Firm ground

 Okay, this fill be the final post (think of it as a het-trick) on the role of awareness and alertness in the grand scheme of personal protection...for now at least. The previous two articles touched upon some of the basic tenets of what is desirable and what is not in that regard. This time I'd like to point you to a great source for further study.

David W I Wilson's work From The Base Up! is a fairly recent book, and a pretty damn good one if I may say! From the very beginning, it is absolutely thrilling to see aa book whose cover page lets you know exactly what to expect. Specifically, taken together its title and subtitle - Building foundational skills for situational awareness, strategy, and self-defense - very aptly describe what the content is all about.

The aspect of this piece of work that makes me like it so much is that the author gives a very comprehensive, yet practical overview of what is a rather complex subject. He approaches the presentation from several angles, addressing the building elements of situational awareness, strategy and goals, willpower, context, tactics, force matrix, intent, structure, breathing, efficiency of motion, effectiveness, as well as practical application beyond combat. As you can see, it is an integrative approach that includes both "software" and "hardware" skills and discusses how they work together in striving for the optimal outcome. 

Remember how I said it was practical? Well, that is possible the strongest feature of Wilson's book. Whereas most other works on this topic tend to stay in the predominantly theoretical domain, spanning from the unnecessarily burdened neuropsychological treatises to cheap lip service pamphlets that boil down to "trust your gut" level of advice, From The Base Up actually deliver a well laid out progression of explanations, accompanied by actionable steps. It means the reader is given concrete advice and various exercises to better absorb the content, i.e. make the material useful in the real life. 

Now, be aware (excuse teh pun) that it is still not what most people would consider a handbook, because the subject matter is highly intangible and dependent on the user's individual circumstances and needs. However, it is exactly this that makes Wilson's book impressive - to my mind he hits the sweet spot between the education (underlying theoretical principles) and instruction (the practical drills/exercises), so that the readers who take it seriously could reap benefits that reach beyond instant solutions to problems they may not even have. 

Ultimately, a good understanding and "embodiment" of the material presented should make one much better equipped to recognize, prevent, avoid and/or manage all kinds of conflict situations in such a way to also prevent and avoid as many of the negative consequences (psychological, physical, social, legal...) as possible. 

With that in mind, it is hard to imagine a better investment in one's personal safety. 

Real deal kung fu!

 As most of my readers/followers are aware, one of my main arguments in view of one's combative effectiveness, provided that is the reason they are training at all, is primarily related to their training methodology. In short, what you train in terms of technical arsenal is less important than how you approach that practice. Consequently, the problems that a lot of traditional martial art exponents face in attempting to use their technical toolbox in dynamic, non-cooperative sparring or competition stem from the training methods that don't fit that goal. 

But it doesn't have to be like that! Even what is typically considered the most exotic among traditional martial systems, i.e. the so-called internal kung fu systems, can offer viable solutions for the above scenarios if approached adequately. And if you wonder how, you are in luck, because a long time Xingyiquan  and Baguazhang teacher Mike Patterson comes to rescue! 

A long time ago Patterson had produced a number of instructional videos that present the technical content of those systems in his lineage, but it is his books that outline the training methods and progressions that should actually bring that material to a functional level. 

His first book is dedicated to the art of Xing Yi Quan (or Hsing I Chuan in the older transcription) and it happens to be quite comprehensive. In other words, the author covers all the topics that make those art "internal", as much as that classification is questionable, such as the brief introduction to meditative and energy practices, yin/yang theory as it applies to kung fu practice, interpretation of some classic texts about Xingyi, importance of daily training etc. Of course, there is the explanation of the elements that the technical curriculum is comprised of - five elements and twelve animals, but in that regard this book is not meant to be a technical manual. Patterson himself says that the moves are better taught/learned in person or in video format, but the commentary on these elements is still very good.

The segment that make the book really shine is his explanation of the training method that is used in his school do train able fighters. Oh, by the way, how do we know it works, i.e. that those Patterson's are effective as fighters? Well, they put it to test and let the world see it!

For example, here are the real time applications of a couple five-element fist techniques:

And then some of the animal form tactics:

So, Patterson calls his methodology R.S.P.C.T., which stands for realistically structured progressive combat training. Trying to give you a short overview here would be futile, because saying it includes partner drills, focus mitt work etc. doesn't really say much. It might be more relevant to point that the author has five tiers of practice in place: reflexive, structural perceptual, conceptual and tempering, according to the main focus at that point of training process. 

The important point here is that, as is the case with most good methods, R.S.P.C.T. is not limited to being used just with Xingyi or traditional marts as such, but can be adapted to serve the practitioners of any other combatively oriented system, regardless of their technical background. 

Being that the first book was well received, it is no wonder that the author decided to follow a similar formatting path with his second one.

Now, having in mind that Baguazhang (od Pa Kua Chang) is seen as even more esoteric that other internal systems, Patterson spends more time (or rather pages) discussing the underlying philosophies and methods of the system, including one of the best presentations of breathing and qigong practices I have seen in martial art books. Fast forward to the R.S.P.C.T. method as it applies to Bagua... In this case, we are shown how it develops the skills such as binding, turning, dragon stepping, and then we move to the areas of continued integration, clinch drills, defense, attack strategy footwork, rou shou practice, advice on strategy and fighting etc. 

As some may have noted from the above videos, in practical application those techniques do not necessarily look like "picture perfect" examples, but then again, the same can be said about any other fighting art, including boxing and MMA. Even so, this one is pretty spot on:

The bottom line is, if you are interested in traditional martial arts and their potential use in practical situations, especially kung fu, you cannot afford to skip these books. And even if you are not a fan of those traditions but still care about functionality of training, the training method presented in them is still valuable.

Book 'em!

 If you are person of certain age and with interest in the fields such as martial arts, combatives, self-protection, survival and other topics on the fringes of mainstream domains, you probably remember (and miss) the publishing powerhouse that was Paladin Press. I still fondly remember thumbing through its catalogs that I used to receive in the mail and eagerly awaiting for the arrival of the ordered books and videos. Heck, I liked their stuff enough to be on the elite client list for a while. After Paladin stepped out of the publishing game in 2018, not a week goes by without me lamenting its absence.

