Reality Based Instructors

[MJS]

We are, during the course of our discussion, talking about well known Martial Artists such as Bruce Lee, the Gracies/Machados, as well as many of the Kenpo Insts. that are out there.

There are, however, many others out there, that dont seem to be talked about as much. This might be due to the fact that nobody knows about them, or that they just choose not to advertise themselves as much as some of the others do.

You have such people such as Sammy Franco, Peyton Quinn, Marc "Animal" Macyoung and Geoff Thompson. Upon looking at the web sites of these individuals, they seem to pretty much teach a very simple, to the point system. The one thing that I have noticed is that they dont seem to be bound by any traditions, such as the ones that you would find in some of the other arts. Rather than teach fancy moves, they seem to be more focused on the reality of a street fight.

Again, as I have said before, we all train for different reasons, so something like this, might not be for everybody. But there are those people that are looking for something like this. I'm not an authority of these people, but I have looked at their web sites, as well as purchased some books put out by them.

Just wanted to see what everyone else thought!

Mike

 

[Karazenpo]

Yes, Mike, I know what you mean. Many times people lead you to believe that they are studying for another reason but just check out all these forums on the net, they all talk about their techniques as working on the street. There is more talk about self defense techniques than tournament sparring or anything else for that matter. My only complaint is this......we are always hearing about the 'McDojos' on these forums but how about the 'Dojo Warriors'-those who fight in theory only and confine their only exploits to within the dojo. Now, don't get me wrong, that's all fine and good for we wouldn't want martial artists going out on the town looking for fights but if you wish to really know what works and what doesn't listen to those that have been their and done that. Just like tournament karate. Should I want some tips on today's tournament fighting I would humble myself and go to those who currently compete and win and learn from them. That is their forte and I respect that but half the time you ask certain people on these forums who are arguing what works in reality when was the last time they used their art on the street, they never answer you! I think one can learn a lot from those martial artists that you mentioned in street survival and sometimes people seem to forget why its called the 'MARTIAL' arts! It's all about reality training-Street Survival!

 

[ryanhall]

I've personally trained with Sammy Franco and Rich Dimitri. They're both top notch when it comes to their field. Very skilled and knowledgable. Geoff Thompson has also been highly recommended to me by a few people, including Rich and Sammy.

I've also trained in WW II combatives. Basic, offensive, and brutal. Good stuff. Carl Cestari is probably the foremost instructor of the system. Jim Grover (a.k.a. Kelley McCann) also teaches along similar lines, but adds some elements of Thai, boxing, etc.

I personally feel that RBSD/combatives goes far beyond the scope of every marial arts school that I have ever seen. The personal experience of the instructors (the ones that I have trained with) is evident in their teaching. Both physical and psychological realms are covered very well--no fluff, no b.s., just to the point SD training.

That said, I don't find anything wrong with martial arts training for other reasons, but it does bother me when MMA/trad ma instructors claim to teach real world self-defense, often without possessing an understanding of what it entails.

 

[MJS]

Thanks for the great posts guys! I hope that others continue to give their feedback as well.

Ryanhall- Yeah, Sammys stuff is awesome!! I bought 2 of his books and was very impressed. I'm sure he's great to train with in person as well.

Mike

 

[MA-Caver]

I first took up MA (Kung-fu) because I was skinny, little and I was just about everyone in my jr. high's token whipping boy. Having a stressful day? Take it out on Ralph! Got damned tired of it. So I wasn't going to take it anymore. So I learned self defense for the real world.
Later as the beauty and harmony that I found with my continual MA training and practices I was able to study the arts for the spiritual side and enhancing the inner knowledge of SELF. Realizing my potential as a human being, as a martial artist. Something that continues to this day.
But reality is still there and while I learn beautiful moves, forms, movements and what not. I'll learn it if it will help enhance the SELF but I will not use it in a REAL fight. I'll get my butt kicked or killed. So as Bruce Lee taught about JKD: use what is useful and throw-away what is useless (paraphrasing). Which is what I do in a REAL fight.
The harmonizing stuff I'll reserve for when I'm at home practicing and relaxing or working out. But I will continue to learn techniques that will put away my real-life antagonist(s) quickly and effectively with minimal hurt to myself as possible.
Life's too short to let punks kick you around.

 

[Kempojujutsu]

Hock Hochheim is another good instructor on realistic training
Bob

 

[Mike Att]

I train under Ralph Grasso, who is an instructor under Cestari and I have found that the Cestari material blends and compliments very nicely with Sammy Franco's and Rich Dimitri's material.

