Ideal Self-defense school?

GreenieMeanie

Black Belt
Joined
Apr 16, 2021
Messages
536
Reaction score
155
What do you guys think about this?

Checklist for a great self-defense school:

-Instructors crossed-trained between different systems

-Sparring sessions in class

-Encouragement [towards experienced students] to bring in material that might add value to the classes

-Covers material in terms of principles, not adherence to perfecting specific techniques

-Classes focusing on martial arts fundamentals, including but not limited to MMA, FMA, and Silat

-Retention curriculum for all relevant weapons

-Instructors are knowledgeable in local use of force law

-Instructors either have experience in Human Behavioral Pattern Recognition and Analysis, or at least provide relevant resources like Left of Bang.

-Anti-surveillance and deescalation drills: acknowledging and politely dismissing potential predators

-Covers anatomy of criminal ambush

-Does Fence drills (Geoff Thompson)

-Covers the difference between social and predatory violence, what it takes to avoid either

-Covers basic firearms manipulation, movement, and mid-fight footwork, SIRT if they have the budget, and brings in specialized instructors

-Revolver work in clinch

-Does pig or meat labs to demonstrate weapon effectiveness

-Seminars on how criminals procure/manufacture/carry weapons

-Stop the Bleed/TCC curriculum

-Runs full scenario drills, testing students ability to appropriately use force or deescalate, and talk to authorities under pressure post-incident

-Brings in specialists who can cover anti-abduction

-Discusses physical security and brings in specialists who can teach lockpicking/entry

-Open gym hours for practicing absolutely anything, whether thats sparring or study groups
 
Lockpicking is fun, but I don't think it's particularly relevant to self-defense.

The firearms material would primarily be useful to those who own/carry a gun. For reasons Bill noted in a recent thread, I'm not convinced that this is a best practice from a self-defense standpoint for most people even for those who live in a jurisdiction where it is legal. (I can see it being useful for those who do have a good reason to carry.)

I doubt that anti-abduction training would be particularly relevant for the self-defense needs of most people. But maybe the material might overlap with other aspects of self-defense. (The old never let a criminal take you to a secondary location principle.)

The scenario training (including evasion, de-escalation, talking to police afterwards, etc) can be very valuable, but only if you have people who know how to do it right. I've been through a bit of that and the most enlightening part of the experience is learning how easy it can be to screw things up and get yourself in worse trouble. If you don't have someone running the show who knows how to set you up to fail in realistic ways, then it becomes just fantasy role-playing.

Most students of martial arts, whether they are training for self-defense, sport, entertainment, or cultural reasons, only have so many hours per week that they will show up to class. You have enough material listed that I can see students getting spread too thin and not getting good at any of it if they are trying to learn all of it at once. It would be cool to have a school where all of that knowledge was available, but it might work better to have a more focused core curriculum and introduce the other aspects as special study sessions as the students progress.
 
Isnt this the syllabus from the School from Spies?
 
Lockpicking is fun, but I don't think it's particularly relevant to self-defense.

The firearms material would primarily be useful to those who own/carry a gun. For reasons Bill noted in a recent thread, I'm not convinced that this is a best practice from a self-defense standpoint for most people even for those who live in a jurisdiction where it is legal. (I can see it being useful for those who do have a good reason to carry.)

I doubt that anti-abduction training would be particularly relevant for the self-defense needs of most people. But maybe the material might overlap with other aspects of self-defense. (The old never let a criminal take you to a secondary location principle.)

The scenario training (including evasion, de-escalation, talking to police afterwards, etc) can be very valuable, but only if you have people who know how to do it right. I've been through a bit of that and the most enlightening part of the experience is learning how easy it can be to screw things up and get yourself in worse trouble. If you don't have someone running the show who knows how to set you up to fail in realistic ways, then it becomes just fantasy role-playing.

Most students of martial arts, whether they are training for self-defense, sport, entertainment, or cultural reasons, only have so many hours per week that they will show up to class. You have enough material listed that I can see students getting spread too thin and not getting good at any of it if they are trying to learn all of it at once. It would be cool to have a school where all of that knowledge was available, but it might work better to have a more focused core curriculum and introduce the other aspects as special study sessions as the students progress.
Well, the point isnt to be good at lockpicking. The point is to get students to think in terms of access points, and what it takes to break and enter. Or apply the knowledge to break down a door, in order to save someones life.

Its the same thing for the rest of the more specialized concepts, get students to look at the world in terms of tool concealment, social engineering, weapons of opportunity, and choke points.

I agree, that the further down the rabbit hole you get, its more for advanced students.

The way an old instructor of mine would do it, is take aside the advanced students during a regular class, and show them something else, while the others focus on the primary curriculum of the class. Then special classes for advanced students on particular days,
 
All that sounds all well and fine until you try to get people to pay for all that.
You might find a very large discrepancy between your dream class (which is what this seems to be) and what the public at large are willing to attend and pay for.
I heard a statistic that 85% of firearms owners in the US are not interested in taking any type of training, other than what is required to get their license.
You could have the perfect curriculum but good luck paying the rent with it.
 
Checklist for a great self-defense school:

The teacher should also teach his students how to kneel down in front of their opponent and beg for mercy.

beg_for_mercy.jpg
 
All that sounds all well and fine until you try to get people to pay for all that.
You might find a very large discrepancy between your dream class (which is what this seems to be) and what the public at large are willing to attend and pay for.
I heard a statistic that 85% of firearms owners in the US are not interested in taking any type of training, other than what is required to get their license.
You could have the perfect curriculum but good luck paying the rent with it.
To my knowledge, Advanced Self Defense concepts in Upland California comes close. Their Instagram is interesting.