Fortunately, someone out there obviously felt the same way and decided to try and follow in the footsteps. Enter the publisher with the intriguing name Off The Books Books (OTBB for short)! Now, as much as I'd like someone to pick up and revive Paladin's old catalog, the new player took a different approach - publishing new titles. Fortunately, those already happen to be of a good number, signed by several authors, and all brought together under the editorial efforts of Fernan Vargas (including some of his earlier books). 

So far I have managed to read a few of the titles put out by OTBB and to my pleasure they offer plenty of good content to enjoy and for the most part live up to the expectations stemming from the titles. For example, the book on the Advanced Lessons in Knife Combat really does address the deeper principles and goes beyond mechanical maneuvers of the craft; the volume on The Tiger Spirit in Asian Warrior Traditions shed light on several aspects I hadn't been aware of; the two Street Craft volumes offer great examples of real life skills and their application etc. 

You can expect more detailed reviews of a selection of those books as I get to do them, but for now suffice to say that I am elated to again have the opportunity to being challenged, inspired and guided on my own path of further research in martial arts and other (more or less) related avenues in the years (even decades?) to come...

Just keep bringing 'em on! 

Fake it...or make it?

You know the saying, sure, but I don't think it holds in martial training. Well, at least not as an attitude. Although many times have I pointed that different folks train for different reasons, hence varying motivational drive, and all of them legitimate, there is still good reason to approach training seriously. Just what it means to be serious can, again, differ from one practitioner to the next.

Naturally, for the people who engage in the martial arts and combatives training for the purposes of actual self protection, professional work (security, law enforcement, military) or sport/competition proper focus and commitment are sort of taken for granted. But the other two main niches - cultural/traditional students and recreational trainees - would also benefit from a deeper dive into understanding the underlying principles and applications of the chosen art/system. 

Specifically, it can frequently be the case with those whose main reason for the study of martial arts is the research of cultural tradition to get lost in the minutia of historical accuracy of costumes, armory, lineage, stances, postures done in solo formal exercises etc, while neglecting the deliberate drilling of actual combative applications. The thing is, when one attempts to recreate or understand the technical details of a system of movement without taking into account the actual purpose of that movement, the outcome of such a study will be an empty shell at best. In other words, all the attempts to attain some accuracy in practice and reenactment will boil down to guesswork. At worst, it will be mere LARPing. 

While for the recreational exercisers it might be all about workout - breaking sweat and burning calories - the authentic intent that stems from the actual understanding of the underlying strategies and principles will actually help to move with purpose, which in turn stimulates the higher expenditure of energy in training. 

To keep this short, what I want to say is: don't let yourself slip into a mere imitation of the chosen activity. Yes, it can be frustrating to deal with the mistakes on the road to actual improvement, but at least it will be an opportunity to really learn and truly raise the level of your performance, instead of mindlessly and carelessly repeating the mistakes...if nothing else, then to avoid self-inflicted injury. 

Ultimately, the choice is yours, and I'm not judging anyway, but the road to true enjoyment leads through true self-investment. 

Hidden in plain(?) sight

But whose fault is it? 

What I mean here is an interesting phenomenon that occurs as a result of experience gap in a given filed, which in our case is martial arts and combative training. Specifically, with years or decades of training and practice certain things become kind of obvious, or at least they seem that way...to us. 

art by Karl Addison

However, the level of perception for the phenomena that make one's field of study can become quite high due to an equally high degree of kinesthetic perception, i.e. inner feel for the movement and general body behavior, stemming from countless hours of working on and with our bodies. And, after long period of such experience it is easy to forget how it all looked and felt in the beginning. 

If you are an instructor, you should not allow obviousness to become a part of your training plan. OK, if you are a coach who spends most of the time working with fighters and competitive athletes, who follow a continual training regime, the understanding of all the important things will indeed unfold over time. Yet, if you are working with who cannot or will not engage in that sort of work, for whatever reason, and particularly in a group format, it is important to regularly repeat even the most basic (and seemingly obvious) lessons/instructions. There are at least two strong reasons for this: one, there is always someone in the group who "doesn't get it", and subsequently may hinder others as a training partner; two, even for those who did get it (or think they did), such instruction may gain new/deeper meaning when reiterated over time.

This is especially case when you have in your class a person who shows the potential and/or desire to also be an instructor at some point. Namely, for them it is not just the process of learning the subject matter, but also learning how to present that material and helping others understand it. And if the art/system you happen teaching is important enough that you'd like to see it grow in the future - this is an important element of contributing to it.

Finally, regularly repeating even the mundanely "self-evident" axioms of your teaching will make you seek new ways of doing it, thus improving, expanding and deepening your own understanding of the material, not to mention the benefits for your teaching skill.

Obviously, it is a win-win proposition, so what's not to like?

Self inflicted violence

 Nobody likes getting bad news, even when they are not directly related to themselves. Sometimes such news wake up and put to the forefront those hard questions that we often seek to ignore or sweep under the proverbial rug. This time, it was the report of BJJ and MMA legend Rickson Gracie being diagnosed with Parkinson's disease. And being that in this regard he joins other legends in the domain of combat activities, most notably Muhammad Ali, but other greats such as Freddy Roach as well, it made one of "those" questions resurface again...

I learned about this case via a report/commentary by Rodney King, who has already been featured a couple of times on this blog. His view of the situation (as shared on Facebook) is sobering because he also speaks from his own experience, which clearly shows that at issue is not an isolated case, or even a string of unrelated cases. These facts make the above question that much more uncomfortable to ponder. 

If take a stroll through my older posts, you will easily find out that dealing with injuries is one of the topics that are taken as important here, because they have at least a two-fold harmful effect - inhibiting further training; and essentially attaining a counter effect to that training, i.e. they makes us more vulnerable that being healthy and untrained. But, those are just the physical injuries. As a matter of fact, with regards to martial arts and combative training, if taken from the functional fighting perspective, they come with the territory, as a manner of speaking. Even when growing into chronic issues, such as arthritis, rheumatism etc, I am frequently inclined to think that it is worth the benefits one can reap from training. 

