How do you simulate real self defense situations?

[Thousand Kicks]

I have studdied TKD for about 20 years. The main focus of my training has been sport oriented, but I have also spent significant time training self defense applications of the art. I have also studied Kickboxing, Boxing, Aikido, and Morden Arnis. So, when I am the student or I instruct other people I always find myself asking this question

How would this technique work in real life against an attacker who will not easily comply with whatever I want to do?

So I ask the group. When you have a group of student training in self defense techniques how do you simulate a real life attack. What drills do you use to get people accustom to the tension and speed of a real attack?

The benefit of Olympic style TKD is that you pad up and go pretty hard without having to worry too much about serious injury; provided both parties know what they are doing.

 

[Manny]

I have studdied TKD for about 20 years. The main focus of my training has been sport oriented, but I have also spent significant time training self defense applications of the art. I have also studied Kickboxing, Boxing, Aikido, and Morden Arnis. So, when I am the student or I instruct other people I always find myself asking this question

How would this technique work in real life against an attacker who will not easily comply with whatever I want to do?

So I ask the group. When you have a group of student training in self defense techniques how do you simulate a real life attack. What drills do you use to get people accustom to the tension and speed of a real attack?

The benefit of Olympic style TKD is that you pad up and go pretty hard without having to worry too much about serious injury; provided both parties know what they are doing.

Tought question, no matter how we try to emulate an atack inside the dojang we can not get too close to the real thing. Inside dojang we use control tecnique to not harm or maim or even cause death over the training partners or studentes, in my case I do use enough force to create disconfort and in some point a little pain (pain innoculation) but thats all, I can't go far beyond to break an elbow with a lock for example, or I can't go far beyond to collpase the troat with a chop or even I can not go to far to break a nose with a palm strike.

It's a need to hit,kick or waht ever with enough force to make understand the student that the techkike can work in the street but this is not the real thing, inside the dojang the enviroment is nice, a large floor covered with mats, no furniture near, no cars, no other people trying to hurt you, almost all the techs are mano a mano and not like a gang.

Manny

 

[Cyriacus]

What kind of real attack are you looking at, exactly? Because theres lots of different methodologies here. Figure that out before you start looking at how to train against it.

 

[Earl Weiss]

Very Difficult. No matter what you are still in a "Safe" environment. One option is padded assailant training. You can go to a place like Peyton Quinn's Rocky Mountain Training applications center, or try to bring in the FAST DEFENSE people to develop a program. One issue in bringing the RMCAT program to a gym is some of the rough verbal which could be a turnoff for the dancing in the pajamas mindset.

 

[harlan]

:angel:

I have studdied TKD for about 20 years. The main focus of my training has been sport oriented, but I have also spent significant time training self defense applications of the art. I have also studied Kickboxing, Boxing, Aikido, and Morden Arnis. So, when I am the student or I instruct other people I always find myself asking this question

How would this technique work in real life against an attacker who will not easily comply with whatever I want to do?

So I ask the group. When you have a group of student training in self defense techniques how do you simulate a real life attack. What drills do you use to get people accustom to the tension and speed of a real attack?

The benefit of Olympic style TKD is that you pad up and go pretty hard without having to worry too much about serious injury; provided both parties know what they are doing.

 

[dancingalone]

Stress innoculation is part of it. You have to get students who really are interested in self-defense to be used to a lot of physical contact. They need to occasionally feel pain and duress so they don't experience those feelings for the very first time when it happens for real. They need to feel what it is like to be attacked by someone bigger and stronger than them and then they need to experience the feeling of cutting loose when they fight back.

How can we simulate these things as safely as possible? As mentioned above, padded assailant gear can be one partial solution on the attacker side. I own a Redman for this purpose. For the defender, there's no getting around the fact that they do need to feel duress, even if that means being struck or being mentally/emotionally stressed at times.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

I have studdied TKD for about 20 years. The main focus of my training has been sport oriented, but I have also spent significant time training self defense applications of the art. I have also studied Kickboxing, Boxing, Aikido, and Morden Arnis. So, when I am the student or I instruct other people I always find myself asking this question

How would this technique work in real life against an attacker who will not easily comply with whatever I want to do?

So I ask the group. When you have a group of student training in self defense techniques how do you simulate a real life attack. What drills do you use to get people accustom to the tension and speed of a real attack?

