Tactical Smarts – Conflict Manager

Open Quarters Vs Closed Quarters – Mark Hatmaker

Today a wee bit of history from the days of Fighting Sail and then we wade into how we might learn a thing or two from these 18^th & 19^th century sailors.

Picture if you will a wooden sea vessel, make it a swift sailing sloop or a heavily armed man-of-war or whatever vessel floats your boat. Conjure up images of the ships seen in any of the Pirates of the Caribbean flicks or, better yet, Master and Commander.

Ok, got those images in mind?

Now picture the superstructures on the main deck. For the landlubbers, a superstructure is any structure/cabin rising above the main deck. On larger ships there were typically two superstructures the forecastle and the aftercastle.

Got that?

When any such ship was engaged in maritime battle with another they would often draw themselves broadsides to allow cannons loaded with a variety of mayhem to do damage to the ship itself (below decks firing to sink the ship and above decks firing if you intended on capturing the vessel). At this point of the battle the ships are engaging in open quarters fighting.

If/when a boarding by an enemy vessel seemed inevitable, the vessel that feared boarding would close a series of doors/shutters that ran along beams or supports bridging the superstructures—the crew would retreat behind these barriers which were called, yeah, you guessed it—closed quarters.

Now, just because the quarters have been closed we are not at actual hand-to-hand closed quarter fighting yet as we commonly envision it. There are a series of loopholes (small openings) for musket and small arms fire.

If/when the marauding vessel’s crew is finally able to board and breech the closed quarters barrier the one-on-one melee began with combatants wielding boarding axes, pistols, cutlasses, dirks, and perhaps here and there a musket or blunderbuss.

The point of today’s little historical aside is twofold—

One-To illuminate the origins of the phrase closed quarters and…

Two—Most importantly to allow the historical use of the closed quarters strategy to inform our modern self-protection thinking.

99.9% of the time (fake but representative number all the same) when talk is made of real-world self-protection or street-defense we move directly to an assumption that the predator has breached our closed quarters status.

Yes, I am aware that we do not walk along this earth with doors and shutters ready to be closed when we first spot trouble on the horizon but…we do, more often than not, spot a bit of trouble before it actually reaches us where we must engage in what we now call closed quarters battle.

This earlier awareness can be thought of as the beginning of our open quarters status. It is at open quarters that we must assess whether the enemy is too heavily gunned to engage and thus we must set sail, or whether to pull broadsides and begin firing with cannonade. This is the nautical equivalent of fight or flight.

Open quarters weaponry, in the modern sense should always err on the side of flight, but…but we must never assume flight is always an option. There are times when flight is simply not possible and engagement must be made. But even in these circumstances modern self-protection trainees must alter how we think of our open quarters weaponry.

We cannot and do not have the option (in most cases) of leaping immediately to our own personal cannonade (in my case a .357 Magnum) nor should this be our first thoughts in what is still an open quarters situation.

We must defer to our prevention, our awareness, our decision to remain vigilant no matter how calm the personal seas may seem. In most situations this persistent scouting for an enemy flag on the horizon will serve us with all the self-protection skills we’ll ever need.

If our vigilance does lag, if we are blind-sided, if even after spotting a threat we may sometimes find our initial flight options sparse to none we then begin open quarters tactics, this can be your own personal cannonade (if warranted of course) whether this be personal firearm, blade, designated weapon or X-Weapon use as defined in our X-Weapon Self-Protection Unit.

We do not, absolutely do not if at all possible want to get to a closed quarters fight from the word go. Closed quarters battle assumes that we may have been less than vigilant in our scouting, less than diligent in our open quarters preparation. Closed quarters battle in the days of fighting sail was the last ditch effort (to mix military metaphors) at survival, the tactical fall back for when our earlier strategies and tactics have failed.

It seems to me that we spend more time in this modern era pondering and training closed quarters tactics than we do open quarters work. We use No Second Chance Book of Drills to rectify this strategic inversion and return the primacy of open quarters battle to the top of the self-protection food chain where it should be.

http://www.extremeselfprotection.com

The Importance of Reputation – James Hall

Many CM readers will have seen the media coverage of a recent incident in China, in which MMA fighter Xu Xiaodong soundly defeated “Thunder style” Tai Chi master Wei Lei in a challenge match arranged by Xu to show that “traditional” Chinese martial arts styles are ineffective. The New York Times’ article covering the match can be seen here: https://goo.gl/mGT56B [1].

The fight itself has already been the subject of much analysis and comment. What I would like to talk about is the aftermath of the fight, particularly its reported consequences for Xu Xiaodong, and the lessons which can be learned from Xu’s experience which are relevant to self-protection.

As the NY Times reports, Xu may have proved his point by winning the fight, but he has faced a powerful backlash from the Chinese media, public and martial arts community, including a statement from the Chinese Wushu Association saying that the fight “violates the morals of martial arts”. The backlash has been so severe that Xu has been forced into hiding, and has reportedly posted statements online saying that his career is in ruins and he has “lost everything”, seemingly baffled as to how things could have worked out so badly for him.

The moral outrage surrounding Xu’s actions can be understood by reference to the “Moral Foundations Theory” put forward by Jonathan Haidt and Craig Joseph. This theory is explored in detail in Haidt’s book “The Righteous Mind” [2], and a summary can be found at http://www.moralfoundations.org. In brief, Moral Foundations Theory proposes that there are five “foundations” to our instinctive sense of what is morally right or wrong:

Care/Harm;
Fairness/Cheating;
Loyalty/Betrayal;
Authority/Subversion;
and Sanctity/Degradation.

A sixth foundation, Liberty/Oppression, was added to the model later. Caring actions are likely to be viewed as moral, harmful actions as immoral, and so on. Haidt also proposes that in society, there are two distinct groups of people: those whose moral sense is dominated by the Care/Harm and Fairness/Cheating foundations, and those for whom all six foundations count more equally.

It seems clear that Xu is in the former category. He has publicly stated that the purpose of his challenge to the traditional martial arts community was to “fight fraudulence”, or to expose the ineffectiveness of traditional systems. This shows clear Care and Fairness motivations – in his mind, the traditional schools are cheating people by taking their money but teaching them ineffective systems, so by exposing their ineffectiveness he is protecting the public from being harmed in this way, which is a good and righteous thing to do. It also seems plausible to suggest that Xu may have been motivated by concerns of Liberty, perhaps in “freeing” would-be martial artists from a perceived oppression by the traditional schools. However, Xu has failed to realise how his actions would be perceived by people in the latter category. The depth with which the traditional martial arts are ingrained in Chinese culture means that his challenge appears disloyal to his heritage, subversive of the authority of the traditional schools in society, and degrading of traditions which are viewed by many as sacred. It is this interpretation of his actions which triggered the outrage that has made him a virtual outcast.

