quite know what individual repetition or single drill session will be the one that does the job to make that tool what it is.

Here’s a passage from Ralph Waldo Emerson on the subject of drilling:

At West Point, Col. Buford, the chief engineer, pounded with a hammer on the trunnions of a cannon, until he broke them off. He fired a piece of ordnance some hundred times in swift succession, until it burst. Now which stroke broke the trunnion? Every stroke. Which blast burst the piece? Every blast.”

Emerson and Colonel Buford’s lesson still holds, we never have any way of knowing which day of drilling our jab, our double leg, or our double-wristlock will be the day that puts it over the edge, the day that makes it move from the commonplace to the extraordinary.

But while we may not know the single instance that does the job, we do know that every instance contributes to the one (if such a one even exists). And with this wisdom in mind we should follow in the steps of Henry VIII, Emerson, Colonel Buford, Manny Pacquiao, and every other top athlete who does what rookies do, but they do it better because they never stopped working on what works and pursued something else. They just kept drilling and drilling and drilling.

 

Clarification, Scepticism and Individuality Part III – Jamie Clubb

Scepticism.

 

Critical thinking is woefully absent from the martial arts world. Martial arts subculture is largely based on a simple principle of following a teacher without question. Likewise, the system or style is considered to be sacred. Nevertheless, critical thinking has played a huge role in the development of virtually all martial arts. Every system or style has its root in one teacher’s critique. All the great founders were sceptics to some degree. However, they were also human and prone to seeing everything from their perspective. As time moved on they became surrounded by sycophants and further entrenched in believing their way was the only true way. Martial artists have done a great job of bringing scientific concepts into the refinement and progression of their systems, but few have fully embraced the scientific method as a whole.

The martial arts cross-trainer needs to apply critical thinking on his journey. This can make the quest quite lonely as our natural instinct is to try to find a tribe. Martial artists who switch styles will typically regard their new style like a new relationship and convince themselves that everything about the new class is better than the last one. On the other side of the coin a good number of martial artists will spend their time cross-training telling everyone about the greatness of their base art. Rather doing their best to completely absorb new material they will preach to their unfortunate training partner about what they do and why they do something in the main system they train. The critical thinker needs to be wary of both these temptations. He engages with the material and then later properly questions it with a rational and logical mind. Through this process the individual cross-trainer should understand that there is no certainty that anything will work, but he will also start accumulating a list of the most probable options.

Due to the tribal nature of martial arts and the lack of overall transparent regulation, irrational thinking has touched virtually every system of combat in some way or other. Pre-scientific ideas have persisted to be a part of many martial arts systems. Sometimes they remain as part of an appeal to tradition argument within the various schools wishing to continue a lineage. However, many modern systems don’t need such an excuse to buy into all sorts of quackery and unproven pseudoscientific concepts. Likewise, philosophical and religious concepts have been forcefully melded with the practice of martial arts and absorbed as absolutes. This dogma takes many different forms and appeals to novelty are just as responsible as appeals to tradition for their continued propagation. Cults of personality have also arisen where followers support the belief that their leader can never be wrong. The martial arts cross-trainer needs to be able to recognise these factors both in others and in themselves.

However, there is at least one caveat the eager sceptic or critical thinker must take on board before he questions everything: be wary of pseudoscepticism. The pseudosceptic denies rather than doubts. He is more of a cynic than a sceptic or is keen to cast scorn over anything outside of his own narrow view. They mask their confirmation bias with scientific sounding language, but fail to adopt the scientific method. They might apply a double standard by applying keen scepticism to one concept and yet not to his preferred choice. However, on the other hand, he might attempt to bolster his argument by attempting to drag down a view accepted by mainstream science as an equal opinion. Reasoned and informed questioning should be a regular part of healthy learning.

Scepticism allows the martial arts cross-trainer to truly free their mind and to resist certainty whilst allowing logical methods – such as Occam’s Razor and the Scientific Method – to lead them to the most effective solutions.

 

Not My Circus, Not My Monkeys – Garry Smith

I took a call the other night from someone interested in joining our Ju Jitsu training. He had clearly spent some time on our website and was just checking out when he could come along and try us out. I asked him a few questions about previous experience, general health and fitness etc. He told me he had another place to check out and I asked him who that was out of interest and he named the local McDojo. He explained he was impressed with the experience of the instructors based on how long we had been training and our dan grades and this was likewise for the McDojo. Again no problem as when anyone compares us and them, they come to us.