The benefit of Olympic style TKD is that you pad up and go pretty hard without having to worry too much about serious injury; provided both parties know what they are doing.

First and foremost, with any technique you teach or train in...has it actually been used against a determined attacker? Have you used it as such? Has your instructor or his instructor? What is your litmus test? Is it gross motor skill based? Is it good for the O.O.D.A. loop? Can you base it off the flinch response? The following is long but a compilation of just some of the things I've offered in the past.

o begin with, most types of sport traing/competions revolve around some/most/all of the following considerations (be they TKD specific or a more general MMA).

• Has a referee that enforces rules that both parties are required to abide by for the match.
• The match is in a well-lit, dry, level, soft venue.
• The opponent is unarmed.
• The opponent is alone with no chance others will join in.
• Some sort of safety gear is usually involved i.e. cup, mouth piece, gloves etc.
• The opponent isn't trying to kill, maim or severely injure you.
• You get a break in-between rounds to catch your breath, get a drink, get some advice or a pep talk.
• If you've had enough, you can call a time out or tap out or simply quit and walk away.
• There is often an incentive or reward for competing and/or winning such as rank advancement, a prize or maybe cash.

As a comparison, self-defense training is for situations;

• Situational awareness i.e. be aware of your surroundings.
• Factors such as avoidance, evasion, escape and de-escalation need to be taken into consideration and trained for where appropriate.
• Where there is no referee enforcing rules.
• You are likely alone and/or at some sort of a place or position of disadvantage.
• There are no rules.
• There are no breaks, water, advice or anything to assist you.
• The assault can occur in a parking lot, elevator, side street, your car, your bedroom, in the woods etc. It will likely occur in dim light conditions in any type of weather.
• The attacker may be armed, and should be assumed to be armed.
• The attacker may have friends more than willing to jump in.
• There is no safety gear, but likely a plethora of person-unfriendly objects like broken glass, traffic, walls etc.
• The attacker is looking to cause as much damage to you as humanly possible in the shortest amount of time possible.
• To quit is to die (or something possibly worse i.e. rape, love one killed etc)
• The goal is survival, the method is whatever it takes and is appropriate to the situation.

When looking at the difference in training methodologies, consider for the student and scenario;

• Do they always 'go for the knock-out', for points, for a submission? Is so, they've limited there response options.
• Do they have the option and/or opportunity to avoid or evade the potential conflice. Or escape or practice an verbal de-escalation skills?
• Do they have the option of using an improvised weapon?
• Does there opponent have the option of pulling a weapon (planned or improvised)?
• Does there opponent have the option of having his buddies jump in to help?
• Is the student required to observe certain rules?
• Do your students always train inside the Dojang? Are opportunities provided to train inside a vehicle, stairs, elevator, hallway, small room, on grass, on asphalt, on a sloping or wet or slippery surface?
• Do your students always where their uniform? Are they familar with what it would be like to be wearing tight clothing, foot wear, shorts and a T-shirt, a dress etc? Tt is one thing to be warmed up and stretched out and wearing loose clothing in the Dojang. It is quite another to try it in a dress in high heels, a pair of tight jeans, with a handful of groceries, a duty belt etc when you're not warmed up and stretched out.
• Have they ever trained in dim light conditions?
• Have they trained with visual/auditory distractions?
• Do we always use a closed fist when striking at the head while wearing gloves and padded helmets? A blow to the head with a fist in a SD situation may not be the wisest tactic. The chance of injuring the hand on someone’s head is fairly substantial even with a well-placed strike. That is why boxer as an example tape their hands and wear gloves. I'll say it again; the chance of injuring your hand on someone's head/face is fairly substantial. If this occurs, depending on the severity of the injury, it could very well limit your options for further SD. Anyone here ever try to manipulate a weapon with broken knuckles? Or a cell phone, or car keys? I've broken a knuckle before and my range of motion in that hand was limited for an extended period of time. Given that manual dexterity is already limited while under duress, you've just made it even harder by busting a knuckle or two, or spraining your wrist on someone's face. And there is no way to know ahead of time whether or not he'll actually be knocked out.
  
  This also doesn't touch on the possibility of blood borne pathogens the bad guy may be carrying. And now you've put yourself in a position of cutting your knuckles on his teeth or 'bleeding' him from the mouth or nose.