The relevance of this to conflict management and self-protection can be understood by assessing Xu’s actions against another model, this time the model of “winning” put forward by Martin Cooper [3]. In Cooper’s model, to achieve complete victory a person must “win” on four levels:

overcome adrenaline and fear to be able to perform;
overcome your opponent;
overcome criminal charges to preserve your liberty;
and overcome civil charges to preserve your resources.

Marc MacYoung has proposed a fifth level: survive retribution from the person you defeated [4]. If we examine Xu’s actions against this model, we can see that he won at the first level, since he was clearly able to perform in the fight; he won at the second level, easily overcoming his opponent; since the fight was consensual, criminal and civil legal consequences were not an issue, so the third and fourth levels are irrelevant; and as far as we know, the repercussions that Xu has experienced have not come directly from his defeated opponent. Therefore Cooper’s model, with MacYoung’s extension, can’t explain why Xu “lost everything” in the way that he did.

To explain the repercussions, we need to add a sixth level to the model: Protect your reputation and good name. Xu “lost” by failing to appreciate the effects that his actions would have on his reputation.

Reputation is key to all our social relationships. Our professional reputation affects our ability to find work. Our personal reputation affects our ability to form and maintain friendships and relationships. Reputation can constitute upwards of 40% of the value of corporations, who invest billions in developing and protecting it [5]. A person with a bad reputation can quickly find themselves isolated and penniless, which even if you’ve prevailed in a confrontation, been exonerated of criminal charges, escaped civil litigation and protected yourself against direct repercussions, is not a good place to be. Xu’s example illustrates that preserving our reputation and good name must form part of a comprehensive self-protection strategy.

The first step in developing a reputational protection strategy is to consider how our actions could give rise to a moral backlash. We can do this using the framework offered by Moral Foundations Theory: how might our actions be considered harmful, unfair, disloyal, subversive of authority, degrading of something sacred, or oppressive? The second step is to consider from whom the moral backlash may come. In Xu’s case, this should have been obvious – he openly challenged a highly respected institution of society, so of course the institution in question and its many supporters would rally to its defence. In self-protection, or protection of others, it will depend very much on the individual’s particular situation. For a law enforcement or security professional, the backlash may come from community groups, for example, and may have a political as well as moral motivation. For a private individual not employed in a profession where the use of force is routine, the backlash is more likely to come from friends and colleagues who can’t cope with the reality of an act of violence, however lawful, by someone they know. Thirdly, we need to consider the form that the backlash may take, and what its adverse effects might be on a social, professional and personal level. For law enforcement & security professionals, a backlash may be overt and very public, possibly in the media; for individuals, it may be more subtle, perhaps a quiet withdrawal of social contact as people seek to distance themselves. Particular consideration should be given to our online reputation via the internet and social media. A good introductory guide to online reputation management can be found at https://goo.gl/XZ4eUJ [6] – it’s aimed at corporate executives but its principles apply equally to individuals. Finally, we need to consider how we can take pre-emptive action to strengthen our reputation and good name within our professional and social circles so as to be more resilient to any future risk to our reputation, and what reactive actions we could take to repair any damage which our reputation may suffer.

Everyone’s individual situation is different, so the purpose of this article is not to prescribe solutions, but rather to raise the issue and get the thought process started. Including reputation management in our planning and strategies should help to ensure that if the worst happens, we can come out of it still able to function in society – not ostracised, baffled and broke with no idea of how we got there.

References

[1] Tatlow, Didi Kirsten (2017, May 10). MMA fighter’s pummelling of Tai Chi master rattles China. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/10/world/asia/mma-martial-arts-china-tai-chi.html

[2] Haidt, Jonathan (2013). The Righteous Mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. Penguin Books, London.

[3] Cooper, Martin. Quoted in MacYoung, Marc “Animal” & MacYoung, Dianna Gordon. Training goals, assumptions and screwups. No Nonsense Self Defense. Retrieved from http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/traininggoals.htm

[4] MacYoung, Marc “Animal” & MacYoung, Dianna Gordon. The cost of winning. No Nonsense Self Defense. Retrieved from http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/repercussions.htm

[5] Brigham, Alexander F. & Linssen, Stefan (2010, Feb 01). Your brand reputational value is irreplaceable. Protect it! Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/2010/02/01/brand-reputation-value-leadership-managing-ethisphere.html

[6] Protecting company & executive reputation (2016, March 23). Ignyte. Retrieved from https://www.igniyte.com/en/resources/guides/protecting-company-executive-reputation/

Contact

hall.jp@gmail.com

https://www.facebook.com/james.hall.902819

Stop Thinking Your Attacker is Stupid! – Randy King

Another thing that commonly bothers me, all the time, when I’m teaching self-defense seminars, going to train with other instructors, reading articles in Black Belt, or looking at blogs online, is people assuming the person attacking you is unintelligent at best. So, you’ll hear advice like, if a person has a weapon, they’re probably going to concentrate only on that weapon, and they probably won’t transition from that weapon. Or if a person’s kicking you, they’re probably going to kick you, if they’re punching you they’re going to punch, if they’re grappling, they’re going to grapple.

I found in real life, and as I’ve said multiple times, fighting is high speed problem solving, it’s as simple as that. It’s just the ability to solve problems during whatever encounter you’re in. So, I’m being attacked, somebody’s punching me, if I can punch and they can punch, and the person’s punching faster than I punch, I’m probably not going to continue to punch that person and not try and transition into a grappling phase or a weapon phase or something else.

I don’t like the mindset of okay, if a person has a knife in their hand they’re going to only focus on the knife, they’re going to keep trying to drive the knife into you, and if you get control of the weapon they’re not going to try to turn or wrestle or take you down or transition into another weapon set or hurt you in any other way than with that weapon. Too many skill sets, too many people rely too much on stopping the weapon, not stopping the attack. The attacker is the problem.

Every time I’ve seen a real fight, every time I have been in a real street fight, any time the person is losing they will change their tactics. So if a person’s wrestling me and I’m out-wrestling them they’re going to start punching me, or they’ll flee, or they’ll transition into something else. If you assume that because your instructor tells you that this is how violence is and that because they have a weapon they’re definitely going to keep using that weapon against you at all points in time and not focus on anything else, you are living in a crazy world. It is impossible to tell what anybody’s going to do in any situation, under the duress of adrenaline, fear, anger, whatever substance might be in their body outside of the natural ones. You cannot predict what’s going to happen … there’s patterns, there’s different thought processes and skill sets but definitely there’s no always. Using the word “always” in combat is just insane. So many things change so many times: the environment, the person, yourself, you might get hurt or slip, luck is a huge factor in this as well, we mentioned the four different factors in fights.

When you’re doing any weapons training, when you’re doing any training in general, your training has to have a place where the bad guy can correct. We have a rule here which is never correct your attacker – the attacker is never wrong. You can’t say “oh I don’t know that one” and not problem-solve the situation.

Looking for new ideas, training methods, and educational resources? Sign up now for the CRGI Digital Dojo and get access to tons of videos, articles, podcast and other fantastic resources.

