Self Defense Triangle (O' Doom)

Great Debates
21

Hmmm…this is difficult.

  1. Mental disposition. (60%)
  2. Choice of Actions. (20%)
  3. Actions themselves.(20%)

Subject to change after loss. :smiley:

In my own study, some observations:

I cannot understand a (2) ‘choice’ of actions until (1) my mind is capable of comprehending that a ‘choice’ exists under duress; and only after (3) my body is able to move to facilitate a particular choice will I be able to effectively put (2) to use.

A student with sufficient tactical presence of mind breaks his hand on someone’s head. The technique was the weak link. His sifu was guilty of too much Sil Nim Tau (Wing Chun ‘kata’, or ‘form’) in the air. Looked great in forms. Had great reflexes. Poor conditioning.

Another facet of this occurs in many Wu Shu arts, in that they look fantastic, build impressive endurance and strength conditioning, but when a fist flies in their face the practitioners flinch: they’ve practiced forms for too long without sparring, and ‘reflex versus encroaching stimuli’ training is lacking.

When Bodidharma required his Shaolin students practice repetitive motion, the techniques were almost incidental; it could be argued he simply wanted them to stay awake while they meditated. Consequently, after meditating for hours at a time, the motions became more than second nature. If one stood too close and said, ‘Nam Myoho—‘ they were instantly killed via the monk’s involuntary reflexes. Kidding. (But only that ‘killed’ part.)

I find that I need presence of mind first. It is after mastering technique that I can temper my actions, by toning them down or raising the stakes. A ridge hand to the temple can become a light box to the ear, or a knife edge kick to the throat can become a full-foot shove to the chest. But no matter what I choose to do, if my body is not prepared to bear side-effects of irresistible force meeting possibly immovable object, I may end up worse off than my opponent.

So many McDojo’s (as my friend affectionately dubs them) pass out high-ranking belts just as soon as a technique is imitated satisfactorily. Nevermind making the technique yours. Nevermind the lack of understanding the actual physics involved with using the human body as a weapon or a shield. The students are too often interested in ascending in rank and less often interested in the honing of the sword’s edge. And the Sifu, or Sensei, might be more interested in the fiscal benefits than in the passing on of the art.

You’ve mastered the art. Ka-ching, here’s your black belt. Now be responsible.

This is disturbing, for the arts are a lifelong discipline. I don’t hold stock in belts, save as indicators to the public who the ranking ‘officers’ are. I’ve defeated many higher ranking belts, and been defeated by belts of lower rank. Through the years, I can tell almost immediately who possesses proficiency in their discipline, and this is more effective than any belt will ever be.

As Indiana Jones put it, ‘It’s not the years. It’s the mileage.’

Insanity destroys logic, but not wit. Nathaniel Emmons

If we are out of our mind, it is for the Lord; if we are in our right mind, it is for you. 2Cor.5:13

22

Spiritus, we could be talking about different things, you’re right.

When I was saying that I thought tactics should be more important, here is what I meant: Some of the things we learn are often presented as secondary to the technique, but are critical to a real situation. Things like movement, distance between yourself and your opponent, the many and various ways the human body can and can’t bend, etc. This stuff is what I think of as tactics.

You’re right that whatever technique you know had better be effective, but I think being able to keep it together and adapt to a situation using that knowledge above are the most important things.

Actually, now that I wrote all that, I think the difference in what we were talking about is proper technique vs. effective technique, which, depending on the art, can be very different. Proper techinque takes a definite back seat to tactics, but effective technique is critical.

23

I think we are getting closer. Some of the elements you mention under tactics (distance, movement, etc) I consider to be inseparable from technique (some schools refer to this as application). The tactical level, to me, is more along the lines of:
Attacker A has reach on me and position on my left, but there is a waist high immovable obstacle between us. Attacker B is to my right front and smaller but he has a knife. My response must (1) Neutralize the weapon. (2) Transition from attacker B to my left side. (3) Shift me awy from a long high attack by A. (4) Resist entanglement/full grapple with attacker B. (5) Etc. <move me closer to an exit – I hope>

Now, I do want to reiterate that I am by no means attempting to minimize the importance of a proper mindset. Indeed, in situations that do not need to become violent the mindset alone will allow you to achieve and maintain control of teh dynamic. However, once the transition to a physical situation occurs you must have strong tactics and technique. None of the three can be ignored, but the balance between the three shifts depending upon the elements of the confrontation. The more complex/dangerous the situation, the more vital it is to have all three legs of the tripod in place.

The best lack all conviction
The worst are full of passionate intensity.
*

24

The above post by Spiritus reflects an excellent discipline.

And, it’s cheating, because you have to give a percentage.

Grin.

Seriously, I am in accord with Spiritus Mundi’s recent assessment. Well said. And Hunsecker, good discourse and thoughts.

It’s nice to see some teachings are passed on responsibly.

25

I have to somewhat disagree with your latest post, Spiritus. The tactics and techniques in your example, are totally useless (you may as well not even know them) without the proper defensive mindset (predetermination of action, instinctive response, etc, see any of Ayoob’s non-gun books, for examples).

Without proper mindset training, which I feel comes from SBT (scenario based training) you will, in face of fear, revert to the animal mind. All the technique goes out the window, and you’ll resort to the hammy fist as a weapon. Also, you will lose fine motor control, so forget about any highly fine trapping, etc. This isn’t to say those techniques themselves are useless, but without the mindset to keep them available there is little point in learning them, except that they may be of us in a minor conflict where the fear isn’t really going to settle in (see just about any Ayoob book, including the guns ones for a discussion on the fear mind. Also, Jeff Cooper (IIRC) has a good book on that… I’ll be back with that one, I need to go check my “library”).