However, the neurological problems and conditions that may stem from them are a different can of worms. First, there is a huge quantitative difference in terms of the deterioration in quality of life, between various orthopedic issues on the one side and Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, or ALS on the other. The degree of a person's functionality in living their lives is simply beyond comparison. Second, and directly connected to the last comment, is how it affects our immediate social environment, i.e. the closest family and friends. Exactly...all of a sudden we don't just bear the responsibility for ourselves, as you can't simply say "it's my life". Because it is someone else's too. 

So, how do we tackle the problem? How does one stay active within his or her chosen field, especially when it is a true passion, while being more responsible in a long-term? Is it even possible to train in a way that is simultaneously geared toward functional effectiveness and personal preservation? The easy answer is - yes! But it is necessarily simple to achieve. Namely, there are many factors at work here, and a proper training environment needs to juggle many of them at any given moment. But that fact is by no means an excuse to neglect it.

The solution probably boils down to a good training methodology, depending on an individual's motives for and needs in the learning/training process. In your search for the good foundation, you might even start with some of the articles on this blog, and see how those suggestions apply to your current training situation. Or, you could go and consult any of those resources from Rodney King, because he has literally dedicated decades of his life and work to developing a paradigm that would successfully avoid or solve the problem we are discussing. 

Ultimately, from this perspective, it is not so much the question of what you do in your practice, but rather how you do it. Therefore, should you choose to keep following the same road, at least try to do it in the best vehicle available. 

Dead end?

 What category of students is the hardest to teach? Yeah, as always, the answers depends on many factors, such as what are we teaching; for which purpose; in what circumstances; how often and for how long etc? Still, even with all these things in mind, I would probably not think of children as the immediate answer... Probably not even in the Top5. 

You see, I work as a schoolteacher in secondary/middle school, but used to work with elementary pupils, too. As a matter of fact, for a couple of years I even taught the physical education class and was given carte blanche to include martial arts in those classes. And it was always enjoyable for everyone involved! In all honesty, though, the whole point of those sessions was to be fun, provide some new movement patterns, keep the kids' attention to teach them focus etc. With goals like that, working with children can be a really rewarding experience. And I do truly believe that martial arts can be fantastic tool in building those kids to be better members of the society, under the guidance of good instructors. 

However, in a recent conversation with a mother of K-6 child, and myself a father of a 13-year old, I was asked what was the proper response to school bullying. And I couldn't give a good answer. You see, the local situation here has changed dramatically in the past month. Less than three weeks ago we had a first ever school shooting, nine kids and one adult killed, a few more wounded. Something that previously had only been stuff of unbelievable news from over the Atlantic. And it caused an avalanche of escalated school violence of  a degree unheard of around here. 

And everyone was dumbfounded... Institutionally (schools, judiciary, media etc), and on the individual level (parents, teachers, children). The thing is, it has been a tough issue for a while now. And here is why.

Namely, just like in the world of adults, any act of physical altercation could have consequences on several levels - physical (injury), emotional (trauma and stress), legal (kids in schools, parents potentially in court), social (how will other kids and families react). The main difficulty, then, lies in actually teaching all that to a pre-teen or even teenagers. Not even adults are always able to handle all those dimensions successfully, if at all, often because it involves too much time and effort (in their view) needed to gat a handle on it. 

The children, on the other hand, are often readier to learn but lack faculties in understanding the deeply interleaved nature of all the aforementioned factors. Heck, at that age they are unable to perceive most anything in terms of long-term views. Patience, attention span, commitment - those are all challenges that can be tackled; but social awareness, understanding of consequences, liability, finality of some deeds - pretty much insurmountable obstacles. At least in this culture. 

Do you teach a bullied child to stand their ground, without knowing how the bully will react? What if he or she pulls a knife or comes with gun next day? Hell, what if they come with an older criminal sibling or parent? At this point, we are moving from self defense to self preservation!

Do you tell them to report to school authorities and rely on their solutions? Yeah, right. Or maybe not even report at all? Do you teach the bullied kid to be first in escalation, use a knife? Join a gang? I hope you didn't even thing of the last two... 

If we have hard times dealing with these questions as parents and potentially instructors, how could we expect children who haven't yet fully developed their psychological and physiological faculties to get a grasp of it all? The answer is - we cannot, and they shouldn't!

What we have at hand is a cultural phenomenon where the society is not really a community, and folks turn their heads away from other people's problems...until they become everybody's problems. Well, that kind of problem demands much more macro-level solutions, and we all ought to take a deep, hard look into our own contribution to the problem and our possibility of contributing to the solution. 

Not an easy task, but a necessary one. 

Challenges in training - toughness

 When I started writing about various challenges one one's training path (also here, here, and here), it was mostly about the elements that a good training process required, one way or another, in order to produce good results. This time, however, I'd like to address one of the desired outcomes of such process, as there are some debates on whether it can be achieved. 

The way I see it, for many people their skepticism with regards to whether training could yield toughness in a practitioner (if they hadn't already possessed this quality) is rooted in what seems to me to be the wrong question - can it be taught? From that standpoint, I would probably be inclined to agree... Because it is not meant to be taught! Toughness is the kind of attribute that can definitely be cultivated. 

But, to get there, we first need to have some kind of working definition of just what is it that we are seeking to develop in a trainee. In the field of engineering toughness, as a mechanical quality of a certain material, is not the same thing as hardness or resilience etc. But then, they do not have to be concerned with the mental component, right? And in the realm of physical training, toughness is actually predominantly mentioned as a mental attribute. 

In the fight game, this quality is also described as grit, clout, guts etc. So, to be on the same page, let's describe toughness as the ability to stay on the course and get to the goal, in face of challenges and despite the obstacles. Obviously, in the combative world, whether it be a sport arena, field of battle, or mean city streets, challenges and obstacles may vary, thus implying several building blocks of toughness. For example, tolerance to pain, ability to take a hit (physical traits), as well as executing proper tactical maneuvers effectively and efficiently (technical traits), but also facing the unfavorable odds and refusing to surrender (mental traits). 