I agreed that he should check us both out but also told him to check out threads on the Sheffield Forum and look at some of their Youtube videos. I did tell him that we have taken on some of their ex students, 2 x 14 year old second dan black belts, who could not punch their way out of a paper bag and who we evaluated as around our green belt standard. That is a big difference.

Last night I saw a post on Facebook by a friend, in real life, who I respect and he posted about a particularly well known person in the martial arts scene who is franchising his McDojo brand left right and centre. He posted one of their videos that they have made publically available and it got the usual slating. Nothing nasty, but if you post videos of unrealistic defences against unrealistic attacks then people who do know what they are talking about will criticise.

The thing is people flock to this guys clubs and the McDojo near us has plenty of students. Before I proceed do I think they should be closed down? No, and there are a number of reasons I will set out to support their right to exist.

Firstly before I sat down with my laptop last night I had been out for a meal with my wife. It was a sunny spring evening so I picked her up from work in my VW convertible with the top down and my new Five Finger Death Punch CD playing. We drove through beautiful countryside to Upper Bradfield with our little dog Bertie, to have a drink and a meal at the Old Horns Inn, mine is a pint of Lancaster Bomber Ale please…..

My wife had the Salmon and Chorizo with salad and I had Elvis’s Last Burger, don’t ask. Why do I tell you this, because everything in the last paragraph and this happened because we, I, made choices. I chose that car, I could have bought many other cars. At one point I was deciding between a new motorcycle or a convertible, sod that, I got both. I chose the CD, we chose our drinks and food, we chose where to eat and nobody else. Choices.

Nobody told us what to do, we made our choices of our own free will from the many options available. We are not wealthy or poor, we are selective, we would like to think we have good taste, we like nice things. There has been lots of making do in our lives but now we can enjoy a reasonably good standard without having to keep up with the Jones’s.

The person making the enquiry re training, remember them, has every right to shop around and make their choice, for now that person is going on information gleaned from websites, well we know how that can be, a website can say anything.  We offer a simple deal, come along and try a session for free, ask anyone any questions, we do not want your contact details, if you do not want to join us we will never contact you, payment is PAYG or bank transfer that a student can cancel immediately if they cease training, there are no contracts, no tie ins, no leadership training, no guaranteed black belt. We now have waiting lists for some sessions, the others are filling up and we will have new classes starting later this year. As instructors we work really hard and are continually seeking to improve ourselves and our training. We take training seriously and we make it a fun thing to do. We do not advertise that much and we welcome comparison. If people need to make choices let them, we do not do hard sell, we offer training not double glazing.

Everything we charge for is on our website, there are no hidden costs and no huge monthly payments that cannot be cancelled if you leave. Often this is the opposite of the McDojo which is exactly why they attract such a level of derision from those in the business. But think on this, the public does not know what it does not know.

As my co-editor, senior instructor and erstwhile training partner Jayne pointed out: the biggest problem we have heard about from our local McDojo is people finding out that they have been sold poor quality training, especially when it’s children who can’t make an informed choice to later find out what they’ve learnt is worthless at any other club, or worse still during a conflict in the street. I have had more than one conversation, once they find out I teach Ju  Jitsu, with parents of 8/9 year old black belts who are suspicious of their supposed ‘child prodigy’, the ‘I have been had look on their faces’. I have had a 17 year old meltdown, literally, in one of my self defence classes when they realise their black belt in Karate MMA, yes you read that right, is actually not going to work in reality.

If you are told that somebody’s training is the best you will ever receive and you have no benchmark how do you choose? If you are told that their training is like a Rolls Royce as opposed to somebody else second hand Lada, which would you prefer, if you have no other comparison.

We all operate in a market economy and an unregulated industry; some people sell crap, they may not know its crap themselves, just like dead people do not know they are dead, they can’t because they are dead, doh. They are Hoffer’s ‘true believers’ who have found their holy cause, plus it’s a cash cow too.

Some McDojos attract extra criticism because we think they know they are selling crap and that that is immoral; well how do we know that, unless they say that is what they are doing we cannot know it, it is just our opinion. And that is the rub, a dojo becomes a McDojo because it is perceived as such. The thing is we all perceive things differently, if the student of a McDojo is having a great time it is of no concern of mine, if they feel ripped off and leave that too is of no concern of mine. Here is why, they are not a competitor, we are not on the same playing field. To those with no benchmark we may look alike at first but anyone doing due diligence will soon see the differences.

Now as many reading this will be practitioners in the martial arts or a related field I will ask you a few questions.