26

“Stress Fire” by Mas Ayoob not Jeff Cooper’s “Principles of Personal Defense”. Sorry about that.

27

Thanks Glitch!

I’d post some more thoughts, but I would probably say something stupid and spoil my batting average.

28

Glitch–

Which part of Spiritus’ post are you in disagreement with?

It would seem to me his analogy of ‘all three legs’ being quite vital in support of the other is befitting a strong discipline. If we spend too much time on the one without the others, we neglect to shore a possible weakness…
I didn’t see where Spiritus denies ‘mindset’ as the important deciding factor in combative scenario; I simply saw his stress upon all three dynamics being essential to possess a well-rounded discipline.

I tried to relate the proper mindset/improper technique and improper mindset/choice dilineation suggestions above as being detrimental to the practitioner…what are your thoughts?

29

This is slightly away from the OP, but can anyone tell me how you realistically train for mindset? Even if you’re doing lots of heavy contact sparring, students are mentally prepped just by being in the dojo. There’s a big difference when you get outside and someone asks you the time and swings at you when you look at your watch…
In the old “Pink Panther” films with Peter Sellers, Inspector Clouseau encouraged his sidekick Keto to attack him without warning from ambush. It was comedy, but maybe he had a point. (My favourite was when Keto was hiding in the fridge. It would certainly keep your awareness sharp!)

30

Pariah: That’s why I only somewhat disagree. It seems to me that Spiritus, and he can correct me if I am mistaken (it wouldn’t be anything new), that he advocates percentages more like: 33% 33% 33%. I disagree with this. I think that the critical nature of mindset, i.e. tactics and techniques being worthless without it, implies a greater degree of importance to it.

Again, Spiritus, if I have misunderstood, please tell me what a goofball I am, or just correct me.

“Glitch … download” - Glitch’s final action. sniff

31

You’re a goofball, Glitch.

32

Oh come on! Surely you anticipated that respose. :smiley:

We both agree that mindset is an important prerequsite for effective action. However, that does not mean that it has overriding imortance in all situations. It is entirely possible to achieve a successful outcome to some situations while using only large muscle movements and instinctive reactions. Other situations require much more refinement. In multiple attacker situations that have become violent, for instance, all of the calm mindset int the world will do you little good if you lack the tactical insight to manipulate the scenario or the technical skill to operate effectively. Yes, the mindset has to come first, but that does not mean it is more important in that situation.

Consider a triathalon. It requires a swim, a bike ride and a run to complete successfully. In every one that I have seen, the swim came first. If you could not swim well, then you were hopelessly behind and literally out of the running before you had a chance to ride/run. Does that mean the swim was 85-90% of the total importance?

I have avoided giving a percentage response because I reject the idea that such a conception can validly be applied to all situations in which a student might find himself. As I said above, the relative importance of each leg shifts not only from encounter to encounter but within the dynamics of each encounter. I feel that to neglect any leg is to invite defeat.

The best lack all conviction
The worst are full of passionate intensity.
*

33

I am not an export on triathalons (sp) but if what you are telling me is that if you fail to swim well then you are effectively eliminated, I would say that holds a certain level of critical importance, especially if you tell me that if you bike poorly you could still win, or if you run poorly you could still win.

Without mindset you are effectively eliminated. All the tactics and technique in the world will not save you in a serious fight. However, you can be missing good tactics and good technique and still emerge with victory if you have excellent mindset. This is why career criminals mop the floors with black belts on the street. They have a highly tuned, by necessity, aggressor’s mindset. Even if their technique and tactics are sloppy (from a martial arts perspective) they still win, and win an overwhelming amount of the time in serious fights.

The claim isn’t that mindset will always save you but that it has an overwhelming criticality that makes it overwhelmingly important (and sadly undertrained) i.e. a high percentage on the importance scale.

34

Nope. The point about the triathalon is that if any of your areas is too weak you will have no chance. Swimming is simply the first one encountered.

This is simply incorrect. Let me state again that I am not disagreing that mindset is important, even vitally important on many situations, but to assert that no fight has ever been won without a studied mindset is simply false. There are many occassions in which old-fashioned rage and adrenalin will sufice. The human species did not evolve with an instinctive reaction to danger which was always disadvantageous.

Again, it depends upon teh situation. Mindset may allow you to triumph in simple scenarios, but the more complex the threat the more iportant tactics become. The more physical disparity (in size, strength, numbers, quickness, weaponry, etc) the more iportant technique becomes.

We all have anecdotal evidence on both sides of this question. Do you have hard numbers? I have known black belts who have lost street fights and who have won them. Please note, however, that most of the anecdotes which I have heard which have thug beating black belt involve a one-on-one confrontation (tactical leg simplified/minimized) and an intial attack, often unexpected, by the thug (technical complexity limited by initiative). Also, to say that a person lacks a refined martial technique is not the same as saying that he lacks technique. I myself had a student who never moved away from his barroom overhand right, not the most kinesthetically efficient attack but one which he had honed through years of use. More than a few of my fellow instructors learned to appreciate the effectiveness of this “unorthodox” technique.

Again, I am not saying that mindset is not vital, only that I do not agree that it is overwhelmingy more important than technique and tactics combined.

The best lack all conviction
The worst are full of passionate intensity.
*