Once we take stock of all those necessary components, it becomes clearer why toughness cannot be taught, especially not in a single act; cultivation, on the other hand is process, and as such it takes time and effort...from both the trainees and their coaches. All right, so how to tackle this thing? Well, actually, we might take a look at the mechanical engineering for some hints!

In the above formula (gasp!), we see that the toughness is the result of a few other parts of the equation. For our purpose, let's look at Y (geometrical factor) as the sum of technical prerequisites of a given discipline (stance, balance, power generation, offensive/defensive moves); the next element - σ (Greek letter sigma) - i.e. the applied engineering stress stands for the selection of adequate training methods (pressure drills, sparring, scenarios, doing reps, equipment training etc.); while the final a points to adequate challenge/demand setting - just beyond the current reach of the trainee, but that does not look beyond achievable at all (if it seems impossible or unrealistic, it will fail to motivate action). 

Pay attention to the sequence of things here! It is frequently said that once the athlete has all the technical demands and physical conditioning in order, the work is 90% mental and 10% physical (search for "fitness" on this blog). This is why raw laypeople, taken from the street are unable to defeat high-level athletes despite how bad they might want it, but when two elite competitors face each other the mental preparation usually tips the scale. 

On more of a meta-level, in his book Do Hard Things [...] Science of Real Toughness author Steve Magness points to four pillars of successful work on the development of this quality: 1) ditch the façade, face the reality; 2) listen to your body; 3) respond, instead of react; 4) transcend discomfort. This is a pretty good sublimation of some of the topics discussed in the links in the above text, and although the book itself is not aimed at martial artists as such, it is a good read for those interested in this particular issue. 

In the end, I'd like to conclude with a couple of pointers - be patient, work with long-term in mind, trust the process!

Stylish issues

 I had a brief but still interesting chat the other day, with a person who isn't really a practitioner, but kind of sidelines fan of martial arts. Fortunately, although the talk was about the value of various martial systems and styles, the said person was above the petty fandom idolization of any particular exponents or their styles, so the discussion was not a bother. The main insight for me came from their observation that in the end Bruce Lee was right that "it is not about the styles, but about fighters", because we have seen representatives (declarative) of several different disciplines having had success in MMA. 

After that, my collocutor was left with a question of why then we still have so many systems and schools? Now, if you have been my follower for a while, you may remember that there are some recommended resources that will answer this question much better than I could within the confines of a blog post. Still, there are, in my view two main components to this - one, historical and social circumstances as they relate to the origin; two, personal motive for being involved with the practice. 

Now, of course, the great Bruce Lee repeatedly emphasized that his practice was all about truth in combat, hence the approach to training, readiness to experiment etc. Naturally, it sounds perfectly sensible, and with the expansion of MMA, it also seems quite evident. This also why some exponents are able to be successful in the situations of being pressure-tested outside the typical framework of their chosen methodologies. That said ,however, it is more often the case of exception, rather than the rule. So, what makes people get emotionally invested in fiery debates about the virtues or shortcomings of their schools of thought, when it comes to fighting?

My experience in dealing with many of those over decades, especially if they have never tried stepping outside the aforementioned stylistic boundaries, is that even if they resort to quoting Lee, it is with a different agenda. Namely, they simply are not in quest for the truth in combat. And, like I've stated so many times, it is OK...as long as they are honest with themselves about it. 

Different folks are into it for different reasons, but quite often they are unaware of choosing to pursue the illusion and live in fantasy, at least from the standpoint of sheer combative effectiveness. In the realm of training for weaponry use it is probably even more characteristic than in the empty-handed systems (although, just the matter of degree). Essentially, it tends to slip into the domain of LARPing, without being called that.

Now, I am absolutely not against LARP and Cosplay. Heck, it gets people outside and moving, while enjoying it. Plus, they are utterly straightforward about living their fantasy. But when a person who does some kind of "traditional" stuff, whether ninjutsy, aikido, kung fu, FMA, RMA, or capoeira, two hours a week on a recreational basis, goes on a rant about just how deadly and lethal it is...ugh, I'd rather not delve into that. Interestingly though, they tend to be offended when compared to LARPers. Go figure...

Changing views

 There is this thing of viewing, i.e. quantifying, one's training from one of two main vantage points - in term of hours spent, or years invested. It probably obvious that those two outlooks are nor really mutually exclusive, but rather complementary. Especially since both require certain level of commitment from the practitioner... Quite recently, the good folks from the FMA Discussion community had a very nice debate on the topic of hours vs. years, and it yielded an excellent episode of their podcast. 

All three participants in the talk were able to really nicely present their points of view and arguments relating to the subject, with a lot of excellent insights. I especially liked how they underlined that when things take their natural course, the hours will eventually turn into years. It really resonated with me, because it immediately reminded of how my path with Alex Kostic unfolded. Namely, when he first started teaching Systema as a guest instructor in the club/group where I was a member, it was only natural that my tendency was to squeeze in as many hours as possible with Alex whenever he was around (he was still based in Canada back then). Those hours contributed to our building a great relationship and ultimately into years spent training and researching together. 

Be as it may, at one point during the above program, the host asked the question that I had sent, whether if we take the look at the training time through the lens of hours, does it matter how far apart those hours are? While the answers were good, I may not have formulated the question adequately. Although, Mr. Steve Grody had already brought up what seems to me to be the central point - consistency.

So, here is my attempt to be a bit more specific. Let's say a person has 50 hours per year available for training. Would it be more effective then to train for one hour every week, or attend five seminars of 10 hours each throughout that year (thus, 10-12 weeks between training sessions)? Essentially, if there is absolutely no other training done outside those hours, it only makes sense that weekly hour-long sessions would be preferable, primarily for the sake of regular feedback regarding one's performance. Regardless of what kind of performance we're talking about here - forms, techniques, drills, sparring - consistent shorter sessions will take the cake over occasional longer ones.