Do you get angry because some outlets sell bad food, poor quality clothing, rubbish cars, fizzy beer (not real ale like I drink)? How do you define bad, or good for that matter? Is there an agreed measure or standard we can use?

The answer to those questions was, I hope, no. McDojo’s exist like shops full of tat on any high street and some will be attracted to them and other repulsed. Another friend of mine said that they actually serve a purpose as they provide a home for the kind of student he does not want at his club.

I know people see them as bad for our industry, but in an unregulated market there will always be a range of products on offer. Do I dislike the McDojo, yes, but that is because I have an informed opinion based on experience, study and empirical evidence. Do I laugh at the ridiculous techniques they film to attract the gullible? Yes. Do I wince at the eye watering cost of their ‘guaranteed’ black belts? You bet. Do I think their students are being conned? Definitely, absolutely 100%. Do I think they have as much right as us to exist? Yes I do.

Not my circus, not my monkeys.

 

Options for Police Officers During A Traffic Stop – Dan Donzella interviewed by Tim Boehlert

In March I had the good fortune of networking with a gentleman on Facebook that seemed to agree with some of my postings – and he had some very good insights to add. I’m always reluctant to reach out and ask too many questions for fear of pushing people away, because in my business, it’s always hard to find like-minded professionals. And while it’s great therapy for me to exorcise some deep-seated thinking, it’s often disturbing to others not acclimated to what I did for years.

I’d like to introduce you to Dan Donzella. Dan is a Martial Artist, an Instructor/Consultant for Police Departments and also a Firearms Instructor. I had asked Dan outright if we could have a phone conversation – I was very curious about his thoughts and experience, and wanted to develop a conversation off-line. We spent over an hour poking around some dark corners, and I finally had to pop some disturbing questions on him! Lo and behold, not only did he agree, but also HELL YEAH! He agreed with my viewpoints.

Understand one thing about some of our civil servants. They are not always forthcoming with talking about, let alone sharing information that is of a specific nature. They generally don’t talk about the job with outsiders, in my opinion of course. I’ve found that many are reluctant to get into specifics or to talk about issues. I’ve also found that training is never discussed.

During my many years of security employment I’ve sought to learn from others – and who better to teach a newbie than a certified Police Officer? I also seek to give back – teach them things that we’d do, based solely on our own abilities or our guidelines. Knowledge is useless if it’s not shared.

In a nutshell, it was great to finally get to the one thing that always bothers me – training. Can we talk about some of it? What are your thoughts about what is taught? Did you see stuff that bothered you? Can we do better? What would you do if you could?

While we have a lot to explore, Dan was kind enough to accept a challenge from me to write his very first article. Dan is a teacher, but not a writer, and we both have that in common, and although he has more ability in many areas than I, we both want to teach better. Dan sent me a few lines of an idea, and I had to wring the rest out. I added my stuff, and took a co-writer option to encourage and guide him through the process, and my expectation is that the next article will be his entirely – and even if I have to edit it, we will strive for autonomy!

What follows is the ‘interview’ process that we undertook after that first phone call where I’d planted the seed to encourage him to share some of his expertise.

TB: Dan, I don’t know much about your background, but you seem to have ties to LE in our community, and we seem to have some very exclusive friends in the MA arena as well as some common friends in the Police community. I also know that you spent some time with a local PD, and did some DT training with their officers. Can you expand on that a bit?

DD: In 2007 a proposal was made to create a Regional Police Academy for numerous police departments. The purpose of this Academy would be to provide standardized training to new recruits while eliminating overlapping policies and tactics and providing a much-better prepared Police force that would be more well equipped to work together with other agencies.

The Department knew me because I had previously taught some of the high-ranking officers. The head of this project felt that the weapons retention course was out of date. He felt that it was inadequate because it was driven by a defensive mindset – strictly addressing problems from a defensive stance. I put together an offensive minded course that was so well received by the movers and shakers that I was then given the task of assessing the Defensive Tactics program and to try and put together a more-modernized version for new recruits as well as seasoned officers.

In doing so, I started by assessing the weapons retention training. Because I am a firearms instructor, and had spent some time on the streets with many of the officers, I was able to find several things that I felt ‘we can do better.’ After being exposed to some of the current training, I knew that I’d have a lot of work to do.

TB: I can’t imagine what it would be like to have the responsibility of designing any program for Police Officers – where do you start, what do you prioritize, and how do you cram it all into such a short program, yet provide them with a responsible end-product?