Is the student (or the instructor) well versed in the state statutes of force and deadly force? In consideration like bodily harm, great bodily harm and/or death? Subject factors? What a reasonable person would do in the same situation? Are you required to retreat in your state? Does your state have a 'Castle Doctrine'? An instructor doesn't need to be an attorney, but providing the resources for the student to check into it and touching on some of the topics during class time.

Is the student (or the instructor) well versed in the O.O.D.A. loop? Fight or flight? Flinch resonse? Adrenaline responses such as tunnel vision, auditory exclusion, loss of manual dexterity in the extremities? Considerations can include;

• Even powerful strikes in non-lethal areas can fail.
• A situation which starts out at less-than-lethal levels can quickly escalate.
• A proper joint lock, at the appropriate time, 'can' immobilize even an EDP (emotionally disturbed person) even if strikes fail and if properly applied.
• Be as patient as possible for the situation, look for openings.
• The attack will probably take place at the most advantageous time to the attacker and the least advantageous to us. We may be tired, sick, distracted etc yet still be forced into a situation.
• Some of these predators come in packs which backs them bold. And even being physically big isn't always a deterent.

Physical conditioning is also helpful during training, or at least encouraging it. Being physically fit can help us in several areas of a SD situation. It can also help if an injury has been sustained.

An interesting tidbit on Judo training; During WWII, Dermott 'Pat' O'Neill was the highest ranked non-Japanese Judoka in the world. He was also a member of the Shanghai Municipal Police Department with William Fairbairn. At the time, it was described as the most dangerous city/job in the world. O'Neill was eventually chosen to teach the First Special Services Forces (also known as the Devil's Brigade) which was a combination of U.S. and Canadian special forces (the movie of the same name was not an accurate portrayal). When designing what is now known as WWII Combatives, O'Neill (and Fairbairn who was a 2nd Dan under Jigoro Sensei) put no Judo into the system. When asked why, O'Neill replied that Judo was useless unless the enemy was wearing a Gi.

Now that was a bit of tounge-in-cheek humor on the part of O'Neill, but the point he was making was that Judo has a lot of sport techniques that require the opponent to be wearing heavy clothing for grip. If they aren't, or the quarters or conditions aren't what is needed then the number of Judo techniques that are possible become limited. Also, while many Judo techniques and principles are excellent for balance displacement, they aren't necessarily lethal which was often necessary on the battlefield or in special ops where stealth and quiet were essential.

Does this mean that Judo is useless for defense? No. Quite a bit in Judo can be effectively applied defensively against a resisting, determined attacker. The goal, for the defense minded Judoka, is to know the difference.

The same can be applied to TKD, or Karate, or any martial art that has both a sport and a self-defense component. For a competitor, who's goal is to win tourneys we need movements that fit within the rules of engagement. While kicks and punches are okay, it probably woundn't prolong your sport career to intentionally elbow strike the opponent, or use an intentional groin strike, or brachial plexus strike or head butt or eye gouge etc. For the defense-minded practitioner, limiting training to sport-geared sparring would limit ones total options as well. Again, the goal is simply to know the difference. One doesn't translate very well to the other. Each has there own specific training methodology and that is fine. The only time confusion or contention enters the picture is when one trains one way and believes it covers the other as well.

The question to then ask is; how do you, or they, know that what they're doing is going to be effective? The answer depends upon the focus of their training, and thus what they teach. If the instructor has a focus on sport methodology, then whether or not they've been in an actual fight becomse moot. I define 'real fight' as an real world altercation by a determined attacker who wishes to cause some level of harm to your person. If the focus is sport, then reality isn't being emphasized. See: http://excoboard.com/martialwarrior/148250/1801375 so I don't have to copy/paste the whole thing. This isn't stated to disrespect the sports enthusiast, just two different venues.

If on the otherhand, the instructor is teaching self-defense, but has never actually used what he teaches, the question can then be asked; how does he know it will work? This is a legitimate and viable question. Since one can either teach from experience or theory, the quality of either can come into question as far as SD is concerned. If it is from 'experience', how comprehensive is that experience. Was the instructor a police officer, corrections officer, EP agent, bouncer or military where they have multiple hands-on altercations? Having frequent altercations of varying levels of resistance is quite a bit different from a couple of 'bar fights' ten years ago. If it is from 'theory', how sound is the theory? Did the instructor, who had never been in a real fight learn from a high liability professional that did have hands-on experience? Or did they learn from someone that had also never been in a fight...who learned from someone who had never been in a fight...and so on and so forth?