What is “Weapon Retention? – Dan Donzella and Tim Boehlert

Weapon retention is described as protecting, while carrying, any weapon such as a firearm or knife from someone that willfully attempts to take it by force from you. For law enforcement it’s a course taught for keeping in your possession your firearm in or out of your holster.

Over the years firearms and holsters have changed dramatically. Up until recently holsters merely secured a firearm only via a button, a piece of leather or with nothing at all. So with this understanding early weapon retention training had to be purely preventative and defensive only, for example, by placing both of your hands on your firearm and holster to keep it in your possession when grabbed by an attacker. Even with today’s high-tech secure holsters this method is still being taught.

In 2007 a new larger regional Police Academy was being created in my hometown. The Captain in charge of this project realized that an upgrade of the Defensive Tactics course was needed. Since the Department was changing their choice of firearm and holster, a new weapon retention course would be needed. I was given the task for the new course. At the time I was teaching a patrol and a traffic unit, so I teamed up with the head of the patrol unit. He’d acquired the new firearm and holster, as both were not issued yet.

The new retention course would be taught when the new equipment was issued at the academy and during ‘in-service’ classes. I looked over the existing course and knew that we’d have to start over from scratch. Since the new holster was very secure, we’d all agreed to create a more offensive-minded course.

I worked on a simple, but very effective technique to defend against having the weapon being grabbed, from every angle and while in the holster or out of the new holster. It was very well received; the officers responded well and liked the new concept. I am very proud to say that an officer who’d just completed the in-service retention class had had a firearm drawn on him, and he was able to use one of the techniques to disarm his assailant.

As a result of this one incident, other doors were opened for me at the department. I began retooling the Defensive Tactics curriculum as well. Working with patrol, traffic, and S.W.A.T. units and even helping officers with testifying in court cases, but I’ll save that for another article.

Let’s change gears and talk about civilian carry issues.

Unless you’re in a state that allows open-carry, most likely you won’t be using a retention holster. Carrying your weapon concealed is to your advantage. No one should know you are carrying. Using, drawing or showing your firearm is the last thing you want to do. Always be on your best behavior, follow all the laws of your state, do your homework, research your state laws. Be aware too that even county laws in your state can be different.

Having the right and ability to carry concealed firearms comes with immense responsibilities. You will be expected to know the law, to understand the circumstances where you may be breaking the law – i.e. by carrying your weapon into certain buildings: government agencies, institutions of higher education, or onto school grounds as a few examples. You have the responsibility of knowing your weapon intimately. You should train on and off the range. You should learn empty-hand skills as well, especially since you don’t have a secure retention holster.

Your offensive response has to be more aggressive, quicker and more precise. I also teach how to use your firearm as a punching, pushing, cutting and locking weapon. You may need to make space, or where you weapon is jammed or even empty. “Cover all your bases” as we say in the United States. Think out of the box and above all be creative. There’s nothing wrong with carrying a knife as back up, especially in a grappling situation. And again: research the laws, and get proper training.

Most officers during their careers never draw their weapon. So, most likely you never will as well. But that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be prepared in every aspect.

If you do draw your weapon, you’d better have a very good reason to do so. We had an incident in Florida where a civilian shot a man that was attacking a police officer. He was told by the officer to do so. After the fact the civilian dropped his weapon and backed away. Exactly what you are supposed to do with other officers arriving on the scene.

In an active shooter situation, you may be the only one that can stop the mass shooting. Remember the proper procedure afterward: Police will come in fast; don’t be mistaken as the killer. Obey their commands to the letter. Today, most likely, everything will be caught on video, so your actions will be studied and analyzed.

In my hometown we have a very large mall. As we all should know by now they are magnets for crime, gangs etc.… I knew most of the officers working overtime at the mall, and I was told to never come there unarmed, because they just can’t be everywhere, and that the mall’s security would be useless.

It’s sad but that’s the world we live in today. As a civilian or as a police officer, carrying a firearm imposes an immense responsibility on you. Remember your basic rules: always treat a firearm as if it is loaded, never point it in an unsafe direction unless you plan on firing, always keep your finger off the trigger until and unless you plan of firing your weapon, know your target and what’s behind it.

Dan Donzella has been teaching numerous Martial Arts systems and creating curriculums designed for law enforcement for over 40 years.

Tim Boehlert worked in Security for a large regional health-care facility in conjunction with numerous Federal, State and Regional agencies. He’s authored numerous internationally published articles on Martial Arts and Security issues.

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.

Biomechanics of Power, Part II – Jari Peuhkurinen

PART TWO

Energy/Power Potential

Power potential is a term that I use to clarify importance of proper body biomechanics in training. Power potential is always present, no matter what the position of our body is, or the situation we are in. It is simply the capacity what we have (not yet produced), in that moment to produce momentum or muscle force and direct it to our opponent. Think of it as stored energy we have in our body, cause of our body´s positioning, ready to be delivered. We should train to maintain proper structure of our body in relation to our opponent’s body, so that in every situation we have the maximum power potential in our use.

Do not confuse this with the physics term potential energy, which is energy that accumulates in our body when we have the possibility to drop our body weight.

We don’t always have the distance required to produce a lot of momentum. As you remember, momentum is a product of mass and its velocity. What happens when we do not have the distance to produce a lot of velocity, but we have the possibility to produce movement? I have separated three different situations:

There is no distance between your tool and the target, you are already in contact and the starting velocity is zero. You cannot produce momentum, but you can produce muscle force. So this is the situation where you use what you have in your muscles. For an example, a pushing movement with your hands to create distance between your bodies.
There is short distance between the tool and the target. For example, in clinching position, you don’t have the room for maximum momentum, so it requires force; acceleration of the mass. Think about Bruce Lee´s 10-inch punch.
You have the distance to produce momentum and you always try to maximize your body movement.

All these three positions need to be practiced. Be well versed in different distances so you can maintain the maximum power potential in all situations.

Balance is crucial if we want to produce and direct momentum. There can be no effective movement with direction if there is no balance. There can be no controlled movement without balance. So if there is not balanced structure, there is no power potential.

Definition for power potential could be something like this: balanced position, from where we have potential to use our muscle force to produce controlled, explosive linear or angular movement and direct it as needed.

Delivery Potential

(Power) Delivery Potential is another term of mine and it describes the variety in quantity of power potential. We always aim to have to have the maximum potential in our use in any particular position and situation, but we also need to understand that there is always loss of force during the movement. We should train to be better at delivering the whole potential and lose less in the delivery. So if we have power potential of 100 units, the maximum what we can have, there will always be less than that 100 units delivered to the opponent. There are several components that effect on the delivery:

Distance is an element in the equation of our technique and its effect. To put it simply. If you are too far away from the target you need to reach. That affects your structure and balance and it has direct effect on your delivery. If the distance is too short, you don´t have distance to build maximum momentum. Proper delivery movement has to choose based on distance.