DD: As you may have guessed, it’s nearly impossible to cover all aspects of police work in a school setting. Your FTO (Field Training Officer) and years of experience are crucial parts of a larger puzzle that isn’t the same for any two recruits. 

After completing my new Weapons Retention curriculum I began working with the various units within the Police Department. Each job is different though. For instance Traffic Division vs. Street Patrol. I had the unique opportunity to work Traffic Division with the Captain of that division for 2 years. I was getting a lot of questions from officers on “what if’s”, and the most common question I got was about how to extract a person out of their car. What they were asking me was “is there a ‘best’ way to remove the person and not have it end up escalating into a all-out brawl?” What gets taught universally in academies is that officer safety should ALWAYS be their first priority.

TB: Can you share any of the issues that you discovered in the field?

DD: The major mistake that I witnessed in the field was that the officers would reach in over the driver with their entire body and with both hands to unfasten the driver’s seat belt. This simple and too common method/error would expose the officer’s firearm, leaving the officer vulnerable to possible attack.

TB: You see a lot from a different perspective once you know more – based on years on the street, and/or in other training that you’ve pursued. So, based on this ‘mistake’, how did you address it?

DD: What I came up with were the following changes for those stops where the officer was dealing with a non-cooperative, non-compliant and possibly combative citizen:

[1] The officer should first place his/her right knee against the driver’s hip. This limits the driver’s ability to move offensively against the officer, and also allows the officer to ‘feel’ any sudden movements, but still allows a reasonable degree of control.

[2] Next, the officer places his/her your right forearm across the driver’s jaw-line turning their head away and towards the passenger side of the vehicle. You may ask why the forearm across the jaw? This is a control situation where the officer may need to assist the driver to unbuckle their seatbelt. The driver may be non-compliant for any number of reasons – medical emergency, or perhaps just being plain uncooperative. Reaching across the body without controlling the head in this manner could give the driver a means of pulling the officer into a chokehold. The forearm might actually not even touch the driver but still creates a safer entry technique. Prior and on-going assessment of the situation is always critical. The driver might fake a medical condition to gain surprise or advantage allowing them to get the upper hand on the officer, so always be on your guard.  

[3] If needed, i.e. with a combative suspect, apply directed pressure against the driver’s head and into the headrest, rearward momentum. Unbuckle their seat belt with your left hand. Most drivers will​ exit on their own once they realize that the officer has experience with this behavior and advantage.  There’s an old saying in the fighting arts,  “Where the head goes, the body will follow.” By using this pain compliance technique, whether the suspect is feeling pain or not, the positioning of their head in this manner and using the suspect’s weight against them bypasses having to deal with their combativeness or resisting limbs to an extent, and is much safer for the officer. It’s called pain compliance for a reason, and it is a legal demonstration of the use of less-than-deadly force.

[4] Instead of fighting with the suspect while citizens are filming you, reach around and behind his head, insert your finger into his carotid artery (the brachial plexus region of the exposed neck) or up under the jaw into his glands with your right hand, the mandibular process. Pull his head up and back, out of the door and down towards the rocker panel. Be patient, as your fingers will penetrate more if the driver resists, making it even more effective and the driver will eventually lose his grip on anything in the car, including the steering wheel and fall out of the vehicle, where he can be cuffed and searched.

[5] It is actually possible to cuff them hanging out of the vehicle. It is a painful technique but with no lasting injuries. The exact same entry using the knee and forearm can be used in any situation entering the suspect’s vehicle. Use it in a much more forceful way if the driver is reaching for a weapon. By smashing him with your knee, elbow and forearm on your way to the hand reaching for the weapon.

So, while some drivers will grab onto the steering wheel, and some have even locked their feet behind the brake pedal, this technique may provide a best-defense entry and extraction strategy, safe for all, because some officers would hit their arms or try to peel their fingers off of the steering wheel, and some would be bitten as a result.

TB: I’ve heard the saying that goes something like this “the threat determines the outcome” and I always took that to mean, that they choose to fight or not, to cooperate or not, and when it’s over – you simply oblige them – and I’m not saying this is true nor the reality for you, but in my world it was often very true.

DD: I have patterned the majority of the arresting techniques that I teach in a way so that they look as non-aggressive as is possible if being filmed. Every department has to deal with the advent of this trend to capture everything the Police do while performing their duties. It does matter how it looks as much as how effective it is, which should always be the officer’s priority.