In terms of Sammy Franco's stuff, I personally like his "First Strike" tape and "Widowmaker" (Webbing/Razing) programs the best.

I think Rich's stuff is great, as is Geoff Thompson's material.

I have not heard good things about Marc Macyoung and Tony Blauer's stuff is alright, but I find his material (SPEAR) too defensive and him way too boring.

 

[hapki-bujutsu]

being a combat artist is hard. When I started teaching my own art my past instructors disowned me for diluting the arts. Half my students are police officers. I feel i am doing good. I have been in the martial arts for 26 years. All i did was take what i beleived to be the best of what i new and scale it down and mix it togeather. It started out as me and a friend and the next thing I new people where calling me at home asking for lessons. I never even sought out to be an instructor. One of my former teachers(a man i respected more then anything) called me said I was teaching people to be bullies and terrorist! Untill all martial artist stand togeather combat,sport,tradtional,internal. The martial arts will never be what it could be. We all have gifts. mine was fighting. Everthing I did I was bad at except fighting. I went threw a stage between 12 and 17 that that was all i did. what is wrong with me taking my odd gift and using it to help people? There are alot of good combat arts out there. Don't take what you here about them as word. Check them out for yourself.

 

[Karazenpo]

Hapki Bujutsu, keep up the good work. You're doing nothing wrong. I've been in the arts for over 30 years, my first kempo instructor was exactly like you and I learned much from him and still train with him 'til this day. I grew up hang'n on the streets with the guys & I, too learned some valuable lessons there. My current primary instructor has an extremely street-wise background supplemented by a carreer in law enforcement as I do. I take his training as gospel, because he not only talks the talk but he walks the walk. These are the people you want to study under if you can or at least one of their students. For they don't train on theory only, people like you have been there and done that-giving much credibility to what you teach and how you train. Fine job if you ask me! Respectfully submitted, Shihan Joe Shuras

 

[crouton]

professor david james, an excellent realistic self defense instructor

 

[hapki-bujutsu]

Thanks kara. You managed to say just what I needed to here.

 

[loki09789]

What in an instructor's curriculum/system distinguishes it as either an 'artistic/traditional art' or a 'self defense art'? Is it the testing environment, rank requirements, discussions on state penal/use of force laws...?

I am a self defense focused martial artist with experience in FMA/Kenpo along with Military/LEO experience. I like to blend the instruction to include the military/leo scenario training to give students a reference. I think it helps them understand how each technique (whether hand to hand or dealing with verbal attacks, reporting to the police or where/when/how to run away) fits into a 'real' situation. I am also rethinking the rank requirements to make it a requirement for students to know and explain/apply certain mental techniques/skills (report writing, Kim's game for environmental awareness...) as well as physical techniques.

Paul Martin

 

[Karazenpo]

Paul, Imho, you can teach a traditional art that is also totally self defense orientated. Technically, the term "traditional' just means something that has been around for a while and practiced by many, in other words, time proven and has a following. In the beginning a system like Kajukenbo or American Kenpo was not yet accepted as a traditional art but technically, at one time, by definition, neither was Shotokan, until it caught on and got some time under its belt. Tradition is just a 'test of time'. It's good you also teach the legalities of the use of force and how the student should express themselves (written reports) to the authorites in case of an incident. Students should be taught, like police, in the escalation and de-escalation or as we say the use of force continuem. Physically, contact is an important aspect of reality training. A boxer's reaction to a punch in the nose is a punch back, so you want to make sure your students will react the same way. And don't avoid grappling, some fights do go the ground whether you want them to or not. Sometimes, you may take it to the ground. For example: You clash with someone on the street who appears to be equal or superior to you with his hands, you suddenly drop down into a single or double leg takedown and quickly move into a choker/sleeper submission. What you did is you took him out of his realm and to another area, one you hope he is not as skillfull in but you are! Smart fighting. Let's face it, if you went up against a Korean kicking champion and you are an American Kenpo man you're not going to try to out kick him, you're going to move inside and work him over with your hands, right? Stamina is also needed for reality training but aerobics is only a part of it. Fighting is anerobic, so some type of interval training, wind sprints, whatever, have to be added. Aerobics alone won't do the job. Just look at the body of a long distance runner (aerobic) and compare it to a sprinter (anerobic). You need the strong, explosive endurance of the sprinter to win a good street fight. I'm sure much of what I hit on you already know with your background but maybe this will help re-enforce your beliefs. Respectfully, Shihan Joe Shuras

 

[arnisador]

I did a Geoff Thompson book review:
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=183127#post183127

 

[clapping_tiger]

Tony Blauer is pretty good from what I heard. Although I have not trained with him, my instructor and another student at the school who is a police officer have, they are working on becoming certified as instructors in his program. And they have worked some of the material with us. It is pretty good stuff.

