Combatives 6

Combatives 5

Combatives 4

Combatives 3

Combatives 2

Combatives 1

It should be surprising, but one of the things most frequently lost in translation about martial arts training is that the whole primary point of the exercise is combat effectiveness.  Yes, combat.  That moment when bad guys want to do horrible things to your all-too-squishy anatomy and you must fight back.

This is not the time for culturally appropriate uniforms, exotic weapons, pre-determined forms, or platitudes about inner peace.  It's also not the time for steel cages, championship belts, starter bells, or ring girls.  Training around those things can help -- in different ways -- but when your life is on the line, it's just about you and your ability to deal out the damage.

It's all too easy to get mesmerized by all the accoutrements of most modern martial arts training.  Every now and then, it pays to take a look at Combatives and see what they're doing.  So over the next couple of weeks, I'm going to post some videos from Kelly McCann, a guy who is all about social engagements at close quarters.  One of my self-defense gurus turned me on to McCann's material and promised me he was the real deal.  My guru passed along the wisdom that the difference between Martial Arts and Combatives is that Martial Arts is what you do with people, but Combatives is what you do to people.  You might think about that while you watch this video, and the rest in my series...

Let the Games Begin! Olympic Judo

Epic video to prepare you for the awesome spectacle that is Olympic Judo!

This year, The US is pinning any hopes for a Judo Gold Medal on Kayla Harrison, a 21-year-old woman who is already a champion on and off the tatami mat.

I wasn't able to download this particular YouTube Video, but it's worth watching to learn about Kayla's personal struggles to reach the top, and to watch her in a relaxed training session that may not be all that different from yours and mine -- except for the intensity that is!

Recent Seminar: Brotherhood of the Blade

I recently attended a Kali / Filipino Martial Arts seminar with Kuya Doug Marcaida.  My prior experience with Kali has been through my Jeet Kune Do training.  In fact, my JKD instructor suggested this seminar and invited me along.

The video shows the flashiest parts of the seminar.  I actually found Kuya Doug to be very practical minded and he stressed the same fundamentals of posture, balance, movement and structure that I am familiar with.

But flashy looks cool.

I Need This T-Shirt

Find one for me, now!

Circumstances

Gene Simmons (No Relation);

First, you did not offend me. You offered a "teachable" moment.

Second, I thank you for reading and contributing in your creative manner. I get the joke -- at least, I think I do... In any event, I enjoy your slightly weird comments, and even look forward to them.

You are touching upon the subject of an ongoing discussion I have with my good friend, SkyNinja. On the subject of what will keep me alive, I defer to SkyNinja's practical expertise. His advice on knife defense -- based on his training and experience -- is not to use a fancy knife disarm. Instead, you should use a "ballistic" defense. Basically, it's what you described: hit the guy as often as possible to overwhelm him -- avoid the knife -- escape from the area. These three actions should be accomplished in whatever order best allows you to survive with the least injury. Oh, and it sounds like you should do the actual hitting with the best weapon available to you.

I trust you will find this advice to be practical. I'm feeling practical and tactical today; I'm wearing my jeans today, not my jammies.

On the (theoretical) other hand... "Fancy" knife disarms exist in many different martial arts. And many of them come from eras and cultures with a great deal of experience with blades. It's hard for me to dismiss them outright.

This may be a situation in which the circumstances that gave rise to a martial art play a role in understanding the techniques. For example, a knife defense from Japan may have been developed assuming an overt attack on a battlefield and an armored defender. That's a very different -- probably more survivable -- situation than a prison shanking.

Also, there may be a faulty assumption at work with knife defenses: just because the technique exists doesn't mean it will work 100% of the time. We don't have that expectation of any other martial art technique. Even the most basic punch fails to land a percentage of the time. We don't say the Guard doesn't work just because it can be passed. We may have to acknowledge that a knife disarm may only work... what 1% or 5% of the time. It's still better than having no technique at all.

There may also be a viscious circle. If the technique is low percentage, you might not train it often. Then, if you don't train it often, its effectiveness is probably reduced.

But your other question; what should you train for? That's a good question. It's going to depend on your circumstances. If you're in a risky environment and constant danger then my advice would be to practice basic techniques with a high percentage of success and seek out teachers with practical experience. If you're interested in martial arts for their own sake and aren't worried about your day-to-day survival, then I think you'll get more mileage out of a "traditional" martial art -- jammies and all. If you want to compete, then you need to find a fight gym and prepare to spend a lot of time boxing and wrestling.