 On the other hand, if we talk about 50 hours of INSTRUCTION, not all training, then the seminars with regular practice sessions between them may be the right way to go, particularly of otherwise we have limited access to the qualified instructors. After all, this how many arts and systems were able to spread around the world. Still, if regular instruction is available, weekly learning slots with reinforcing practice sessions on other days of the week would win, for the reasons mentioned above. 

It bear saying, nonetheless, that certain situations will naturally gravitate to one of the two vantage points. Say, a fight camp 6-8 weeks prior to a competition clearly goes towards the emphasis on hours spent over the period. Alternatively, in some systems require age limits for certain ranks, so the hours on those years may not be decisive. 

The bottom line is that it is how learning works - effort over time. The intensity and regularity are the fundamental factors here, and if those an be balanced, it is really an optimal situation. And again, if the commitment and discipline are there - the hours will definitely turn into years. 

Kaleidoscopic view

 A week ago I had a great pleasure of being interviewed by guro Tom Edison Pena of the FMA Discussion crew. During the chat, besides an overview of my background and journey in the martial arts, we touched upon several training related subjects. It mostly presents my views about the role of the instructor(s) in conducting the training for the adequate results and with proper approach. 

Some of you may be already familiar with some of the things stated here, but if you would prefer to watch and listen to me go on about various topics, check it out.

Here is a rough outline of the contents:

03.55 - Early beginnings and first steps in MA

14:00 - Physical attributes in technical development

22:05 - Starting RMA and learning perspectives

24:15 - Introduction proper to FMA

29:55 - Encounter with Lameco eskrima and doing long-distance learning

40:20 - Appreciating unpaid instruction

41:10 - Teaching as a learning tool

42:48 - Validity of training approaches

45:03 - Contextual functionalist

47:05 - Stint in MMA; on competition in general

53:30 - Role of luck

56:20 - Alex Zhelezniak and ACT system

57:40 - Teaching/Coaching methodologies

59:40 - Curriculum shortcomings

1:02:50 - Instructors vs Coaches

1:07:00 - Meeting Luis Preto and learning Jogo do Pau

1:11:15 - Tactics as a decision making process

1:12:15 - Mindset foundation for training

1:13:45 - Benefiting from Internet communication

1:18:00 - Importance of cultural and historical background

1:19:30 - Role of "flow" drills

1:23:45 - Forms pros and cons

1:30:50 - Differences between good athletes and coaches

1:33:05 - Sending students elsewhere for their sake or group sake

1:40:54 - Private vs group class

1:41:55 - Some recommended online FMA programs

1:47:54 - Importance of fundamentals and creative application

1:49:57 - Main requirements for teachers/instructors

1:51:35 - Need for education

1:55:40 - Craft before art

1:59:00 - FMA as a community?

Having done the interview, I believe there will be more articles on certain subjects mentioned, because as great as my host was, the boundaries of the format and flow of the conversation didn't necessarily get the fully fair insights into some of those. 

Challenges in training... Courage!

 Yes, courage. And it can mean a lot of things, but today I have a specific one in mind. While it applies to everyone involved in training the martial arts or other combative methods, it is particularly pertinent to those actually teaching and coaching. In the former case, this primarily entails having the fortitude to always keep taking a sincere look at your driving force in training, and being strict in deciding if what you do in training is in line with it, or you are just enjoying the workout (better case), or maybe even enjoying the illusion (worse case).

For the instructors, school owners, system founders/heads etc, there is an even more important and deeper component to it. Namely, besides the sincerity in saying what your system or school are all about, so that the potential students are not misguided, one must be absolutely honest and ready to change the material in the face of new findings. Here is what I mean...

Let's say you are dedicated to training your clients for the functional combative skill, in the real time and against resisting opponents (either in a sports arena or street self-protection), and you have developed a well-rounded curriculum and fairly good training methodology to achieve this goal. Owing to that,  you attract a fair number of trainees, maybe even open a couple of branches in other places. And then...one way or another you discover a new set of methods or training protocols that you know for sure will improve the whole process. That, however, requires investing time and effort to rewriting your curriculum and training programs, educating assistant instructors (some of which may be unwilling), and finally saying to your clients "sorry, forget what you have been paying for so far, there is a better way". Hmmm... Do you actually go for it in spite of all those challenges, or do you hide behind the good old "if it ain't broken, don't fix it"?

By the way, it applies just as much to the schools/instructors whose mission is the preservation of intact tradition and the original teachings of whatever master/system. What happens if you stumble upon an older proponent of the same lineage, who proves to be legit and then says that a portion of what you have been doing for the last 20 years is wrong and ought to be done differently? Damn, you already have a dozen or more black belts under you, who have been teaching the same "mistakes" to their own students, not to mention your peers who had graduated under the same tutelage fraught by the same mistakes! Where do you go from there? Keep on doing the same thing, finding an excuse of the "it's a different lineage" sort, or do you go back and start correcting everything, thus possibly losing students and associates? 

There are some people I admire greatly in this regard, who had the courage and integrity to change their teaching and training despite any and all inconveniences it may have caused. Alex Kostic has already been a subject of a couple different articles in this blog. He had both the sincerity to acknowledge the shifting focus in this work and change the training methods to suit it, while openly announcing the changes to his students (and losing quite a few in the process), but also alienating himself from a wider community of his "home style" and withstanding their mud slinging. The late Mario Topolsek did the same in a traditional art of Uechi Ryu (like in the above example), and with similar consequences. And an excellent example of the functional paradigm is Tom Sotis, whose entire career in the realm of fighting arts has been a constant strife to outdo himself and update his achievements. 

Interestingly enough, during a chat we had, Sotis pointed to a very interesting "matrix" of options that people have in their training if driven by honesty, depending on their underlying motivation. Let's show it like this:

T            NC

R              MC

F            NC

In the above table T stands for traditionalist, R stands for recreationalist, while F is for functionalist. Note that under the two opposing poles there is the same indicator NC, while for the middle way it is MC. It denotes that both the traditional and functional proponents have no choice in how they will train - they always have to be congruent to the latest discoveries of what constitutes the truth in their chosen endeavor. The recreational practitioner (some may call them enthusiasts; I agree with such term in the early stages of one's training, when they are still trying to figure out what is their guiding principle), on the other had, has many choices because his or her participation in the given activity is predicated on the goal of enjoying the activity on its own, regardless of its authenticity. 