TB: Times have certainly changed. Respect for the law is a thing of the past, sadly. And the media has all but gutted the Police Officer’s ability to get home safe every day. Because of their lack of understanding, one-sided and under-researched articles, and outright deceptive reporting practices, our officers are in more danger every day. The media has painted them as thugs, and with the thought that all they want to do is to use force irresponsibly. That has impacted how the public responds and acts when coming into contact with officers.

DD: An officer stops cars all day long, never knowing what to expect. Sadly, there are too many road rage confrontations, and while some citizens solve it by displaying verbal outbursts only, others end up using deadly force.

Every officer wants a safe traffic stop where the driver of the stopped vehicle stays in their vehicle, the officer does his job, whether it be issuing a warning or writing a citation and then to have them both get back on their separate ways. Unfortunately, today a pleasant, non-combative stop can turn into a shoot-out. It happened just today, again, to a new officer, who was killed by the driver after a ‘routine’ traffic stop. No stop is ever routine, and the word ‘routine’ should be banned from every Police officer’s mind.

TB: Anything else that you’d like to share Dan?

DD: We all have seen videos of bar fights and how some bouncers handle the situation. Inexperienced ones get in the brawl and throw punches and toss patrons around. For a club that’s a bad ‘solution’ which can ultimately result in lawsuits, losing their liquor license or losing the business due to adverse reactions from their patrons. An experienced​ bouncer wants to defuse the mayhem. He can handle the patron with total control using different controlling techniques while adapting to his resistance and without causing harm, which is a sheer pleasure to watch!

In conclusion, constant training and improving not only your skills but also knowledge in your chosen field is a must. You must upgrade yourself, training facilities can last only so long and they must be upgraded as well. Having teachers who ‘think out of the box’ are crucial in this endeavor.

TB: I’d like to thank Dan for taking up the challenge and for sharing some unique insights about his training ideology. It’s good to know that there are teachers like him out there that our Police Officers can utilize. And depend on. Dan and I have both seen the effects of incomplete training and we’ve both sought to change that status quo in our own ways. As teachers, we both agree that more can be done, however. We need to get beyond the false sense of security that ‘we’ve learned all that we need.’ That simply is not true.

 

Clarification, Scepticism and Individuality Part II – Jamie Clubb

Clarification

There are several reasons why we find clarification missing from a typical martial arts class. Suppression by governments, suppression by occupying powers and prevailing tastes have led many martial arts teachers to become creative in the way they have justified teaching violence. Desires to blend in personal views of religion and philosophy became so strong within the Asian martial arts subculture in the past century that many have come to accept a pseudo-history whereby martial arts were not skill-sets simply designed to subdue and/or neutralise the enemy. In the west, middle and upper class intellectuals felt a need to justify their training in violent activities such as boxing, wrestling and fencing, and welded on their own philosophical validations. Such validations were then made to retrospectively stretch back into a respective country’s history with the comparable 19th century romanticisation of medieval chivalry in the west, bushido in Japan and xia in China. Another motive to obscure the objectives of martial arts classes is the often commercial need to appeal to a wider audience and to offer more to retain students.

Because of my emphasis on clarification I make my teaching service-driven. I begin any course – be it a one-to-one or a seminar for a group – by asking my client what they specifically want and offer an honest answer as to how I can best fulfil that demand. If I agree to take on the client I can then stick firmly to our agreed objective without risk of either of us deviating. I deviate and tangent enough within a subject, so I am grateful for those parameters to keep me in check.

I recall once being asked by a small group to teach a martial arts course. The attendees really weren’t sure what they wanted, but it appeared that their primary interest was to undertake a fitness activity. After we worked out a rough definition of what sort of fitness they were after we agreed upon a combat conditioning course with a leaning towards Muay Thai. All went well until just after the first class one member of the group made a passing comment about what they could now do if someone tried to attack them. The comment was made half-jokingly, but nonetheless the group immediately began a serious hypothesis on how they would apply the skills they were learning and followed this with an honest evaluation on whether they would a) remember them and b) have the courage to use them. The entire conversation must have lasted less than two minutes before I felt I had to interrupt. I quickly explained that, as per my brief and our agreement, the course they were embarking upon was not for self-defence. It wasn’t really a Thai Boxing course, but used aspects from this art as an engaging way to improve cardiovascular fitness, strength and flexibility. I explained that if they wanted to learn practical self-protection I had a course that focused on this discipline.