 

[kenpo12]

I'm always a bit suspect about "reality based" systems. The reason is that most of the so-called reality based systems were made up or designed by people who trained in traditional systems to begin with. For me no training system is real, training is training and real is real. I think there are some systems that that are better for reality than others but as long as the techniques makes sense, the individiual is going to make their reality not the system.
I've seen some of Jeff Thompsons videos and I liked them and I'm sure many of the other people mentioned above have some great ideas and training methods. I also agree with evaluation and evolution of techniques and training methods, but I also think that learning from a traditional system to start out with can be benificial before moving on "reality based" training.



:soapbox:

P.S. When I say traditional system, that includes Western Boxing, Judo, Jiu Jitsu (Japanese or BJJ), Karate, or any other other art that has been around and proved it's worth at one time or another.

 

[TonyM.]

That was one of the most intelligent posts I've read in a while. Thanks.

 

[MJS]

Originally posted by kenpo12
I'm always a bit suspect about "reality based" systems. The reason is that most of the so-called reality based systems were made up or designed by people who trained in traditional systems to begin with. For me no training system is real, training is training and real is real. I think there are some systems that that are better for reality than others but as long as the techniques makes sense, the individiual is going to make their reality not the system.
I've seen some of Jeff Thompsons videos and I liked them and I'm sure many of the other people mentioned above have some great ideas and training methods. I also agree with evaluation and evolution of techniques and training methods, but I also think that learning from a traditional system to start out with can be benificial before moving on "reality based" training.



:soapbox:

P.S. When I say traditional system, that includes Western Boxing, Judo, Jiu Jitsu (Japanese or BJJ), Karate, or any other other art that has been around and proved it's worth at one time or another.

Good point! I'm sure many of these guys have trained in other systems prior to coming up with their own brand of fighting. Seems to me though, that they took out some of the stuff and kept the things that appear to be the most practical.

Example- things they took out: Kata, fixed stances with little or no movement.

Things they kept or added: Your most effective strikes such as elbows, knees. Added better movement and aliveness.

Mike

 

[loki09789]

Karazenpo,

I was honestly asking for feedback with the question in the last post. I was not implying that 'traditional' automatically meant outmoded or unrealistic.

The benefits of traditional training can not be dismissed, and IMO essential to developing a solid base for reality application. Focusing on discipline, athletic fitness, good moral conduct not to mention the classic technique aquisition formula of form, power, focus and speed all establish a solid foundation of mental and physical toughness and bearing.

I guess the traditional school that I have in mind is the local TKD/Karate school that uses the Olympic certificates coaches/referees on it's advertising, competes in form and point tournaments and caters to the 'family' market exclusively.

These types of schools pass on some of the finest personal development benefits of martial arts and make work outs fun for someone who might not go to a gym.

But I have rarely, if ever seen them have classes - not just lectures or mentionings during a class but classes, on environemntal awareness, local and state use of force laws, environmental/improvised tools, force continuum or any topics outside of technical perfection and athletic fitness to perform techniques under stressful conditions (sparring/self defense techniques).

Using the solid base of 'traditional' training - within this context - is a good platform to include the other topics that would build it into a self defense based program.

Paul martin

 

[kenpo12]

Seems to me though, that they took out some of the stuff and kept the things that appear to be the most practical.

MJS,

But my point is that they kept in what seemed most practical for them. There are alot of moves that may not seem practical to you but I may be able to use them successfully and that's part of my own journey in the martial arts. But if someone else cuts down what they learned and then I cut down what I learned from them, pretty soon you have a system that doesn't have much left. I know not all systems and styles are built the same but I like to have the ability to study a whole style and take out what's practical for me. If I teach, I teach everything I was taught and let my student decide what works for them with some additional guidance from me. I have nothing againse "reality based" arts but I think someone really needs to spend at least 5 years or so in a "traditional" system before they branch out and look to a reality based instructor. That's just my two cents.