I hope that doesn't sound too mystical, grasshopper. Martial arts isn't a one-size fits all activity -- no matter how many folks insist it is. There is no single way of doing things best.

Col. Rex Applegate

"Mr. Applegate contradicts a lot of what I've seen..." Really? Are you sure we're reading the same Rex Applegate? I'd like to deal with this seriously -- though I know it's at my own peril.

Okay, Rex Applegate was the close combat (armed and unarmed) expert assigned to the Office of Strategic Services during World War II. His job was to develop the course of instruction for special commandos, spies, saboteurs, and other special operatives of the United States. His work was originally based on the work William Fairbairn performed for the United Kingdom to teach the Special Operations Executive and the British Commandos.

In a sense, Applegate is the grandfather of the reality-based martial arts. You know, the guys who often claim to re-invent the wheel, or is that invent a better mouse-trap? I don't know... I can't tell them all apart in those street clothes...

Applegate's curriculum does NOT contradict good martial arts technique. I've got the three books authored or co-authored by Col. Applegate -- pictured at the top. I've taken a few interior photos to demonstrate what I mean. Immediately above is Applegate's "Japanese Strangle." It probably looks very familiar to the BJJ and Judo crowd. It's the basic Rear Naked Choke, sometimes called a triangle choke or Mata Leao.

Oh, look here: a basic outside wrist throw. Actually, this photograph indicates to me that Applegate and his team weren't especially advanced martial artists. It doesn't utilize several of the principles of martial arts as laid out in Pearlman's Book of Martial Power. (The spines aren't aligned, for one...) But while this is crude, it will work.

Here's something Applegate labeled the Cross-Arm Choke...

...and here, in Kyuzo Mifune's book The Canon of Judo, is pretty much the same front choke. Mifune was one of Jigoro Kano's original students, and the last Judan in Judo. The Canon of Judo was writen in the late '50's -- it was the summation of the art he had been learning since the earliest part of the 20th Century. Once again, Applegate has nothing new; although he has chosen a particularly effective technique. That was his real talent.

Now, it might seem as if Applegate was cherrypicking from Judo. Not really. This is a good time to point out that all martial arts exhibit a sort of convergent evolution. Despite the cosmetic and cultural differences people see at first, all good martial arts have more in common than they don't.

This, for example, is a sequence from the book I have on Medieval and Renaissance Dagger techniques. Pay special attention to the key lock illustrated in the lower left hand corner...

... Because it reappears on this page from Applegate's Kill or Be Killed. The arm key lock itself is nothing special. It appears in Taijutsu (as onikudaki), Aikido and Judo as variations of ude garami, and BJJ as the Americana. Incidentally, BJJ calls this the "Americana" because it was "borrowed" from Catch Wrestling as practiced in the US, which has its roots in folk wrestling from England... You get the drift.

Two more knife defenses, first from Applegate on the left, and from the Rennaisance on the right. Again, the relative sophistication of Applegate's team is evident in comparison to the experienced Western Martial Artists on the right. Note how Applegate's man is still square and close to the opponent. The other defender has utilized his space to create distance, and has bladed his body to present a smaller target.

I'm not digging against Applegate and his team. Given the situation, their product is actually pretty good. They learned and adapted quickly.

Oh, Applegate's curriculum even included pressure points; something many (but not all) modern reality based martial artists don't put much stock into.

The point of all this -- and there is a point -- is one we've seen a million times before: there is nothing new under the sun. All martial arts lead to the same destination.

The Problem of Definition

My posting of the YouTube video below showing a ToShinDo trained "ninja" winning an MMA bout in 26 short seconds seems to have set off some heated discussion. I was hoping to get more open discussion, but I forgot I was posting on the open web... If you haven't already checked out the video, and posted any thoughts, I'm still encouraging opinions.

Part of the reason we have such a heated discussion is that we're not all using the same definition of the term "martial arts." At first glance, it seems like a specific enough term, indicating any method of attack and defense.

But really, "martial arts" is one term that encompasses at least three related, but different activities:

• Reality Fighting: That is, techniques of movement meant to save your ass in life-threatening combat.
• Sport Martial Arts: Which runs the gamut from fitness/exercise to professional and competitive sports.
• Aesthetic Martial Arts: These are martial arts intended primarily for culture or entertainment, such as demonstration, dance, or even movie-making.