What put them off then, as it had done when I first offered it, was the two most important ends of the self-protection training scale. Good self-protection training consists of mainly personal security non-physical “soft” skills. At the other end good self-protection training should include some form of pressure testing. Both are quite simple and straightforward, but aren’t necessarily comfortable. The former can be boring and difficult to absorb for someone who doesn’t have much interest in psychology, behaviour science, criminology, criminal law or the adaptation of warfare/law enforcement strategies. Besides, they can be difficult to apply and can override certain behaviours outside of the class. It is one thing to practice your combination work on the heavy bag or to go through katas, but it is another to properly assimilate a self-protection mind-set into everyday life. Pressure testing is usually not popular with many who don’t have a predisposition for this type of combat. Self-defence pressure testing should be a form of very intensive asymmetrical fighting and that isn’t usually a very pleasant experience.

Physical fitness is important in self-defence, but is largely a by-product of punitive mental conditioning through various ordeals and the development of good physical “hard” skills. Many civilians don’t really want actual self-protection or self-defence training they just want to produce a physical expression against their fears of interpersonal violence. This is easily catered for by hitting pads and performing techniques on compliant partners. One can see why so many martial arts teachers are tempted to leave it at this stage and exploit the demand for delusion in the market. There is almost an unwritten and unspoken contract between the student who asks the teacher “Tell me a lie that will make me feel better” and the teacher who justifies his willingness to do this by obeying the economic law of supply and demand.

Be clear about the purpose and context of your training. It’s a simple rule that is easily forgotten.[i] Whether you are approaching a new class, training with a new teacher, beginning a certain exercise or training a particular technique, the cross-trainer needs to be clear about his objective. He needs to be clear about why he is dedicating his time and energy into this particular area of study. It is naïve to rely on even the best of teachers to take you exactly where you want to go. Unless the teacher is helping to manage your personalised cross-training programme, he is going to have a different agenda. His job is to teach you the discipline you have chosen in his own way. If you are undertaking one-to-one training he will tailor it more to your demands, but it is still a lot to expect him to understand how this experience will fit in with your overall martial arts education.

Besides you don’t really want him to do that. You want him to teach you what he knows best. For example, imagine asking a Western Boxing coach to improve your Muay Thai punching techniques. In principle, this is a great idea. However, you are not really getting the most of his experience and knowledge if you insist on having you both stand more square on, change footwork and to limit upper body movements in line with Muay Thai. Your purpose here is to train in Western Boxing as if you are a western boxer. Outside of the lesson it is time for you to put the work in and see how it applies to your Muay Thai game.[ii]

Being clear about the purpose of any exercise is crucial for a cross-trainer. Being actively involved in different disciplines calls for strict and mindful time management. Objective defines an exercise – be it to test a single technique or test one’s abilities in a certain area. If the agreed objective of a technique exercise is test the efficiency of a rear naked choke then it is pointless to continue with another technique when the choke has been thwarted. A better use of time, energy and resources would be stop and restart. Unfortunately the cognitive reasoning of the brain often takes a back seat once matters get heated in a physical situation. It is quite common to see a pressure test centering on take-down defence deteriorating into a ground game.[iii]

The same attitude should be carried over into your solo training. This is where a lot of the good work is done and also wasted. It can be mentally tough enough for most people to take the initiative to train properly outside a class in the first place, be it alone or with a fellow student. It is even harder to then apply cognitive thought processes to encourage greater skill development and continued learning outside of a classroom environment. The cross-trainer has to go beyond what has been prescribed in lessons. He needs to do more than rehearse routines to fulfil grading criteria and needs to do more than improve his physical fitness. However, this takes a special extra kind of effort and a lack of commitment to this type of effort is what leads to the cross-trainer becoming confused with the various tools he has at hand. It is much less taxing on the mind to just lose one’s self in the superficial demands of an undetailed workout.

So the heavy bag ends up being used as a one dimensional repository for any random move the student chooses to throw. Shadow boxing becomes a freestyle dance of favourite movements. Focus mitt holding becomes a more energised version of the punching bag situation but little more. This comes from the person training not having a clear plan in their head and therefore not getting the most out of their training equipment, their training partners or themselves. If you are going to use the bag as a stand-in for a training partner then you are going to need to imagine the fight and stick to certain target zones so that you hit accurately. You also going to have to move with the bag or around the bag, depending on the context of you are training. You are going to have to plan your rounds or sets. Is this going to be about technique, improving speed or developing raw power? Are you going to theme your workout as lessons are often structured? What other equipment are you bringing into your training session?[iv]

Clarification defines the purpose of what you want to do in all that you do. Begin with a clear idea and make sure you return to that idea as often as possible.