Friction is the force resisting the relative motion of solid surfaces. If there is no friction, the power potential will have little or no effect on the target since most of the power potential will be lost from the ground to opposite direction. This is the reason why hockey players grab the opponent when they hit during a fight. This clarifies the importance of proper structure also. Friction force will work for us, when we deliver momentum.

Structure is composed of bones, joints, articular cartilage, ligaments, tendons, muscles and that kind of tissue that keeps internal organs at their place. This is our engine and vehicle that produces and delivers the energy to our opponent during altercation. Structure needs to be without a weak links, for us to optimize its energy production and delivery. Most common examples of poor structure you can see when people hit something and their joints give in and bend during impulse. That is force leaking from the delivery. Remember that according to Newtons III law every force has an equal and opposite force acting on the objects. That bent wrist during impulse is the Newtons law in action. Contact with the opponent produces the opposite force acting on our structure.

Pressure (p) is multi versed term in martial arts and can be used to describe for example the psychological pressure you need to create for your opponent. In here it is a physics term that measures the force applied perpendicular to the surface of an object per unit area over which that force is distributed. Pressure is measured in Pascals. Again to put it simply, we want to deliver and focus our power potential into small area to gain more pressure to the target and create more penetration. Think if could focus the power of our low roundhouse kick to a surface in size of a pin? It would have more penetrating power than a boot tip. The idea of pressure is the same as in impulse. Think about a bullet shot towards you, if you could divide the pressure bullet creates to your whole body area, you would hardly feel it, but because the momentum of that bullet is concentrated to a small area, it has a huge penetrating capacity.

But again there are situations where we want the momentum to effect on larger surface, for example to create more stopping movement.

Angle in which the momentum is deliver to the target is also of consequence. As mentioned in the pressure is force applied perpendicular to the surface. So we look for 90-degree angle of delivering the momentum. Anything other than that and part of the force is redirected from the target and has no effect.

Effect Potential

Effect Potential is the last part of the movement. Maximum effect potential is ideal result that we look for in any movement we make. It is the proper delivery and directing of power potential that enables the maximum effect. From physical point of view, following two components create the maximum effect in our opponent, if the power potential and delivery are in order:

Tool and Target are important factors of effect. You need to deliver momentum with proper tool and choose the right target for that tool. To put it plainly, do not hit opponents kneecap with your fist. Even when you have the momentum and delivery potential, the effect will most likely be not in its maximum. However, if you change the tool, for example to tip of a boot, the effect will probably be closer to maximum what we could hope for.

These two components of effect potential could have been included in the earlier sections too, since all of the other components that result in the overall effect our movement has, is dependent on the opponent’s psychology and physiology. Basically there are only six desired effects we can hope to achieve with our action:

Pain in order to make opponent give up and comply
Make him out of balance to better our position
Cause unconsciousness (striking)
Disrupt the flow of blood to the brain (strangle)
Disrupt the flow of air to the lungs. (choking)
Stop the heart from beating.

If you really think the whole concept on potential (power-delivery-effect) you can understand why the laws of physics, mechanics, biomechanics and kinesiology are not completely straight forward when talking about self-defense and martial arts and they need to be applied. Of course if we only want to measure how much force or momentum we have in our straight punch, we can use the biomechanical basics to better our movement that way, but for actual self-defense situation it holds almost no meaning, since the effect is only thing that matter, and that cannot be measured effectively.

What we can learn from these concepts is how to make our action and our training better. What to look for in the training.

Options – Rory Miller

I’m part of that generation of police and corrections officers who was raised with the idea of a “Force Continuum.” We were taught that there were specific levels of force, each level had certain effects and was justified by certain criteria. Most agencies have moved away from the idea of a continuum. Not because it is ineffective or out of a fear that people would misunderstand and think it was a “connect the dots” game that required every step be touched on the way up the ladder.

They have been rejected because the courts have stated explicitly that the court would not consider the continua as elements of reasonableness. That doesn’t make the continua bad practice or bad teaching or even inaccurate, it simply makes them an unacceptable part of one piece of the legal process.

The continuum I was trained on had six general levels of force. Force for our purposes means anything that can make a person do something they don’t want to do or stop them from doing something they want to do.

Our six levels were: Presence, verbal, touch, physical control, serious physical control, and deadly force. For conflict resolution, I’d like to propose eight categories. Not definitive, just for this discussion. The eight options I want to mention are: Avoidance; Acquiescence; Presence; Verbal; Touch; Force; Pain; Damage; and Deadly Force.

There are always three over-arching factors that dictate what level of force is appropriate. The first is the necessary outcome. If you are under serious attack, your own survival should be non-negotiable. If you have a mission to accomplish, such as arresting a felon, that job must be finished. If you are negotiating a contract, there will be things you need in the contract and things you need excluded.

The second is your safety. Not just survival, but a scale from discomfort through pain to injury, to long-term injury, to death. You want the least impact on your life.

The third is the bad guy. Legally and morally, you will be expected and required to solve the problem (accomplish the mission) with the minimal harm to the bad guy.

These three things are always a part of the equation, but they will have different weight depending on the situation and your individual value system. I was taught as a military 91A (medic) that “A dead medic never saved anyone.” My safety first, the mission second, and the enemy a very distant third. In practice, however, many medics put their own lives second on the list. And in some circumstances, the combative person is the mission, and the medic will not and should not harm a combative patient in order to help the combative patient. It’s a balancing act, with few simple solutions.

Somewhere in the balance of mission and the intent to minimize harm to all involved, there is a “best” level. Generally, higher levels of force are faster, easier, more effective and safer (for the one using the force.) Shotguns simply solve problems faster than negotiation, and the problem solved with a shotgun tends to stay solved. But the higher levels of force require higher levels of justification. Boundary setting doesn’t draw the legal or social scrutiny that shooting does.

The Lower Levels of Force.

Avoidance is simply not being in the bad place at the bad time. The skills involved include reading terrain, reading social patterns, reading people and profiling places. Those skills must be combined with the will to act on your decisions. If you know that one of your friends is a trouble magnet, the information is useless unless you are willing to be rude and act. “No, I’m not going to the pub with you.”

Acquiescence is on this list because it has worked. Like many strategies, however, it only works until it fails and when it fails, it fails catastrophically. Acquiescence, without a higher-force back-up plan, cedes all initiative and power to the threat. In addition, under adrenaline and with high stakes, the hind brain looks for any strategy that has worked and acquiescence quickly becomes a habit. Acquiescence as a strategy only makes sense when one is certain that other options will fail and will be met with punishing force. Don’t be fooled, since this is what a threat will want you to believe. Acquiescence is sometimes a survival choice for the victim, but it is exactly what the predator wants.

Is there ever a time to acquiesce? It’s a personal decision when dealing with bad guys, but I’ll give you one example. Lawful arrest, when the person arresting you has the power of the government behind the badge and not just the right but the legal responsibility to overcome resistance, you will lose. And you will be punished. “Resisting arrest” is its own separate crime.