I say, "at least three" because there's plenty of room for overlap in these categories, and even some subcategories. For example, reality fighting includes personal self-defense courses within the context of violent crime, and you have military instruction that teaches methods to deal with the realities of the battlefield. Even that can range from non-lethal methods for use in peace keeping operations, to mass melee among bodies of troops, to sentry removal.
So without one, settled definition of "martial arts" it can be very difficult to discuss the topic across the internet.
One popular website demonstrates this problem. Their idea -- a paradigm, really -- of good martial arts is MMA competitive fighting. Based on what they've seen, they espouse the idea that this is the only way to be effective in martial arts. Why? Because two extremely fit, scary looking fighters get into a ring and connect with full force techniques that ultimately prove one man to be superior to the other. It sure looks like a real fight; and we're always told there are no rules. Except there are three very important rules:

1. The fighters are matched for relative size, weight, and experience
2. Neither intends to kill the other one, and both fighters know this.
3. Most importantly, there are no weapons involved.

Meanwhile, the local strip mall martial arts school -- commonly derided as a "McDojo" -- gets a bad rap because they focus on memorizing forms, physical fitness, and some "feel-good" philosophy. Possibly there is some light sparring.
Yet this ignores the good work many "McDojos" do at keeping responsible, happy, fit students. They provide an outlet for stress and aggression, and also an opportunity to connect with a cultural tradition. Statistically speaking, most of these students are not going to end up in a fierce close quarters battle with a mugger or terrorist, and few will be foolish enough to choose to enter a competitive match -- at least not without increasing the intensity of their training. The most dangerous enemy they will face on a regular basis is themselves, and if they are good students, they will be equipped to meet that challenge.
I've been involved in martial arts for many years now, and I've been part of just about every approach to training you can think of. I haven't found it to be one size fits all because the reasons for getting involved are as many as their are students. I do think it is dangerous for any practitioner to fail to understand this spectrum of training. It can be very dangerous to think of yourself as a hard core warrior if your monthly session is Tai Chi at the Senior Center. But it is equally dangerous to think that you can take your MCMAP instructor's certificate and open a children's program when you leave the service -- you're not doing your wallet or your students any favors on that one.
Lastly, I've found that the key to a sustainable martial arts involvement, and the key to more advanced levels, is to embrace the spectrum and understand the importance of the different levels. The most common problem is to concentrate on the aesthetic and intellectual aspects and forget the martial in martial arts. I'm working on a post that will return to this point in the near future.

Shinken Gata: What I've learned about fighting from the Bujinkan

There's been many a negative comment thrown around about the ability of the average Boojie to fight his way out of a wet paper bag. Many of these comments are even deserved. We do spend a lot of time working on historical methods of combat that may not directly relate to modern reality.

On the other hand, here's a rundown of a few lessons passed to me by various folks within the Bujinkan:
1. Combat will not look like kata. It will be quick. It will be messy. Mistakes will be made.

2. Winning means... making fewer mistakes than the other guys, finishing with more energy than the other guys, and surviving to wake up on the right side of the grass the next day.

3. Fighting is immensely dangerous for all involved. You should only fight for the most important reasons. When you fight, fight all out.

4. Martial arts are something you do with people. Combatives are something you do TO other people. Don't be nice.

5. The best plan is: Use a weapon to kill the other guy while he's still standing up, and preferably no later than as he hits the ground. If you're wrestling around on the ground, it's taking too much energy, too quickly. The longer you wrestle, the more llikely you'll wind up as the dead one.

6. It is better to be lucky than skilled. It is best to be lucky and skilled.

7. No one is invincible. Don't believe me? Just ask any of the dead personnel from Task Force Ranger, who fought the Black Hawk Down incident. Oh, you can't... They're dead. These guys were Navy SEALs, Delta Force, and Army Rangers -- some of the toughest, best trained soldiers in the world. But untrained, malnourished, drug-addled bozos with rickety AK-47's killed them.

Our old friend MLK may take issue with us as "hobbyists" considering "real fighting." But the fact is, martial arts divorced from an understanding of martial reality are nothing more than dancing. Even if we don't ever intend to engage in actual hand-to-hand combat with an angry adversary, we need to keep the truth of combat in our minds as we train.