[i] Ibid.

[ii] See my chapter on “Attribute Training” in my aforementioned e-book to understand how to get the most out of these lessons.

[iii] My chapter on “Specific Training” in “Mordred’s Victory and Other Martial Mutterings” details the importance of specialised pressure tests.

[iv] I have a chapter on “Solo Training” in “Mordred’s Victory and Other Martial Mutterings” that can help provide more insight into this often abused side of learning.

 

Guest Blog Spot

Understanding Violence Sociologically by Peter Kaufman.

 

In this very interesting blog Kaufman looks at how sociologists look at violence. We all understand the vast nature of the beast and Kaufman offers us a “basic, sociological understanding of this complex and multi-faceted concept.”

http://www.everydaysociologyblog.com/2014/10/understanding-violence-sociologically.html

 

Idiots, Assholes and Pros – Rory Miller

This is aimed mostly at professionals.

There are three general kinds of people that will require force.  The three types don’t fight for the same reason or use the same tactics, and your skills may not work the same.

Honestly, most of the time, if you are in enforcement or corrections or especially bouncing, you are going to run into idiots.  The drunk college kid who squares off and lets you know he’s coming a mile away.  The entitled whiner who thinks he’s too special to go to jail just for driving drunk.  The martial artist who’s never been in a real fight but doesn’t believe there’s a difference.

It may just be the old man in me coming out, but it seems like idiots are on the rise.  Fewer people have been exposed to violence; more people have never had their behavior controlled.  That combination creates people who are both hot-house flowers incapable of taking care of themselves, but certain that anything they want is a right and anyone who disagrees is an oppressor.  It seems I see more and more of this pathetically weak but shrill and bullying dynamic. For whatever my opinion is worth.

Idiots are easy.  You see them coming and almost anything done decisively works.  The drunk steroid freak squares off and let’s you know he has a blackbelt in…

And you smile and toe kick him in the shin with your boot before he finishes the sentence and then drop him. Or beat past his arms and twist his spine.  Or, probably the classic:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PIzc6qDnh8

Again, almost anything done decisively works.

Assholes are the second most common.  They like to fight and they have varying levels of, for want of a better word, professionalism.  The experienced know when they are outnumbered and tend to surrender.  The experienced assholes know when they are losing and give up.  Generally, even the experienced assholes don’t like going hands on on a cop or other professional– unless they sense any weakness.


They have varying levels of ‘professionalism’ in how far they are willing to go and incredibly varied skill levels.  An asshole who gets the drop on you is still dangerous even if he barely knows how to hit. To a large degree, fighting assholes is somewhat like fighting martial athletes.  A wide range of skill and commitment but generally, they like to fight and it will be a fight.  The fatal mistake is treating an asshole like an idiot.  When it comes time to bat his guard aside, the guard won’t be weak and it will likely trigger a counter-attack.  An idiot’s lack of confidence and/or lack of understanding of how the world really works are the reasons it is so easy to bat aside even their trained fists.  You won’t get this with assholes.

And saying they like to fight isn’t quite right either.  They don’t like the give and take of fighting, only the give.  They enjoy causing pain and beating people down but tend not to be so big on receiving pain. So most won’t engage if you act like a wary professional.  They won’t see the safe opening.

The pros are a different kettle of fish.  For the most part, you won’t get a lot of these.  Highest concentration is in prison, jails, or on elite teams.  Rarity makes them somewhat low risk.  Their own professionalism also makes them low risk.  It is very, very rare for this category to fight for ego.  If you have the drop on them and maintain control they will, generally, not resist.  If your handcuffing technique has a hole built into it or your approach is sloppy, they will use the Golden Rule of Combat: “Your most powerful weapon applied to your opponent’s most valuable point at his time of maximum imbalance.”  They will hit you hard, decisively, where and how it will do the most damage, and they will strike when you are least ready.

Assume most pros are skilled.  It’s not always true and it’s not a necessary factor, but growing into a pro mindset usually takes time and that kind of time doing those kinds of things develops skills.  That said, it doesn’t take a lot of skilled technique when you follow the Golden Rule.  No one has to be trained to hit a man in the head with a brick from behind.

And the skill may be something unusual.  In the debrief on Minnesota I mentioned that there were some high-percentage techniques that simply didn’t work on Kasey, Dillon or me.  Our grappling backgrounds made us instinctively structure in ways that idiots don’t think to and assholes are too arrogant for, even if they had trained the skills.