Presence is idiosyncratic. How you move, dress, stand, and what you look at largely determines your victim profile. Some people present as harder targets than others. Being large and fit certainly helps, but small people who move well are also avoided by predators. Your clothes can send a “hard target” message, but without the body language to back it up, particularly the alertness, wearing 5-11 clothes and Oakley sunglasses marks you as a wannabe.

Presence as an action is simply adding information. When you show up as a witness, many bad guys will cease their crime. This can be accentuated as well. I’ve stopped road rage incidents by visibly picking up a cell phone and prevented a probable burglary of a neighbor’s house by walking up to the suspicious car, visibly taking a picture of the license plate and walking back to my own home.

Verbal prevention and de-escalation is a vast skill. It includes everything from pleading to negotiation to naked threats. It is just as personal as presence, but almost infinitely expandable. A hostage negotiator might need to cajole, calm, threaten (rarely) and run a con all in a single conversation.

Presence and verbal are the best options when they have any chance to work. Excellent chances of success with very little chance of physical injury. But part of the skill, especially in verbal de-escalation is recognizing the point of no return, the moment where it will go physical no matter what you say.

Touch is barely a level. That is the soft hand on the shoulder to get a drunk’s attention or a calming embrace. It is definitely communication and can be seen as an extension of verbal. I separate it out for two reasons. The first is that in many jurisdictions, touching someone without consent can be construed as battery. For this reason alone, I prefer to use verbal tactics rather than escalate to even the lightest touch. The second reason is that if I can touch the threat, the threat can touch me. If I have misjudged the danger, touch without control puts me at risk.

Force is using strength and leverage to make someone do something or stop that person without resorting to pain or risking injury. Pushing someone away, or holding back a friend who wants to fight. It has many of the dangers of the touch level.

Pain is also idiosyncratic. Inflicting pain is a form of communication. Which means that if someone is not willing to communicate, or unable due to mental illness, emotional distress or a bad drug reaction, pain by itself rarely works. Pain compliance works through an unstated bargain, “If you quit fighting, the pain will stop.” A threat in excited delirium feels the pain of a pressure-point gouge, but is incapable of reading the bargain and often fights harder.

There is a hard transition between this level and the next. Tactically, morally and legally the levels we have just covered are very different than the higher levels. The levels so far have been appropriate when you are at little or no risk, when you are in control, when you are winning. In police terms, these are the techniques that will likely work on a non-compliant threat. A non-compliant threat is resisting, but that is an entirely different world than a threat trying to injure or kill you.

This split is critical to understand. If you attempt to use a low level of force in a high level situation, you will likely lose. If you use a high level of force in a low level situation, it won’t be legal self-defense.

The Higher Levels of Force

Damage is different than pain. Pain hurts, but doesn’t hamper your physical abilities. When damage is justified, I am trying to break the threat or part of the threat in such a way that he loses the physical ability to hurt me.

Realistically, there is an element of communication to this as well. Most people quit psychologically. I’ve stayed in fights with shoulder dislocations, broken ribs, fingers and (this is sport) twice with complete ACL tears. The shoulder, finger and knee injuries hampered my abilities. The ribs just hurt.

Deadly force is appropriate when you need to shut down the entire threat immediately. Jurisdictions vary slightly in the wording of the legal definition, but “deadly force” doesn’t just mean killing. It is death or “grievous bodily harm.” Again, the definition of “grievous” in the moment is going to be hashed out in court by lawyers. Generally, anything that has a permanent effect or impairs a life function will be called grievous harm. Permanent scarring. A permanent limp. Partial or total blinding… If you want to use an eye gouge, you need to be able to justify deadly force.

Deadly force is only justified when faced with deadly force. For anything less than immediate death or grievous bodily harm— or rape, every jurisdiction I have checked includes rape under the definition of grievous bodily harm and a rape attempt therefore justifies lethal defense— killing and maiming is out of bounds.

There is a saying, “When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.” When all you have is training in a single option, it is easy to convince yourself that it’s enough. It isn’t. A pacifist who eschews the physical force options is left with only acquiescence, relying on the mercy of others. Negotiation from a position of weakness, whether that weakness comes from a lack of skill or of will, negotiation without force options is only begging.

Conversely “kill them all and let god sort them out” is almost never legally, ethically or even tactically appropriate.

If you are ignorant of an appropriate option for a given situation, you are helpless in that situation. And always remember that none of these skills have an end-state. You can always get better and learn more.

For more information on different force options, we recommend “Scaling Force” by Rory Miller and Lawrence Kane.

THE SELF DEFENSE CONTINUUM: DISENGAGE THE ATTACK pt 5 – Teja Van Wicklen

Your first target choice is the most important.

Your first attack either creates an opening for your second and third attacks or notifies your attacker that you need to be immediately neutralized. Once he knows you plan to fight, your element of surprise evaporates along with any time to strategize. Depending on his level of determination your assailant will do whatever is necessary to make sure his plan goes smoothly including, but not limited to, knock you out, tie you up, lock you up or kill you. Put yourself in his shoes. You’ve invested time and effort into this project, if you’re injured in the process or too much attention is drawn, you lose. If your assailant is fully invested in you, he may put everything he has into the completion of this venture. Wouldn’t you.

Sometimes your first choice is the most important one. Sometimes it is the only one.

(Caveat: Almost everything changes if your assailant has a gun and intends to use it. You will need to know how to read signals and to trust your knowledge and instincts. Does he appear to know how to use the gun? Is he desperate enough to shoot you? Might he shoot you be accident because of his level of anxiety? You will have to choose whether to give him what he wants, attack him, or run. More on this in other installments, or check www.ConflictResearchGroupIntl.com, wwwNoNonsenseSelfDefense.com and www.CorneredCat.com for detailed gun-related articles.)

If you create an opening with your first attack, you will have taken an important step towards the overall strategy of bombarding him so he can’t recover. This is how you damage either him or his plan and create an opening in time and distance large enough for your escape.

The first attack is where a mental shift must occur if it has not already. How you accomplish this daunting mental shift has been covered in earlier installments of this article and, if you remember, involves trusting your own decisions and perceptions, giving yourself permission to do whatever it takes to survive, even if it goes against everything you have been told about damaging another person. The ability to shift from what is essentially a social mindset to an asocial one is a psychological mystery of sorts. Some people do it easily and others can’t do it at all. Knowing where you fall is also an important part of this puzzle.

There is only so long you can defend against a determined attacker. The law says you may not aggress on someone unless you are in imminent danger. Once you have established that you are indeed in imminent danger, you must cease to be the rabbit in the trap and become the wolf feeding her cubs. This is to say you must become the attacker. In becoming the dangerous one in the relationship for this crucial moment, you remove some of his options (remember that the predator has more options than the prey). You want him defending, not attacking. The conversation must become a monologue in which he never has a chance to speak.