In this regard, I'd say courage is a coin which on one side is made of asking difficult questions, and on the other side of embracing honest answers. Simple...but not always easy. 

Reading Tactics

 In one's quest for learning more about the endless aspects of combative behavior, it is probably safe to say that in the absence of personal contact and instruction, video format is the next best thing...if done properly, of course. However, over the past 30+ years my preference for the books has remained unwavering. Why?, you may ask. Well, while video certainly does better in depicting the technicalities of HOW and WHAT IF in various fighting scenarios, the good old books (and the new electronic ones, actually) are simply superior i discussing the deeper, and more universal, levels of human violence and all its domains. This is why my reviews of the martial art related literature has been focusing on such works, and this time we have another one that easily qualifies for my Top 10 list.

If you have had any interest for knife-related material within the scope of personal protection, the name of Tom Sotis should probably at least ring a bell. Namely, he is one of the pioneers in the field of developing and teaching "knifing" as the platform for the more general fighting skill. As the founder of AMOK! he has thought hundreds of seminars around the world and tested his material where very few others dared trying. Fortunately, besides seminars and training camps, his hands-on training methods are accessible for the general public through the AMOK! website, while its underlying philosophical foundations and experiences that had lead to its establishing are brilliantly presented in the book The Way of Tactics: a Manifesto of Invincibility.

The book is divided into three parts, each covering one of the intertwined building blocks of Sotis' methodology.

The first part is comprised of a couple dozen biographical episodes, which serve, as it seems to me, a two-fold purpose: providing the reader with contextual background from which the author's teachings have grown; and highlighting specific life lessons gained from those events, since they make the fabric of his higher, meta level material. Now, the fragments of author's life may not be as extreme as with some others, but he certainly did thread a path that not may people do, and it is obvious that his authority as a teacher/instructor/coach is as authentic as it gets, and you can take his word or trust his judgment on the subjects in the book. 

The second part is what I found to be the most valuable portion, and which I keep re-reading often. Here, Sotis gives an extremely thorough and methodical presentation of the material indicated by the title on the cover. Many authors have offered their take on the importance of strategy and tactics in combat training (frequently using the two terms interchangeably), but none comes even close to this book. Unlike them, Sotis has a highly analytical approach to step-by-step exposition of the ideas he wants to convey, and manages to do it in a superbly clear and logical way. From the trainee's inner values as the ground for strategies, through tactics used for the accomplishment of what he calls (and describes in a precise fashion) the best possible outcome, the author takes the readers on the tour of dealing with possible conflicts in their pre-engagement, engagement and post-engagement phases. Along the way he provides excellent insights into the tools for assessment, protocols, preparation, managing fear, and a whole host of other precious lessons regarding mental and physical pillars in one's training. 

Although the third part of the book is titled Application, it has nothing to do with photos showing physical movements, techniques etc. Instead, this is where we see how the material from the first two parts is processed and used in planning, organizing and running a training process in the functional manner. This also where Sotis gives his views on the common pitfalls of most martial training organizations and how he manages to avoid them within his own. It is important not only from the standpoint of practicality, but also from the perspective of supporting the arguments for the structures explained earlier and purported as the backbone of effective training. 

I have to say, having followed Sotis' work to the best of my ability since his earliest appearance on the Internet in the late 1990s, my expectations of the book were VERY high, and yet, he has overcome them by a large margin. The bottom line is, if you are involved in fight training for any reason other than the ethnological study reasons or the quick money making, you cannot afford to skip this book. Yes, it is so important that if you only buy one instructional item over the next five years - make it this one! 

Goal setting...

...is overrated. I sincerely think that. While we do need some sort of metrics to see how much we have been progressing, if at all, in certain undertakings, in my view the entire "goal setting for increased productivity" mantra has been ridiculously overused. And at this time of the year, I have the similar sentiment about New Year resolutions.

In case you are wondering, this is not some rant aimed at venting out, nor am I in the bad mood. The thing is, for the most part I am enjoying the life as it is, in the sense of journey taking precedence over destination. Therefore, the grand majority of things I do in life, at least those I with passion, need no clear quantification in order to make me happy about them. As long as I enjoy the process and see/feel progress (even if not constant), it is good.

Such attitude is probably what enables me to be in this whole martial artsy thing for a long run, and hopefully with more place and capacity for growth over many more years. And there sure have been accomplishments over time, but I tend to see them more as milestones and highlights along the way, rather than something to be taken as goals in and of themselves. While it was not part of some master plan at the outset, I allow for my motives, goals and aspirations to grow, shift and change organically with age and maturity in training, and in retrospect it seems to have been the right recipe for me.

With that in mind, I actually look forward with optimism for what the future will bring...

Happy holidays!

Bang for the buck

Last week I did a favor for a new friend, 15-ish years younger than me, and he was somewhat confused and surprised that I didn't want any sort of monetary compensation. I answered that I had been on the beneficiary side of similar situations before, so this was my opportunity to pass a good deed. It brought to mind the saying that "All the best things in life are free", and I wasn't sure whether that is right or not.

I guess everybody has their own, personal gauge of evaluating things in life, particularly in terms of "bang for the buck". To keep things in the domain of martial arts and training related things, I have received some free instruction over the years, and paid rather heftily for some other. I have also conducted both free and paid classes. On the receiving side, I can honestly say that some of those free sessions were much better than some of those paid ones, and yet, I do not regret paying for those that I did. All those experiences were instrumental in building my view of what is a large and important segment of my life, mostly in good ways, so I am grateful for having gone through them. However, I do not necessarily hold the instruction or lessons that came detached from monetary compensation any less valuable that the costly ones. After all, I feel I have paid for the former with my sincere effort, sweat, bruises and bumps, even blood occasionally. Some of the people who offered them are my friends to his day...as are some of those whom I paid to learn from. As the matter of fact, this very blog started as my attempt to pay dues and express gratitude for everything good that has happened to me over the past tree decades (and some) in and around martial arts.

