The problems with a "streetfighter" mindset
I'd like to talk about the distinctions between an athletic training model and mindset, and a "streetfighting" model and mindset. And I do believe it's important for a number of reasons to make a certain distinction between the two. That distinction, and the reasons why it's a healthy one to make, are what this thread is about.
Now before anyone uses this post or thread as an opportunity for personal insults; or a fallacious either or argument we need to be very, very clear as to the content of what's being discussed.
When we began talking about differences in approaches to anything there is potential for people to take such discussions on a personal level, due to lack of understanding regarding the conversation, or a previous personal agenda, etc. Nothing in the below written posts is personal, period.
If you DON'T find the distinctions to be true in your own case then there is obviously no reason to view them as personal. And if you DO find that some of the ideas may hit close to home, then it's also a very positive thing, and a chance for learning. So in either case the ideas presented below should be seen as the laying out of a roadmap that is intended to bring positive results into peoples lives. But in either case nothing being written or spoken is about a specific persona, on any level.
Secondly, discussing different mentalities in training and life is never an either or proposition. Although that may seem obvious, many people have trouble with that concept so it's always best to lay it out front of the discussion.
When it comes to "street" training, combatives, or RBSD, there seems to exist a fallacious argument. The old street" versus "sport" training argument. The false premise being it must be one or the other, that the training methods are mutually exclusive.
This is not only an incorrect assumption; it also goes against the long and colorful history of American "combatives" or "self defense" Instructors, of previous eras. A brief look into their backgrounds, and minimum amount of research will tell the tale.
In addition, anyone with even a minor bit of information about SBGi knows we offer many RBSD programs. Including programs for Law Enforcement, and including all possible "foul" tactics, and their functional counters. So again, to suggest anything written below paints ALL Instructors who teach RBSD in a particular light is simply not logical, nor factual.
Finally, the politics and gossip of Martial Arts holds zero interest for me, or I think anyone in our Organization. But if you do have any personal issues, feel free to contact me direct, or in person. It's the approach I take, and the one that is always the most appropriate. As for discussions online, they should always be kept to training methods and ideas. Now there are two separate issues with reality based self defense.
The first is functionality. And as people will be theoretically relying on the information and training offered to save their life, or the lives of others, this point is critical. There are a ton myths offered when it comes to self defense and 'streetfighting'. Some of these seem harmless, and may be when it's simply two adolescents or grown men getting together to click sticks, or memorize patterns.
But when it comes to people who may actually need to use such information, police officers, etc, in order to be able to go home to their family safely at night, such misinformation, and perpetuation of myths can be deadly. So functionality in what is being taught is critical in RBSD.
When it comes to weapons this was addressed to a degree in the previous posts here:
Regards the stick fighting, to actually be able to fight with a stick one would have to start by throwing out the majority of the "Kali" that is typically taught, and almost all the 'drills', which are little more then two man Kata which teach one what not to do. And even then, left with functional, powerful strikes, and realistic methods of defense, the ground will still often occur, and ko's will not always be easy.
As far as defending against a knife, again it can be, and is done. But one would have to throw out the majority of the "Kali" empty hand tapi-tapi type drills taught, and go to a control position such as offered by Karl in the STAB program, Jerry with the RedZone, and Burton's two on 1 baseball grip variations.
Coincidentally I had a conversation yesterday regarding a police officer who had been stabbed multiple times by large mental patient on a call a few days ago. Apparently the officer is ok, but he was surprised to relate that he didn't realize his opponent even had a knife until he had been stuck several times, because to him at that time it felt like 'a minor strike'. That seems to be fairly typical. It also has to be why they attack the way they do with a shank in prison. . .having realized this reality a LONG time ago.
On a positive note that department will now be working STAB with Paul Sharp.
In Jerry Wetzel's Red Zone video there is a great section where Jerry's wife, who is a practicing MD, goes into detail regarding the bodies actual process for going into shock. And much of the mythology of knife fighting is cleared up there as well. I'd highly recommend that video for anyone serious on this subject.
Another good example that clearly demonstrates these ideas are written in our street vs sports section here, on the website.
"One happened about a year ago, I'm walking up to a father/son domestic when the son steps out onto the porch where dad is sitting on the stoop and hits dad full tilt with a golf club dead on in the throat. Dad does a weird squeal and jumps up, pulls knife and goes after the kid.
What was that acronym about throat-eyes-solar plexus-nads-knees?
Somebody should have told those guy's when you get hit in a pressure point you go down no questions asked...."
There are many first hand experienced related such as this, elsewhere on our website.
So it's obvious that there is a lot of mythology when it comes to RBSD, particularly (but not exclusive to) the JKD family. And although it may seem harmless enough, when it comes to serious issues, such as Law Enforcement or personal self defense, it's anything but harmless.
However, there is another, deeper, issue I would like to talk about that I feel is even more important when it comes to this subject.
The most important point in my opinion is the mind set that exists behind the eyes of someone who finds themselves attracted to the entire "streetfighting", biting, killer instinct, paradigm that exists, and is marketed to with some instructors. If one looks honestly at it then it becomes pretty obvious that it is really about fear, paranoia, insecurity, and personal guilt.
What does that statement mean?