Learning a 'technique' in the controlled environment of the Dojo/Dojang against a compliant, or at best a semi-resisting opponent is quite different from applying the same technique in a chaotic, adrenaline filled altercation with a determined attacker bent on causing as much damage to you as is humanly possible in the shortest time possible.

I'm bringing these things up only to give the reader some food-for-thought if they are focused one way or the other.

Martial art is an all encompassing term theses days. Originally, a martial art was meant, in large part, for one thing....defeating an attacker in armed or unarmed personal combat. Yes, esoteric venues have been attached to it through the years such as sport, health, social interaction etc. But martial arts in-and-of-themselves are movements designed to cause injury and/or pain to another for self-preservation or to defeat an action. Nowadays however, martial arts may mean self-defense or it may mean twirling a glow in the dark 'numchuck' to music in order to compete for a trophy or ribbon. It may mean its the thing you do Mondays and Thursdays while Tuesdays and Fridays are reserved for bowling. Or it could mean, for some folks, a means of training to protect yourself in armed or unarmed combat. Ask 10 different 'martial artists' and you'll likely get 10 different answers.

Defensive Tactics (D.T.) is usually the term used in law enforcement. It is the term I/we use when we're teaching L.E. and Corrections academies. While used for self-protection, D.T. also covers techniques that can be used to transport or secure an individual. Terms such as 'bent wrist' or 'goose neck' are used as well as 'hammer lock' and 'pain compliance'. It is usually a VERY simple course. The techniques have sound principles that IF trained for consistently will often produce positive results. Unfortunately, the bulk of L.E. and Corrections doesn't routinely train with D.T. or firearms beyond the academy. The individual that goes on to take martial arts or advance D.T. (or shooting for that matter) are few and far between. Such advanced D.T. course include such programs as S.P.E.A.R. (SPontaneous Enabling Accelerated Response) by Tony Blauer, PCR (Physical Conflict Resolution) by Gen Good (Seal Team Six), Boatman's Edged Weapon Defense by the late Sir Peter Boatman or Israeli Instinctive Shooting and/or Israeli Urban Survival (Hisardut Krav Maga) by several former Israeli commandoes. I've taken the instructor course for each of these and they are, hands down, among the most hard-core D.T. combatives courses out there. I'd place them in the H2H section as well.

Self-Defense can be contained within the martial arts or D.T. sections. It could also be a short-term course designed for the civilian that doesn't take further education in the venue. Just as with D.T., it usually offers simple but effective methods of (usually) unarmed defense. If the person would train with such methods, at least periodically they would likely be well served for the majority of altercations they may find themselves in. If they don't....well we train to live and live to train is the old saying.

H2H is basically (usually) meant for military (or advanced L.E./Corrections team/individuals). More than self-defense, it could be termed self-offense just as easily. H2H often is doing something dynamic and terminal to someone as opposed to defensive movements designed to defeat an attacker. Fathers of modern H2H would include William Fairbairn, Pat 'Dermott' O'Neill, Col. Rex Applegate, Charles Nelson, Carl Cestari and others. Without trying to make a shameless plug for Martial Warrior, there are a collection of articles and videos in the SD section for anyone interested http://excoboard.com/martialwarrior/148250. H2H reading material would include 'Kill or be Killed' and 'Get Tough'. As an interesting note, and I've mentioned this before, Pat 'Dermott' O'Neill of WW2 combatives fame was at one time the highest ranked non-Japanese Judoka in the world. His WW2 H2H combatives teaching included NO Judo of any kind. No sporting elements went into its development. He was quite strict on that point.

H2H was trained quickly and trained hard. Often less than 24 hours of training. Yet it was all based on gross motor skill by rote to be retained in long term memory and highly usable under duress. It succeeded. There are cases such as the senior citizen (and former FSSF member) who took out an armed robber at a 7-11 based ONLY on what he learned from O'Neill back in WW2. As I said, retained in long term memory was the goal of the training. My step-father told me of a similar incident involving the town drunk who at one time was also a WW2 combatives trainer. Suffice it to say that no one picked on him after an incident.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Additional thoughts:

When discussing self-defense training, how and where do you train? Important questions that need some serious examination. Here are some considerations;

1. Lighting. Many if not most 'incidents' happen in dim lighting conditions. Is at least some of your training in dim or even no light? If its not, I would challenge you to begin immediately. Things can appear quite different at night or in a dim light area.