Subsequent attacks will also need to be fast and furious so he has no time to breathe, but they don’t have to be quite as perfectly chosen. Ultimately, you want to use everything you have together in a merciless barrage of targeted and brutal assaults that give him no chance to recover. This is how you survive a dangerous encounter with a violent criminal. Incapacitate him and leave. You have a wild animal inside you. We are educating that animal so she can be both wild and wise.

Part 6

What are the best primary empty-handed attacks?

The Hammerfist
I’m going to recommend the Hammerfist. But, just to confuse you, let’s talk about punching, after all it’s a classic, and it’s similar to the hammerfist in some ways. Most women never punch, though boys seem to miraculously know how to hold their fists and deliver these things. In the movies we see a lot of this but the fact is, without spending a lot of time on it, punching takes practice, so if you don’t do it regularly, don’t plan to use it to protect yourself.

As the center of personality the face tends to be the primary target when men face off against one another. But the face is attached to this incredibly mobile thing called the neck, which makes it more difficult to hit than the movies might have you think. When punching someone in the face you run the risk of catching his skull which will make little impression on a determined attacker and will certainly keep you from using that hand again for a while. In face, you are more likely to break the tiny bones in your hand and wrist even if you hit his face, than you are to keep him from hurting you.

As an alternate option to the punch I present to you, the Hammerfist, which is exactly what it sounds like. Hold your hand the way you would hold a hammer. Now lose the hammer. That softer part of the hand is a better weapon than the highly breakable knuckles. Imagine punching a brick wall vs. pounding on it.

Another cool thing about the Hammerfist is how multi-directional it is. Punching is harder from odd positions. By odd, I mean from the ground or in a car. It’s very difficult to generate power with a punch when you’re lying on your back or trying to hit someone who’s reaching in your car window. Remember we’re talking about protecting yourself against someone who fights dirty. So you may not be facing the person, in fact you probably won’t be. He’s more likely to be behind you or at an angle, places where punching is difficult to impossible. For instance, you can pound down on someone’s neck or collarbone but you can’t punch in that direction unless you’re much taller. You can Hammerfist out to the side or down on an angle. Try it.

You can also turn many things into weapons by allowing them to protrude from the pinky side of your hammerfist. Now you can practice one technique with many applications.

Generating power with a hammerfist can take some practice. If you have any hard or sharp object in your hand, you don’t need as much power, but the section on weapons is coming up next. If you want to generate enough power to strike someone in the neck, groin or base of the skull, it would be wise to try it out, and see how strong you feel doing it. Get to a heavy bag, or something you can hit from different angles and work it out.

The good news is that practicing a hammerfist on a heavy bag is a great way to build strength without weights. Making contact with a heavy bag causes muscles to contract much like lifting weights.

(If you haven’t done this sort of thing before, don’t start out by hitting with all your might. Take it slow and respect your body. After a number of repetitions or a few 1 or 2 minute cycles, check back in with yourself the next day.)

Hammerfist Targets:
You can use a Hammerfist anywhere really but the best targets are both tough for your opponent or attacker to see coming and vulnerable to the attack.

Recommended Hammerfist Targets:
Front or side of the throat
Side of the face including the jawline (where ear, jaw and neck meet)
Base of the skull (where the neck and head meet) – This is an excellent target if you are thrown over someone’s shoulder. Be careful in practice, it is easy to knock someone out this way or to damage their neck badly.

Other Targets:
Groin (the groin is a great target except that, as we will discuss further, it is well-defended and therefore often easy to spot and defend as a first move.)

Hammerfist Targets with a Weapon
All of the above targets are applicable. Following are targets that are only sufficiently vulnerable to a very powerful attack or an attack with a hard or sharp weapon:
The kidneys can be hit with a hard or pointy object, but you must be very precise with anything but a pointy or sharp weapon. The kidneys can be found at the back floating ribs especially on a rising angle. A ‘hit’ to the kidneys tends to make it very hard to breathe, which should allow for a follow-up attack. You might think of using this target if someone throws you over their shoulder.
The back of the knee is where a bunch of ligaments attach. A cut to the back of the knee can disable the leg.
The achilles tendons is the thick tendon that attaches the calf muscle to the heel of the foot. If cut, it may make it difficult for him to chase you.

Hammerfist Tips:

When practicing, focus more on the speed of retracting the hammerfist rather than the impact on the bag or focus pad. In other words, focus on the pulling back rather than throwing the hammerfist. This will make you faster and speed can be the same or better than strength in a fight. Also, when you focus on the attack you often pause briefly with your arm extended which can allow someone to grab you. This tip is somewhat counterintuitive, but in practice it is both more efficient and more effective.

Tips on generating power almost always involve softening your knees (it is very difficult be strong with your legs locked), coiling your hips (which takes understanding and practice) and exploding in your chosen direction. If you have played baseball or softball or even tennis, you understand the swinging of a bat or racquet at just the right time and with all your power.

These are concepts it is virtually impossible to explain. Even pictures don’t really help. They must be demonstrated. Video and live instruction are the way to go.

TO BE CONTINUED…

Biomechanics of Power – Jari Peuhkurinen

”The degree of clarity with which you define something determines its usefulness to you” -Blauer Maxim

This article is part of a larger project of mine where I’m going to make laws of physics more understandable for martial arts and self-defense. My interest does not lie in the calculations or measurements of conventional physics, but in the practical part of physics; how can understanding basic physics make your action, training and teaching better?

My laboratory for these biomechanical basics is training and teaching concept called Improvement in Action. It´s not a martial art nor is it a system, but a structure of concepts and principles how to improve your training and teaching of self-defense.

When I started this project a few years back, I was looking for the right field of study what to follow, so that I can make sense of the laws that affect us all regardless of the art or a system of training that you follow. Finding the right field of science was not easy. Physics and laws of mechanics provide the basis for these concepts, but they do not tell us how to apply those in training. Biomechanics is a field of study what includes the human (bio) element into the picture, but biomechanics are a lot about measuring the performance. The only measurement in self-defense that we truly need is the effect of our action in the opponent, how can we measure that so that every time I perform a technique, the result is the same? Effect of action is not something we can measure in self-defense, we can only presume what the effects could be and train so that the technique we perform gives us the best possible probabilities of maximum effect.

Also biomechanics do not include the psychological part of the action in to the equation. As we all know, psychological part plays a huge part in our performance under stress and also in training. However, there is another field that includes the psychological part also, it’s called kinesiology. Kinesiology addresses biomechanical, and psychological mechanisms of movement. There is very little or no information on kinesiology and martial arts available. So you can see there is a lot of fields that need to be studied to make the information of basics physic laws applicable to self-defense training.

In this article I will address the proper terms that should be used when we talk about power – effect in the training and teaching.