Taxonomy alert: Taxonomies are naming classifications.  This is a separate taxonomy from the social/asocial that I usually use.  An asocial threat can fight as either an asshole or a pro (as an idiot, too, but Darwin usually takes care of that combination early).  The asocial/social/maslow/triune is a better introduction for most everybody, but people who use force professionally might get something from this classification.

 

Clarification, Scepticism and Individuality Part I – Jamie Clubb

The Three Missing Fundamentals to Clear, Purposeful and Bespoke Combative Training

Part 1 – The Cross Trainer and the Information Age

The Information Age aptly describes the era of the modern mainstream martial arts cross-trainer. Unfortunately The Confusion Age is an equally fitting title. The meteoric rise of the internet has provided most in the developed world with more instant access to knowledge and data than ever before in the history of civilization. Similarly, training in multiple combative disciplines is no longer the practice of the hard-core martial arts enthusiast or the heretical renegade who is forced to travel huge distances across the country and even the world to seek out knowledge. Today not only is there an unprecedented variety of fighting arts readily available within a geographical region but we have seen the proliferation of full-time martial arts training centres, where cross-training is actively encouraged by gym owners and embraced by certain clubs that offer training in different systems by guest teachers.

There is a flawed assumption that this age of information and cross-training should lead to the enlightenment of more people. Unfortunately such wishful thinking is without reckoning on human nature. Our cognitive reasoning is beset by a range of biases that shape how we filter and view information. Our tribal instincts push us towards the comfort of others with similar biases to reinforce our views. More access to information also means more access to misinformation and disinformation. The pursuit of knowledge can easily be derailed by the propagation of falsehoods and myths, especially if there is cognitive comfort in these stories. Furthermore, the sheer volume of information – even good information – at an unprepared researcher’s fingertips can often result in learning little more on his desired subject than if he hadn’t switched onto the internet in the first place.

To muse over metaphors once again, it is unsurprising that the phrase “surfing the net” became popular during the internet’s formative commercial days. If progress in any aspect of civilisation can be seen as a steady narrow current of knowledge that often has to gradually trickle its way around and often through hard rocks of prejudice, tradition, irrational protectiveness and fear in order to become established into the main stream (forgive the pun) then using the internet can be compared to handling a tidal wave. Rather than having to handle and carefully manage the gradual, steady flow of information used to fill a gulf of ignorance, the unprepared researcher is overwhelmed by a forceful mass of data that washes over him. Struggling for breath in his effort not to be drowned in the overload of facts he becomes numb to everything. He becomes confused. He becomes prey to his own bewilderment and also to the sharks of disinformation, which thrive and swim in the sea of knowledge. In the blinding chaos that is information overload the flailing researcher may even mistake such sharks for a valid float. Here is where conspiracists, pseudoscientists, pseudohistorians, archaists and purveyors of Bullshitsu strike progressive learning down. Yet we still have the skilful surfer or rider of the waves who has a far better chance at negotiating all the information available. Such individuals are no less vulnerable than the drowning non-swimmer – surfers still drown and are eaten by sharks – but they have developed skills and therefore have more available tools at their disposal.

The directed cross-trainer is comparable to the scientifically minded researcher. He can entertain ideas without being threatened by them or absorbed by them. He does well to ride the waves of information in the direction that will not overturn and engulf him; he won’t get drawn off-course to attractive islands and forget his way and he is experienced at spotting the sharks of disinformation.[i]

Below are three fundamental areas that are often not taught to students wishing to pursue cross-training. Whilst it is commendable that instructors encourage students to seek out different disciplines and research for themselves, many get discouraged when they start becoming confused. Confusion is entirely unnecessary if we think about what constitutes cross-training. As children we study multiple subjects in our most formative years often with different teachers who have different approaches. When we play sports, we learn many different games. Most occupations can easily be broken down into several different disciplines and skillsets. We know that historical martial arts practice comprised of cross-training and comparisons might be fittingly made with today’s military. The tribal nature of martial arts has led to the creation of a structure that makes students and teachers often feel unsure and vulnerable again when they train outside their usual art. Others ride through this anxiety and even embrace other arts, sometimes completely abandoning old systems for new, but struggle to blend different skillsets.

[i] See my chapters “The By-Product Myth” and “The Calypso Effect” in my e-book “Mordred’s Victory” for in depth discussions on how martial artists often get side-tracked in their training objectives.

Part II on clarification follows next week.