On the other hand, it is definitely true that there are persons out there who have hard time appreciating things they do not have to pay for. That does not deter me from still teaching for free when it feels right. Have I made wrong assessments in this regard sometimes? Yes! But there have been good calls, too, and those are cherished moments.

Nowadays it might be more difficult, especially for younger practitioners, to have the appreciation for some things, with all the freely available stuff on the internet, bot excellent and awful. The way I see it, it just makes me all the more happy when presented with the chance to make difference and set a positive example in someone else's life experiences...even if it turns out to be mistake.

Pieces of the puzzle

All the founders of martial art styles and systems were those rare geniuses that come once in a… No, wait! Really?  If that were true, then how come we have so many of them? Is it possible that just a relatively small place such as Okinawa gave birth to so many geniuses in less than half century, some 150 years ago? Not to mention much larger cultures, such as those in China, India etc. Thousands of martial expressions in the East Asia alone. And there is one more thing… How come we often see quite notable differences among the practitioners of the same system?

If you take a look at the above comment, you will see two equally important attributes being mentioned: personal and traditional. At the first glance those might seem to be contradictory. After all, the whole point of traditional training is to do the things the same way they have been done for centuries, just like the founders, right? Well, sort of. If you think about it a little, and do some research, you will find out that those very founders have actually codified their own personal expression of the previous traditions, and named them (or their students did). Which means, in turn, that tinkering and experimenting with your training is the traditional approach anyway.

But, how is different to modern, non-traditional approach then?

First, nowadays more people have the tendency to give new names to their personal expressions (hey, we live in the world of brands and marketing!), although there still many of those who keep training, doing their own thing, without stopping to think about how to call it. Second, we live in the information age, when instructors are not so secretive and more open towards cross training. It is, therefore, no wonder we can choose among dozens of schools and styles. Matter of fact, we don’t need to pick just one! Heck, why not attend a few and combine the stuff into our own system!?

Wasted time and effort

This is the problem of the media age. It’s just too easy to get lost in the huge amount of information all at once, but without certain filters in place it can be exceedingly difficult to make the right selections and see if they fit together. I remember a guy coming to an instructor friend of mine who teaches sort of JKD-inspired MMA and asking for Wing Chun lessons, in order to better deal with the clinch range. Asked how he would deal with grappling, the guy answered “I do aikido for that purpose”. He did not think for a second about the gap between the underlying principles of the two systems, but started from the perceived strength of each. Also, and even more importantly, he flat out refused to join that MMA+ class (as my friend called it) which already had worked out the work in different ranges of combat; instead he preferred developing his own system after the hefty experience of six month of martial training.

Another issue is the failure to recognize the most probable challenges and problems you would face, depending on your reason for training, but instead focusing the rare extremes that get the attention of the media. This is where people dedicated inordinate amounts of time to various lapel grabs and two-handed holds, while completely neglecting tackles, headlocks and standing guillotine chokes. In other words, inexperienced practitioners engage in cross training looking for solutions, while not seeing the problems in the first place.

The way I see it, there are two paths to finding the proper fit in cross training, and they are not mutually exclusive.

Yeah!

One, join a club/group that does something different than you, and accept being their “toy”, thus experiencing the problems their style might put before you. Then go back and see what answers you can find by digging deeper into your own system, its technical principles and tactical tenets. This may require some adaptation of the stuff you have been already doing, but that is where the  personal aspect comes in.

Two, if unable to solve the problem on your own devices, then go elsewhere for instruction. However, keep an eye open for the potential problems that may arise from their solutions, i.e. opening doors for new problems, especially if those new problems are more serious that the ones you came to solve.

Personally, if training different systems, I usually keep them separated for a while before even looking at amalgamation possibilities. Sometimes, in fortunate circumstances, such possibilities will present themselves, kind of jumping out at you as a pleasant surprise. Other times it will take conscious analysis and pondering to direct your research. Of course, there is always the possibility of not finding the right fit between the two, and that’s perfectly fine. In that case you can either drop one thing, or stay with it for its own sake.

Naturally, you may be entirely satisfied staying for the same system for years or decades, and I have utmost respect for people who do that. Again, people’s motives for starting a martial art may vary widely and wildly, so as long as your are able to find something according to your needs you should be fine…just be honest with yourself.

Facing revelations

It is often said that to train martial arts is to walk a path. I agree. Also, if you keep walking it long enough, it inevitably leads to self-discovery, and I agree with that one, too. One question does arise, though – will you like what you discover? No, really, not all self-discoveries are nice. The next question then, and a decisive one, is how will you deal with those unlikable findings you may stumble upon?

What will yours hide?

OK, let’s take a step back. In one of my earlier articles here I discussed authentic motives for practicing some form of combative disciplines. It is my belief, based on experience, that in such cases, even if one has to face certain less-than-favorable aspects of own personality, those situations are mostly perceived as opportunities to learn and better understand how to proceed.

But, what about those who are in it for all the wrong reasons? Are there even wrong reasons in the first place? Again, my experience is that the grand majority of people who are looking for a quick-fix, magic potion, ultra secrets that would yield invincibility, tend to fall off rather quickly and end up being rather harmless, unless…we’ll get there shortly.

There also folks who start in a martial art out of curiosity, and exhibit some perseverance, and find out along the way that they enjoy the visible awards (belts, certificates), status (titles and ranks) and/or financial rewards (as unlikely as it may be). Now, I have no problem with any of those side effects if the said trainees don’t:

a)      do any teaching anyhow;

b)      compromise the quality of their instruction just to indulge their liking of the above “benefits”.

I have met a fair number of former cases, but the latter…not so many. To reiterate, those who do not teach also so not cause any harm, and often just stop training sooner, rather than later, after accomplishing one of those goals. However, if one embarks on the teaching adventure, I am inclined to apply tougher criteria (not that my opinion matters, though). The bottom line is, it is absolutely fine to earn money from teaching, wear a fancy uniform and what not, as long as you are “producing” competent and able exponents of the chosen system. It just happens that these examples are very few and far between.