Basic biomechanical terms

Power (P)is the rate of doing work. It is the amount of energy consumed per unit time. Power does not have direction and it is a vector quantity. and it is measured in watts (w). So power, when used normally in training context does not have the right properties to describe the energy in the movement. Of course we are interested in energy consumption, but since power dos not have a direction, it is not the proper term to use when talking about the energy that we deliver to our opponent during altercation via technique. Still just as a term, power is most commonly used, so there is nothing wrong with as long as you understand and can explain the real meaning of power.

Force (F) causes an object with mass to change its velocity. The original form of Newton’s second law states that the net force acting upon an object is equal to the rate at which its momentum changes with time. Equation for force is F=ma (mass x acceleration) and it is measured in Newtons. This sounds more what could be used in training. So basically if we want to develop more force we can train on two things; increasing the mass or increasing the acceleration of that mass. In my opinion concentrating on acceleration in technique is too precise, if we compare it to developing over all speed in our technique. But we do use concept of force when we create force against the ground to cause motion. Motion enables production of momentum.

Momentum (p) is the product of the mass and velocity of an object, quantified in kilogram-meters per second.So momentum is measured in kilograms-meters per second. Mass and velocity of that mass; that´s something we can use in training. In my opinion, momentum is the proper term that should be used when talking about “power” in techniques. Momentum has direction and it has the element we can develop; velocity. We produce momentum with the movement of our body mass and the velocity of that mass.

Speed (v) is a scalar quantity that refers to “how fast an object is moving.” Speed can be thought of as the rate at which an object covers distance. A fast-moving object has a high speed and covers a relatively large distance in a short amount of time. Contrast this to a slow-moving object that has a low speed; it covers a relatively small amount of distance in the same amount of time.

Velocity (v) is a vector quantity that refers to “the rate at which an object changes its position.” Imagine a person moving rapidly – one step forward and one step back – always returning to the original starting position. While this might result in a frenzy of activity, it would result in a zero velocity. Because the person always returns to the original position, the motion would never result in a change in position. Since velocity is defined as the rate at which the position changes, this motion results in zero velocity. If a person in motion wishes to maximize their velocity, then that person must make every effort to maximize the amount that they are displaced from their original position. Every step must go into moving that person further from where he or she started. For certain, the person should never change directions and begin to return to the starting position.

So simply but, the speed of an object is the magnitude of its velocity, the rate of change of its position.

While velocity is the magnitude of speed in the movement, Impulse is force over the time interval for which it acts on the target. You need to separate these two; velocity of the movement and the time which the force of that movement acts on the opponent.
This is very simple and useful concept to understand. If you have a force of 100 units and that force acts on the target period of 10 seconds. The target receives 10 units of force per second. However, if that 100 units of force acts for only 2 seconds (which is extremely long time for example for a strike) it delivers 50 units per second to the target. What you would prefer is the force of 100 units to act 10 seconds on the target, deliver the force of 100 every second. So basically you want the impulse to contain as much force as possible, for the longest time possible.

There a several ways we can use this concept:

We can shorten the time of our movements impulse as in striking. This means recoiling the movement. According to Newton´s III law every force has an equal counter force in opposite direction. So in reality when we strike our opponent, his counter force acts on us in opposite direction and collision transfers our momentum to the opponent. The sum of the momentums stays the same after a collision.
We make the acting time longer and utilize movement as a pushing movement. Still we want to have as much force as possible as long time as possible in the impulse. We don’t recoil the movement but keep applying the pressure forward.
Proper timing enables to increase the impulse by hitting the target while it has opposite direction to our movement. This two-way movement can be used with proper timing or by making it happen by pulling opponent or keeping target in place.
In defense we can utilize impulse by moving with the force so it affects us longer time and this way reducing the force acting on us. Basically the movement acts as shock-absorber so impulse time grows and movement loses its momentum.

Energy/Power Potential

Power potentialis a term that I use to clarify importance of proper body biomechanics in training. Power potential is always present, no matter what the position of our body is, or the situation we are in. It is simply the capacity what we have (not yet produced), in that moment to produce momentum or muscle force and direct it to our opponent. Think of it as stored energy we have in our body, cause of our body´s positioning, ready to be delivered. We should train to maintain proper structure of our body in relation to our opponent’s body, so that in every situation we have the maximum power potential in our use.

Do not confuse this with the physics term potential energy, which is energy that accumulates in our body when we have the possibility to drop our body weight.

There is no distance between your tool and the target, you are already in contact and the starting velocity is zero. You cannot produce momentum, but you can produce muscleforce. So this is the situation where you use what you have in your muscles. For an example, a pushing movement with your hands to create distance between your bodies.
There is short distance between the tool and the target. For example, in clinching position, you don’t have the room for maximum momentum, so it requires force; acceleration of the mass. Think about Bruce Lee´s 10-inch punch.
You have the distance to produce momentum and you always try to maximize your body movement.

All these three positions need to be practiced. Be well versed in different distances so you can maintain the maximum power potential in all situations.

Delivery Potential

Structure is composed of bones, joints, articular cartilage, ligaments, tendons, muscles and that kind of tissue that keeps internal organs at their place. This is our engine and vehicle that produces and delivers the energy to our opponent during altercation. Structure needs to be without a weak links, for us to optimize its energy production and delivery. Most common examples of poor structure you can see when people hit something and their joints give in and bend during impulse. That is force leaking from the delivery. Remember that according to Newton’s 3rd law every force has an equal and opposite force acting on the objects. That bent wrist during impulse is the Newton’s law in action. Contact with the opponent produces the opposite force acting on our structure.

But again there are situations where we want the momentum to effect on larger surface, for example to create more stopping movement.

Effect Potential

Tool and Target are important factors of effect. You need to deliver momentum with proper tool and choose the right target for that tool. To put it plainly, do not hit opponent’s kneecap with your fist. Even when you have the momentum and delivery potential, the effect will most likely be not in its maximum. However, if you change the tool, for example to tip of a boot, the effect will probably be closer to maximum what we could hope for.

Pain in order to make opponent give up and comply
Make him out of balance to better our position
Cause unconsciousness (striking)
Disrupt the flow of blood to the brain (strangle)
Disrupt the flow of air to the lungs. (choking)
Stop the heart from beating.

What we can learn from these concepts is how to make our action and our training better. What to look for in the training.

“Every woman should learn this choke.”- Well, should they really? – Erik Kondo

“Every woman should learn this choke.”– Well, should they really? The above statement is an opinion about the widely viewed “Gracie Choke” technique video to be used against sexual assault. It seems that a number of people agree with it. On the surface, it sounds reasonable. After all, why not? What harm does knowing something create? (Full video here)

But let’s deconstruct it and see what that statement really means.

“Every woman” really means “most physically fit women”. For example, women with only one functioning hand, or have limited grip strength, or are very young or are old are not the ones being considered here. A “choke” is a technique. “to learn” really means “to be able to learn and execute” “should” really means “because it will work” AND there is a reasonable possibility of needing to use it.

Therefore, we now have the opinion statement expand to say:

“So and So thinks that most physically fit women are able to learn and execute this technique AND there is a reasonable likelihood that they will be in a situation where they need to make it “work” AND it will “work” against most types of male attackers.”