It's very simple. If you market yourself, your school, or your products as a "streetfighting" system, then a certain group of individuals will find themselves drawn to that product for a variety of reasons. Many of which are unhealthy.
Does that sentence mean all Instructors who teach such things are filled with fear, paranoia, insecurity, and personal guilt!?
Of course not.
Does that mean that ALL RBSD schools cater to such cliental?
Of course not.
Does that mean everyone drawn to such marketing is similar to the people described above?
Of course not.
Let me insert a section of an article by me that was written for realfighting.com on this very subject that I believe explains what the above sentence means very clearly.
(Psychological fear is a completely different animal, and sadly it is incredibly common within the "combatives", or modern self-defense crowds. Psychological fear is actually a form of paranoia, and it's created by one's internal fears of inadequacy on either a physical, emotional, or mental level.
When a male (in particular) thinks himself to be inadequate there is a strong feeling of sadness and anger. And just as aggression is the other side of the same coin as fear, sadness is the other side of the same coin as anger. If one doesn't address this internal sadness in a very real way then it will often manifest itself in the form of anger. I think as males we are more prone to adopt and embrace the anger, at least within our public persona, as opposed to the sadness, because for some misguided reason we have been taught that anger is more "masculine" then it's equal, sadness.
One would think that by training in "street" orientated martial arts, or combatives that emphasize the self defense aspects of martial arts, to the exclusion of what they deem to be "sports" training, that these types of individuals would gain more confidence, more peace, more happiness, and become more comfortable within them as their skills at 'self-defense' grew. Unfortunately, it has been my experience that the opposite seems to be true. Individuals that come to strictly "street" orientated martial arts, that were already prone to feelings of inadequacy, shame, physiological fear, and paranoia tend to have those qualities magnified by such training, rather then eased.
I wouldn't ask anyone to take my word for it with that assessment. Instead I would suggest one visit the nearest "mercenary" convention, combatives or "street" martial arts forums, or speak with these individuals in person. This sadness, anger, and immense fear is palpable when you are forced to spend anytime around these types of individuals. Try reading the posts at the "street" forums. Many tend to read like angry notes from disgruntled 13-year-old boys. There is talk of "tearing out the mo-fo's eyes", biting, and various vicious things that can be done to the attackers. The posts speak to an intense anger and fear in the writers, and sadly, the Instructors of such curriculums cater to this need by exploiting their target audiences obvious weakness, and emotional frailty.
These same people could begin to realize a much deeper sense of peace, well being, and level of personal safety if they were instead steered away from the geeky-ness of the combatives crowd and into a more contact orientated, healthy, and sane sports environment, with "alive-arts" such as boxing, Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, wrestling, Muay thai, judo, and other "sports" systems. In that type of "alive-training" they will not only gain real skill within a particular delivery system of fighting, they will also achieve a higher level of personal conditioning, become used to a higher level of contact, understand exactly what an aggressive, resisting attacker feels like, and learn to perform under a certain amount of stress. They will also gain a real sense of peace that comes with understanding how to actually move the human body in effective ways against aggressive and dangerous attackers.)
Now, does that above set of paragraphs mean that Matt Thornton is saying ALL RBSD Instructors are doing a disservice?
No, of course not.
Does that above set of paragraphs mean that Matt Thornton doesn't believe that "When your life is in jeopardy most tend to resort to the foul tactics if it determines life or death or just plain survival." .
Of course not!
As stated above we have a heavy curriculum of RBSD, and LE training within our own organization. Which covers the gamut of all 'foul' tactics, as well as their counters. And as stated at the top of this thread, when it comes to real life self defense, FUNCTIONALITY is more important to us then anything else. Anyone who has attended any of the self defense training courses, or Law Enforcement program can testify to the functional nature, and mandatory testing of all our tactics, techniques, and delivery systems. It's not open to speculation.
So what's the point of bringing this subject up?
Simple, because I have found that the same types of people who (may often) be drawn to more violent, "streetfighting" type images, will actually make great leaps in personal development and well being when they switch to a healthier athletic format, and simply let go of the whole 'killer' instinct, bite, kill 'image/mentality'.
I remember a seminar Years ago where Rickson Gracie was asked this exact same thing about eye gouging and the "street". He related that although he had to fight in the street and defend himself many times as he was growing up in Brazil, that even thinking about gouging peoples eyeballs, or biting them, is not something he would ever want to start doing. The thought itself is unhealthy to a human, and Jiu-Jitsu is supposed to be about health and well being.
I couldn't agree more.
I am also sometimes asked by RBSD Instructors why we don't place a heavy emphasis on advertising the "streetfighting", or RBSD aspects of what we do, if in deed we do train this way at our Gyms. (The fact that we do train for self defense becomes self evident to anyone who ever trains at any of our Gyms) . The answer is we do market that way when it's appropriate, but we choose not to emphasize that aspect to the public at large for the reasons listed in this article.
The athletic mentality, method, and mindset, is HEALTHIER for all human beings. And it's also more functional on a very practical level. It's healthier for adults, it's better for children, and it's just better for human beings in general.
Especially in terms of mental well being.
And this is why we steer people into that area whenever possible.
Cheers. - Matt Thornton