Finally, we come to the shady parts of the woods. The people who start out of curiosity or with unclear motives and then somewhere down the line they get all enamored with the decorum, tall tales, ego trips and what not. When that happens, the actual contents and quality of training take the back seat and the iconography takes precedence. The main problem is that such types will see as their chief priority in life to open and run a school (maybe even a chain of school, God forbid), in order to fully enjoy their pathology. 

...and the dark side takes over.

The danger in having these characters at large is that in their diploma-mill schools the aforementioned seekers of secrets and invincibility will be led astray, taken advantage of, hurt, and possibly the worst of all – grown into spreaders of their instructors’ training models. These are also the kinds of personalities who dominate the arenas of internet trolling and keyboard warriors with no better things to do than to trash other people’s efforts and work, getting boggled in gossip, slandering and other vile practices.

Yeah, the path of martial arts will reveal those people in our midst, and the threat is not that they will dislike and deny what is obvious, but rather that they will like it and let that newly found menace take reins. 

Turning points

The majority of commercial martial art schools utilize some sort of visible external decorum to mark their trainees progress, i.e. the colored belt system. Essentially, the belts and entailing testing are primarily the tool to maintain motivation among the students, and, of course, to extract more profit. However, I have never met anybody who had spent years in training and who had fond memories of their yellow or blue belt test. Some, myself included, do remember their black belt test, especially if it was a demanding one, but even that usually does not rank among the top 10 moments on their martial art journey. And the way I see it, for those whose time in training was marked by that particular event, it wasn't much of a journey anyway.

Naturally, the meaning and significance of certain occurrences in one's practice of martial arts is individual, from person to person, depending of their goals and initiative motives to embark on such a trip anyway. In retrospect, I can basically identify three fundamental types of landmarks that have left a lasting impression on me.

One is the initial step out of the comfort zone, which means trying something new, specifically a completely new system of combat and training. Sometimes it was via seminars, sometimes simply joining a new class, as long as those lead to new insights or even paradigm shifts.

Second is whenever my command of the technical and tactical methods within a system were put to the test for the first time, which, for the most part, meant competing for the first time within the framework of that discipline, or under a very different set of rules (my first competitive experience was in taekwondo, later sanda added clinch to the equation, followed by MMA, and finally weaponry in an arnis competition).

And last, but not least (not even by a long shot!) is when my understanding of a system was challenged by being asked to teach it. Honestly, for the first 15-ish years of my involvement with fighting arts it always emerged as a suggestion from my instructor(s) and each time came as a surprise. However, after a while, this role would appear in more of an organic way, when I would feel a desire to share my specific view of how to approach training.

Again, these are merely my own experiences and ruminations on the subject, but I am always interested in hearing how others see their path in the chosen domain.

Teaching roles

Arguably the most important goal any instructor has in their classes is to make sure that the material being taught is presented to the students as best as possible. In order to accomplish that, the person doing the teaching has to take quite a few variable into account (students’ motivation, predisposition for the subject at hand, group dynamics etc.), but first and foremost they manner in which they conduct the classes, simply because that happens to be the aspect they have the most control of. I have already discussed the need to be able of speaking to various people in their “own language”, in terms of how do you formulate your message. This time, let’s take a step further and see how the said message is packed to be sent.

It should be more or less known by now that the properly chosen material to be worked in a training session should be challenging but doable. It is the approach one uses to get their student to do it, despite being challenging, that sets the tone here. There seem to be three main styles of talking to the trainees, and I will use arbitrary monikers here to label them:

·         Caring supporter;

·         Gambler/challenger;

·         Drill sergeant.

Helping, caring hand

In essence, the first one mentioned is the type that encourages their students by using affirmative language and actions, in order to help them achieve the desired result. For example, the caring supporter will be saying things like “come on, I know you can do it! You’re almost there, just one more step/rep/second...!” They will also commonly be giving the students applause, patting their backs and doing other things of that sort if they succeed, or even if they don’t, but in the latter case the emphasis will be on commending the spirit and effort demonstrated during the attempt. This fashion of coaching is especially suited for beginners and/or very young students.

The gambler/challenger plays the card of people often wanting to prove others wrong when daring them to do or not do something, i.e. expressing doubt in their ability to accomplish something. Typically, such trainers and training partners will utter stuff like “I bet you can’t _____ that, even if your life depended on it”, or “if you do _____ I’ll eat my socks!” You get the idea… In my experience, this sort of tainting is mostly prevalent among the people who are basically peers – equal training partners or in the cases when the instructor-student relationship is relaxed and not very formal.

"You dirty, rotten, fitlhy..."

Finally, when the training session is bordering abuse (or at least looking like it), you’re having the drill sergeant at work. Such situations will offer plenty of foul language, insults and dismissal of the trainee’s effort, sometimes even if they do achieve the task. “You pussy! Why am I wasting my time with you, you worthless peace of shit!? Is that the best you can do, you big sissy?”… I guess that even by reading this you can rather vividly imagine the tone of voice and facial expressions that go with it. Typically, this is the approach associated with boot camps of all sorts, hence the chosen designation for these instructors.

Now, some may ask, which of the above teaching tactics is the best? Well, from the last sentence of each of those paragraphs, it should be clear that each has their place, depending on the circumstances. Sometimes, more than one of those can be used even with the same student or within the same training session, again, depending on the situation. Ideally, an instructor should be able to take the shape of any of the above and speak as a different person when it is called for, but… I think it is counterproductive to force yourself to be one of those “personifications” if it really goes against your grain or moral fiber. The reason is, if you are unable to be authentic in a given role, the outcome will also be less than ideal. 

Shapeshifter

Finally, keep in mind that the described tactics are not necessarily clear cut and sharply distinctive among themselves. As always, they are more of the streamlined fragments of a continuum and should be taken and utilized as such. The bottom line is – assume the personality that will suit your students’ needs best, and not just because you are in that kind of mood that day.