2. Terrain. I would say that your chances of being attacked on a soft mat are pretty slim. Out on the asphalt or concrete might be a more likely spot. Or gravel. Dirt. Grass. Sand. Wet and slippery. Training on different surfaces and different angles is a plus to your training.

3. Position. Do you always train in the 'combat stance'? How about training in a chair? A car? A hallway or stairwell. How about your own bed? In the real world people have to fight in all sorts of odd places and positions. Most fights don't start with both people standing six feet apart wearing training gear with a referee. You might want to expand the horizons a bit when it comes to position and place.

4. Clothing. Ever been attacked in you bare foot in your Gi? Probably not. Might want to institute a 'street clothes' night. If you train military or Officers, get them in their gear. Get some shoes on while your at it.

5. Improvised weapons. There all around us. Do you train to use them? A pocket full of change or keys thrown in the BG's eyes. Grab a lamp of the night stand and put it upside his head. How about a knick-knack or chair? Look around you.

Seems to me I remember something about situational awareness/awareness of one's surroundings.

Things to think about for your next training session because your next session might be the one that preceeds a life or death assualt....

People normally teach the way they were taught. This can be good or bad. To me, it separates the leaders from the followers. Most anyone can simply regurgitate information they've learned to one extent or another. But this is where it can break down. For example, if someone is claiming to teach self-defense but has never been in a position to litmus test their techniques, and if no one in their lineage has either...how do you know if it will work against a real person who is violent and resisting? Answer...they don't.

So if a teacher is simply teaching theory instead of experience or tested material, it is the student that ultimately suffers. This is where sport training breaks down. Training in a controlled environment, against semi-resisting partners who have no intention of hurting you (or shouldn't) day after day in no way prepares you for reality. Unfortunately, many instructors aren't willing to step out of their comfort zone or their egos won't allow them to admit that they need to adjust their teaching method. And again, ultimately it is the student that suffers for their arrogance.

 

[Thousand Kicks]

I read through the posts above and basically agree with what you all are saying. But, I guess my question is more on the application/what do you all do in your dojang.

When there is mention of the effects of environment/terrain/improvised weapons. Do you hold self defense classes outdoors or other varied environmental settings?

When I ask about simulating the tension of a real life scenario, I am asking about a general methodology versus specific situations. Let's try to take an easy example.

Let's say the scenario is just defending a haymaker right hand punch. A simple defense might be to block, punch to the face, kick to groin, then escape. So you run through the drill a few times till everybody understands the idea of what you are trying to do. Now, there are many things that could change the way this plays out. At full speed, even blocking a haymaker could knock you off balance or even to the ground. So by changing the power of the strike, you can change the scenario. So, how do we get people to understand, in training, that even blocking a punch can feel like getting hit with a hammer?

I am not looking to nitpick anybody. I am looking for ways to better my training/instruction.

 

[dancingalone]

When I ask about simulating the tension of a real life scenario, I am asking about a general methodology versus specific situations.

This doesn't really get at your main question there, I think, but let me offer this thought. My belief is that you CANNOT simulate for every possible scenario at the same time and even if you could adding too many variables clouds the training and it makes it less likely for students to receive the benefit of each drill/training scenario that they should.

I try to keep things relatively simple with maybe 3 things at most to train at the same time. Like maybe shouting for help, power striking at close quarters, and then fleeing. So in this case, we get a guy padded up in the Redman and then have him seize the defender and try to pull her away with him. We assume the defender was successful in her drill if she gets up a loud 'Fire, fire - help' and then smashes the Redman in several key locations (while he is actively trying to abduct her) before disengaging and running away. In the next permutation of the exercise, we might dispense with the shouting for help part and assume the abductor is in a mounted position on the defender and thus the new addition to the drill is a sweep escape attempt. And so on.

Variations can be physical as you mentioned (adding a structural compromising event like blocking a heavy blow or having absorbed a big push), environmental like terrain, or tactical such as 1 or more attackers. We still try to keep the number of essential variables to be 3 at the most to make learning a more likely outcome and I do believe that is the intent of drilling to begin with, to offer simplified pattern recognition that with steady prolonged exposure will permit the individual to gain skill and become able to absorb more and more nuance if needed.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

When there is mention of the effects of environment/terrain/improvised weapons. Do you hold self defense classes outdoors or other varied environmental settings?