Thing is, most people who are learning to fight or carry, know very little about it. They learn some Krav Maga, MMA, take CCW and safety classes, maybe read a book, but that is the extent of their awareness. I remember some years ago talking randomly to an NRA rep. We spoke about the amount of training it takes to truly be ready with a firearm. He said most people arent there yet.
 
What's the difference between a school that teaches fighting vs. a school that teach self-defense?

People may say that fight may have legal issues. But fight in the ring won't have any legal issue.
 
Competition is safe and fun. Street fight is not. There is nothing wrong to train for competition and not train for street fight.

If you train for competition, the word self-defense will have no meaning.
 
What do you guys think about this?

Checklist for a great self-defense school:

-Instructors crossed-trained between different systems

-Sparring sessions in class

-Encouragement [towards experienced students] to bring in material that might add value to the classes

-Covers material in terms of principles, not adherence to perfecting specific techniques

-Classes focusing on martial arts fundamentals, including but not limited to MMA, FMA, and Silat

-Retention curriculum for all relevant weapons

-Instructors are knowledgeable in local use of force law

-Instructors either have experience in Human Behavioral Pattern Recognition and Analysis, or at least provide relevant resources like Left of Bang.

-Anti-surveillance and deescalation drills: acknowledging and politely dismissing potential predators

-Covers anatomy of criminal ambush

-Does Fence drills (Geoff Thompson)

-Covers the difference between social and predatory violence, what it takes to avoid either

-Covers basic firearms manipulation, movement, and mid-fight footwork, SIRT if they have the budget, and brings in specialized instructors

-Revolver work in clinch

-Does pig or meat labs to demonstrate weapon effectiveness

-Seminars on how criminals procure/manufacture/carry weapons

-Stop the Bleed/TCC curriculum

-Runs full scenario drills, testing students ability to appropriately use force or deescalate, and talk to authorities under pressure post-incident

-Brings in specialists who can cover anti-abduction

-Discusses physical security and brings in specialists who can teach lockpicking/entry

-Open gym hours for practicing absolutely anything, whether thats sparring or study groups
Sounds like it would be a lot of fun. I wouldnt mind checking that out.
 
Competition is safe and fun. Street fight is not. There is nothing wrong to train for competition and not train for street fight.

If you train for competition, the word self-defense will have no meaning.
Beyond the transferrable skills from competition, it is otherwise irrelevant in this thread.
 
To my knowledge, Advanced Self Defense concepts in Upland California comes close. Their Instagram is interesting.
A similar school is C-Tac, Student University Courses Civilian Tactical Coach.


Thing is, most people who are learning to fight or carry, know very little about it. They learn some Krav Maga, MMA, take CCW and safety classes, maybe read a book, but that is the extent of their awareness. I remember some years ago talking randomly to an NRA rep. We spoke about the amount of training it takes to truly be ready with a firearm. He said most people arent there yet.
A good self-defense school should include clearly identifying/teaching: concepts, the elements of a fight, skills and training to develop fighting skills.
 
Beyond the transferrable skills from competition, it is otherwise irrelevant in this thread.
There is nothing wrong for a MA school to teach "sport fight". The reasons are simple:

- You can have sport fight tomorrow if you want to. You can't have street fight anytime you want.
- You can have fun in sport fight. You won't have fun in street fight.
- You won't have legal issue in sport fight. You may have legal issue in street fight.
- Less chance to get hurt in sport fight than in street fight.
- In sport fight, you don't have to talk about self-defense, de-escalation, run away, ...
- You attack first is normal in sport fight.
- ...
 
There is nothing wrong for a MA school to teach "sport fight"
Nothing wrong with that. Many schools are geared towards competitive sport MA. Oftentimes though, this can mean less time spent on close-in self-defense against non-MA sport attackers. Luckily there are other schools that emphasize this and down-play the sport aspect. Some schools approach MA as exercise. Others have a balanced approach. IMO, such things are more important than the "style" for most potential students considering what school to join.
 
A balanced approach is best.
 
What do you guys think about this?

Checklist for a great self-defense school:

-Instructors crossed-trained between different systems

-Sparring sessions in class

-Encouragement [towards experienced students] to bring in material that might add value to the classes

-Covers material in terms of principles, not adherence to perfecting specific techniques

-Classes focusing on martial arts fundamentals, including but not limited to MMA, FMA, and Silat

-Retention curriculum for all relevant weapons

-Instructors are knowledgeable in local use of force law

-Instructors either have experience in Human Behavioral Pattern Recognition and Analysis, or at least provide relevant resources like Left of Bang.

-Anti-surveillance and deescalation drills: acknowledging and politely dismissing potential predators

-Covers anatomy of criminal ambush

-Does Fence drills (Geoff Thompson)

-Covers the difference between social and predatory violence, what it takes to avoid either

-Covers basic firearms manipulation, movement, and mid-fight footwork, SIRT if they have the budget, and brings in specialized instructors

-Revolver work in clinch

-Does pig or meat labs to demonstrate weapon effectiveness

-Seminars on how criminals procure/manufacture/carry weapons

-Stop the Bleed/TCC curriculum

-Runs full scenario drills, testing students ability to appropriately use force or deescalate, and talk to authorities under pressure post-incident

-Brings in specialists who can cover anti-abduction

-Discusses physical security and brings in specialists who can teach lockpicking/entry

-Open gym hours for practicing absolutely anything, whether thats sparring or study groups
It all sound pretty good, but that list is a BIG ask for any school/instructor.
 

Latest Discussions

Back
Top