When it comes to a physical self-defense technique, what does it mean to “work”?

In my opinion, the most useful criteria come from Rory Miller’s Golden Move, where the Move has the effect of:

Damaging your attacker
Weakening his or her position.
Strengthening your position.
Protects you from damage.

A technique is a sequential set of one or more moves. Therefore, a technique that “works”, has a high probability of meeting ALL of the above criteria.

If it causes your attacker to be unconscious or dead, you have damaged him or her.
If your attacker is unconscious or dead, you have weakened his or her position.
If your attacker is unconscious or dead, you have strengthened your position.
If your attacker is unconscious or dead, you are now protected from damage from him.

At first glance, it seems like the choke, meets all the criteria for “working”. But, not so fast, there is one more element to consider. That element is time.

According to the extended video it takes “6 seconds” for the technique to be effective. Is that an average of 6 seconds, where some people execute it in two or three seconds and others in 10 or 15 seconds against the “average” attacker? Or is that the minimum time it takes for a skilled practitioner to make it “work”?

Given that it is highly unlikely a scientific choke study was done to determine an “average” of 6 seconds. Most likely, it takes a skilled practitioner 6 seconds, and a less skilled practitioner longer. Is that 8, 10, 15 seconds or more? I don’t know, and my guess is that nobody else knows either.

The reason the time lag is important is because of what could be happening while the woman’s hands and legs are occupied with the technique and she is waiting for it to take effect. Assuming that the close body position doesn’t allow the attacker to engage in power full punching, it still does allow for the possibility that the attacker might be able to use his free body parts to:

Gouge and claw the woman’s eyes.
Crush her wind pipe.
Squeeze and choke her along neck with this hand(s).
Drive this thumb or fingers into pressure points in her neck.
Rip off her ear.
Drive his finger into her ear canal.
Drive his fingers into her nose.
Bite her, rip, and tear her flesh.
Dig his knuckles deep into her ribs.
Drive his head into her face.
Drive his forearm into and across her face and or throat.
Utilize short whip-like facial strikes.
Reach and deploy a concealed weapon such as a knife or other sharp object.
And other types of related of close quarter infighting attacks.

All of this could be done in the time it takes for the technique to take effect. In reality, during this time period, it is probable that

The attacker is not damaged.
The attacker’s position is not worsened.
The woman’s position is not improved.
he woman is taking damage.

In this case, the technique meets all the requirements for being the exact opposite of a Golden Technique.

When someone is being choked in a real life confrontation, they have no idea of whether the choker is only trying to knock them unconscious, or is actually trying to kill them. Therefore, someone who is being choked is likely to be “fighting back” for his life and will use any and all means available.

Choking requires taking away excess space which means getting very tight to the person and limiting his movements. The woman must cease her escape response and focus all her efforts on attacking. That requires a mental switch from fear based “get away” actions to anger based “attack the attacker” actions. In the situation envisioned, the attacker now no longer has the option to willingly stop his attack and disengage. He is literally being forced to stay and engage in what could be a life or death struggle.

If the attacker’s actions cause the woman’s choke to fail, she is now positioned very close to him. And she has likely expended a great deal of energy in trying to make it “work”. What is her next option? Instruction of a technique is incomplete without addressing what to do if it fails.

The next question is “How exactly is this technique learned?” This is a physical technique that requires repeated physical practice to learn. The student has to learn proper hand position and wrist extension. She needs to understand the proper angles of to apply force. Some people will take much longer than others. But everyone will need lots of practice time.

Regardless, to become reliably proficient, she would have to practice it against a wide variety of men of different weight, neck sizes, and musculature. Fat necks, thin necks, skinny necks, muscular necks, sweaty necks, heavy shirts, light shirts, tight shirts, loose shirts, sweat shirts, dress shirts are some of the types of men and clothes she needs to practice against and with (and what about a person with no shirt?).

She also needs to be able to execute the technique in the scenario intended for its use. Since the choke is promoted as a defense against a stranger rape attack, for realism, she needs to practice with men who she is not psychologically comfortable training with. Men who can create the real fear and feeling sexually assaulting her. These men would have to violently force themselves on top of her and between her legs in order to create both the physical position and the mental stress required to realistically “practice” execution and condition her emotionally.

They would also have to resist in manner consistent with someone who thinks he is being choked to death. And as with many types of learned physical techniques, she would need to periodically refresh her skills for her entire life in order to not forget how to do it.

The final issue is whether this type of practice will cause her to fixate on a type of attack that is both statistically unlikely to happen and also doesn’t represent the type of sexual assault that usually does happen to women. The vast majority of women are assaulted by men they know or are in some type of a relationship with. They don’t actively resist, and they don’t report the crime. And in many cases alcohol is involved which impairs their ability to execute physical defense.

How will the choke be used in these circumstances? Remember, any choke comes with the possibly of causing death. In order to choke someone, you must be willing to take the chance you will inadvertently kill him or her. That reality requires a certain mindset and emotional state to use it in a conflict.

On the flip side there ARE a number of benefits from learning this choke that do apply to physical self-defense. But that doesn’t mean “every woman should learn this choke”. It means that some women who choose to engaging in this type of training may benefit in the following manner if they train realistically.

They would realize that just like women, men vary greatly in not only in body type, but in willingness to endure pain and willingness to continue to attack when faced with determined resistance. This fact may seem obvious, but how would a woman who never engaged in head to head competition with a variety of men know that? Particularly, a woman who believes (has been repeatedly told) that all men are stronger than all women?
They would realize that the manner in which this choke can be broken provides the key to counter-attacking in a real life sexual assault. All the nasty infighting tactics mentioned previously are effective ones for women to use if they find themselves in this type of situation. By understanding what would cause themselves to disengage their own chokes, they may understand what may cause their attackers to disengage their attacks.
They would realize that what they have been told about learning specific self-defense techniques to deal with specific types of attacks is unlikely to help them. For most people, skilled based physical techniques are likely to fail under stress. But instinctive actions that have been conditioned under stress based scenarios have a higher likelihood of success.
They would benefit from learning physical skills that require a combination of flexibility, strength, coordination, timing, and confidence. Skill building is generally very beneficial even if you never apply the skill in real life.
As long as they know the practical limitations of their techniques, they will benefit from the learning process itself. Specifically, learning when NOT to attempt to use certain techniques is a valuable part of this learning process.
Assuming realistic practice, they will develop the mindset and mental conditioning needed to have a greater chance of successfully resist an assault.
They will be in a supportive environment with other women and men who all have the same goal of improving their ability to successfully defend themselves from a physical attack.

When it comes to whether or not “every woman (or man) should do something”. It is important to recognize who else benefits from what they all “should be doing”. Is it all women as implied, or is it really someone or something else?

There is a big difference between something being beneficial for SOME women and ALL women, because something that may help some women in some situations may also hurt other women in other situations.