Dancingalone offers a good post above. My thoughts are to expose the student to likely situations. Yes, we train outdoors. Training should take place on stairwells, elevators, a parking lot or garage between two cars, inside a car, in an open doorway etc. These are places that real attacks occur in all the time. And by training in these environments quickly shows what can and cannot be done. It shows the limitations of a situation. It opens up possibilities as well. For example: A TKD student that can kick the top of a door and/or do a great spinning kick. Put him/her in street clothes, on aspalt (that may or may not be slippery), between a couple of parked cars. This student quickly finds out that kicking, at least the fancy, refined motor skill kicking isn't the best option. So a limitation is observed and noted. At the same time, he/she finds that a simple gross motor skilled sweep puts the attacker's head into the side of a large, heavy and immovable object i.e. the car and serves to help stop aggression. Thus something is learned for future possible use. At least if they find themselves in this or a similar situation...they been there already and done something that works. They aren't caught flat-footed trying to translate a technique done in a static environment (the school) to a dynamic situation.

Now we're not talking about actually putting a fellow students head into the side of a car. But certain high % movements can be done to a degree in the proper setting i.e. in between a couple of cars without damaging the students or the car(s). This can be taken inside where this situation is duplicated with an eye for student safety and then taken full force i.e. set up a limited movement area with pads set up to simulate user-unfriendnly objects like the side of a car, wall, mail box etc. Just takes a bit of imagination and is not only fun for the student but REALLY advances their training. Can you simulate being in an elevator? How about a hallway? Inside of a door (like you've answered the door and the bad guy is right there)? Lots of situations can be recreated inside of the school as well as actual training in those areas when available.

Dim light situations are a statistical probability. So turn down/out the lights from time to time. Induce stress by introducing stressors into the training. As an example, when combat shooting we run and do heavy exercises prior to the drill to get the blood pumping. Then we introduce additional stresses. If it is night or low light we'll pull up a cruiser right behind the shooter with lights blazing and siren at full wail. Or someone is shouting in your ear, or throwing something at you. Again just use your imagination to think of what types of stressors could be introduced to a scenario that are likely to happen. Sometimes it is something as simple as 'harsh' language that a student has to deal with. That is a real consideration and a pre-fight indicator. Do they fall apart if someone calls them a name? Do they over-react if their manhood is challenged? Good time to introduce de-escalation techniques. Not every scenario has to be an all out fight. How about giving the student the option of simply walking away. Or de-esculation? Or stun-n-run? Or maybe avoiding the whole thing. Sometimes we get so amped up we don't take the obvious solution like simply closing the door and locking it or putting a barrier between us and the knife-weilding thug.

Often times it is VERY benificial to video tape a person during a scenario for them to watch directly afterwards for visual feed back. What did they do right? What could they have done different, if anything?

Are they great kickers? Excellent! Now put the ladies in a dress and high heels and lets see how it works. Or the guys in tight jeans and they aren't warmed up or stretched out. Do we have street clothes night at least occasionally? Do we do our kicks on the grass or a sloping surface? Do we try our favorite hand techniques inside of the area of a phone booth? Do we start the scenario facing off with a 'bad guy' everytime or do we sometimes start at a postion of disadvantage? Try starting from the floor. After all, we could have slipped on a bananna peel or been knocked down before we knew the threat existed. Do we practice situational awareness? Do we teach things like pre-fight indicators i.e. breathng becomes heavier, fists start to clench, 1000 yard stare etc.

Just some things to toss out for consideration and a few hints on how to implement them into any training program.

 

[Manny]

:angel:

Motal Kombat.... Kato vs Clouseau......

 

[Manny]

When I teach self defense, one steps, three steps, hoshi sul or waht ever I alwasy make clear the students that those are drills, and not the real thing, that these drills are nice learning tools that can help some one, so we need to practice, practice and then practice again till the moves become second nature.

I try to keep things easy to teach and to learn and try to avoid super duper moves that in a hurry can be so clumsy that compromise you, so I adhere to the KISS principle.

In a real self defense I look a few things, a) distance is your best friend.-if the bad guy can grab you or hit you then you are safe, b) be aware of sorroundings (color code awareness), c) kick, stomp, tear,poke,bite,etc,etc viciusly d) run away.

Manny

 

[jks9199]

Rory Miller's One-Step exercises are good tools for practicing some of this. Essentially, they're kind of like doing a strobe-light effect for fighting. You move slow, one move at a time. It's not exactly A-B-A-B turn taking -- but it's one move. A initiates, B responds, A responds to B, B responds to A...

Other sources of ideas would be Training At the Speed of Life by Kenneth Murray, and a lot of Bruce Siddle's stuff. Peyton Quinn is another one to look at...

If you choose to do scenario training... take the time and do it right. Poorly structured and poorly conducted scenario training not only is poor training -- but can be very dangerous, too.

 

[Gorilla]

Kong Soo Do!!!! Holly cow!!!! I get back to you in a month!!!

 

[DennisBreene]

As many people have stated, you can't simulate all scenarios in the modern dojang. The risk of injury is probably too great. My grand master had extensive military experience in combat and I've noted several recurring themes in his method of training. This predates BJJ, MMA and other modalities, but for what it's worth. We occasionally trained in armor (kendo gear at the time, I know, I'm a dinosaur). It was instructive to be hit full force in the face with a haymaker and find yourself flying backward through the air. Our one step sparring and self defense techniques were simple, straight forward and versatile. The techniques were open ended "if you want to". By that I mean, after the initial block counter techniques, you were expected to continue your counter based on the resulting position/ situation of the opponent. This seemed to develop a flow of techniques that followed your opponent and was unscripted. We never learned technique no. 1, no. 2, etc. I'm convinced that while this helps the student remember a list of techniques, it puts a mental step into the sequence that can slow the response. I.e.,"what was technique #3?" when you should be reacting. In order to see all the techniques he wanted to see, he would simply tell us which response to use, or which or give us a menu of any acceptable response. If we repeated ourselves, so what? The object was to counter the attack. We practiced various attacks, including how to defend while sitting next to someone, or across a table. We practice sparring with more than one opponent to get a feel for situational awareness and endurance etc. Was it perfect, no. It wasn't marine basic training. It was a bunch of suburbanites who had never been in a fight in their lives, for the most part. Did I feel invulnerable? No. But I felt better equipped than I would have been without the training and I also knew to look for the out and escape. Over the years, I've found that LEO's in the classes have had much to offer with regards to acceptable force and discussing scenarios from real experience. Unless the students are interested in full contact training without the usual sport rules, I doubt you can make a street fighter out of a noncombatant. But you have to assess what you are trying to teach vs. what is safe and practical. I remember asking him, when we were learning tornado kicks, when I would ever use that in real life. His response was, probably never, but then again, it just might be the perfect thing sometime. The message was, don't limit yourself and don't over think it. BTW the only time in my life I've used my training has been when I slipped on ice and was able to fall without injury. Most of us train for the fight that will never come. And for the rare individual who needs it, I suspect you are better off talking in generalities. This includes running scenarios didactically. Discussing what kinds of responses to attempt against certain situations. Absolutes, like, don't ever let them get you into their vehicle etc. Train their brains as well as their hands and feet.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Kong Soo Do!!!! Holly cow!!!! I get back to you in a month!!!

Start it off slow. Could be as simple as turning down the lights in one training class and then running through various drills. Or maybe let everyone know that next Thursdays class is 'street clothes' night. Giving a student the job of role playing can not only provide immediate feedback for a scenario but is also a lot of fun and generates interest. Tell the role player what you want them to do ahead of time. And like I mentioned before, not every scenario is going to be a knock-down-drag-out fight. Does the 'victim' try to de-esculate the situation (if given the time and opportunity) or do they automatically drop down into a martial arts stance prepared for battle?

Just little things that can be tossed in over time. It makes the class interesting beyond the challenges of what the student is doing. Add stuff as you see the class(es) interest grows and tailor it to their needs/interest. That way they aren't overloaded, but rather get some real life application of what they've learned. Even if they're training for interests other than self defense, they can still benefit from occasional exposure to SD methodology. And it takes away nothing from the training itself.

Just some stuff that's worked for us over the years.

 

[Rumy73]

Ksd takes an intensely scientific approach to sd, which Leo folks really need. The rest of us should take some pages from it. Street clothes, limited spaces, lighting, trying to verbally defuse, and when fighting, using simple attacks and defenses. We should incorporate these elements.

 

[Earl Weiss]

Another helpful scenario is the "Surprise Backup" for the attacker. Lots of stories around here lately where the bystanders came to the aid of a victim only to have the attacker's backup suddenly appear.