Ideal Self-defense school?

[frank raud]

You expect me to believe, that your ”military grade” laces will handle the weight of an athletic male human body? (nourishment debatable depending on the country)

A regular shoelace will work just fine. It's not something I show all the time, but as I am obviously not a self defense instructor, it's OK for me to demonstrate it. Last time I did was at an open seminar, and the instructor was teaching a variety of rope techniques he had learned from Ronald Duncan,

 

[gyoja]

A regular shoelace will work just fine. It's not something I show all the time, but as I am obviously not a self defense instructor, it's OK for me to demonstrate it. Last time I did was at an open seminar, and the instructor was teaching a variety of rope techniques he had learned from Ronald Duncan,

I believe he was being facetious.

 

[HighKick]

There are people that want to receive the training that some warfighters received. They may be former military or security contractors that want the courses because they couldn’t get them in their former organization. Others want the course because they want the training, but not the burden of service.

I imagine some former servicemen/women 'needing the action' after their term of service is up. I fully get the 'hard to turn it off' analogy.
Hopefully, that is enough for them.

 

[HighKick]

I assume if a MA teacher teaches this technique, he is not a self-defense teacher.

I assume all secret agents will need to learn this.

View attachment 30959

Photo one could easily be the prelude to photo two.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

There are people that want to receive the training that some warfighters received. They may be former military or security contractors that want the courses because they couldn’t get them in their former organization. Others want the course because they want the training, but not the burden of service.

I mean, this stuff is kinda open-source. You’re just less likely to meet anyone who can teach it in a higher scale community.

 

[Hot Lunch]

What do you guys think about this?

Checklist for a great self-defense school:

-Instructors crossed-trained between different systems

-Sparring sessions in class

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

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

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

-Retention curriculum for all relevant weapons

-Instructors are knowledgeable in local use of force law

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

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

-Covers anatomy of criminal ambush

-Does “Fence” drills (Geoff Thompson)

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

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

-Revolver work in clinch

-Does pig or meat labs to demonstrate weapon effectiveness

-Seminars on how criminals procure/manufacture/carry weapons

-Stop the Bleed/TCC curriculum

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

-Brings in specialists who can cover anti-abduction

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

-Open gym hours for practicing absolutely anything, whether that’s sparring or study groups

And after four years of training, you get a Bachelor of Science in Self-Defense. I think you need to contact your local four-year university and pitch this idea to them.

 

[Xue Sheng]

What do you guys think about this?

Checklist for a great self-defense school:

-Instructors crossed-trained between different systems

-Sparring sessions in class

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

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

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

-Retention curriculum for all relevant weapons

-Instructors are knowledgeable in local use of force law

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

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

-Covers anatomy of criminal ambush

-Does “Fence” drills (Geoff Thompson)

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

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

-Revolver work in clinch

-Does pig or meat labs to demonstrate weapon effectiveness

-Seminars on how criminals procure/manufacture/carry weapons

-Stop the Bleed/TCC curriculum

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

-Brings in specialists who can cover anti-abduction

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

-Open gym hours for practicing absolutely anything, whether that’s sparring or study groups

We had a poster, and one time Mod, Brian R. VanCise, who taught (teaches) a martial art that covered many of these, and his career made him rather aware of many of the others. He would call it Martial Science.

Although he would not cover all of these, he's not training spies or special forces folks

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Competition is safe and fun. Street fight is not. There is nothing wrong to train for competition and not train for street fight.

If you train for competition, the word self-defense will have no meaning.

Which doesn't really have bearing on OP's thread. Since the thread is about a self-defense school, self-defense has meaning. IMO, competition does, in that context, too.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

What do you guys think about this?

Checklist for a great self-defense school:

-Instructors crossed-trained between different systems

-Sparring sessions in class

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

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

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

-Retention curriculum for all relevant weapons

-Instructors are knowledgeable in local use of force law

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

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

-Covers anatomy of criminal ambush

-Does “Fence” drills (Geoff Thompson)

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

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

-Revolver work in clinch

-Does pig or meat labs to demonstrate weapon effectiveness

-Seminars on how criminals procure/manufacture/carry weapons

-Stop the Bleed/TCC curriculum

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

-Brings in specialists who can cover anti-abduction

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

-Open gym hours for practicing absolutely anything, whether that’s sparring or study groups

Ideal for whom? For most students wanting to improve their odds in a self-defense situation, even including touchpoints on all this would dilute their focus on core material.

Also, taking the focus away from "perfecting" specific techniques seems to imply not drilling them over and over, over time. That repetitive drilling is what makes them functional in chaotic situations.

You also mention specific arts (Silat) and generic competition description (MMA) as requirements in the same sentence, which is odd. While I'd assert MMA competition training is a good base to work with, you can get a solid base without needing to reference MMA. And what you can get from Silat or FMA that is most useful for self-defense can be had from other sources. My point here is that requiring specific arts or competition focus isn't as useful as wanting coverage of specific concepts or approaches.

And some of what you suggest is a edge-case material (lockpicking, anti-abduction) or just interesting but not useful for SD (how criminals make and procure weapons).

Any role-playing scenarios (talking to authorities, de-escalation, etc.) can get really sketchy. I've been to communication skills seminars where the instructor couldn't get role-plays to stay realistic (people don't react in a role-playing scenario the way they would in reality), so I'm really leary of anyone claiming they can do these well with highly stressful situations like you describe.

To me, an ideal SD school has a focus on SD applications, encourages some level of competition for the core skills, has some coverage of SD law, de-escalation, situational avoidance, and other "knowledge" segments by people who use them regularly, and fits the needs of those attending within the time commitment their priorities support. That last part is very important, and isn't at all the same across all people interested in SD.

I'll also add that while I prefer instructors who have experience in multiple arts, that's not at all necessary. Someone who is very experienced in BJJ, and has played with folks from other arts (but not trained in those arts), and has some job-related experience, is likely (but not necessarily) better equipped than someone who has done some BJJ and some Karate, but lacks those other points.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It would take a team of instructors for sure.

And I'd expect it to be expensive, to have a team that varied and expensive. I could be wrong, but that'd be my expectation. Which brings to mind an "ideal" quality the OP excluded: it fits the student's budget. For someone who wants to deep-dive into SD, with a lot of hours per week to commit, this might be an ideal school (with some alterations I've mentioned in other posts). For most folks, it wouldn't be ideal.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

In Chinese wrestling system, during the first 3 years, students only learn offense techniques. After 3 years, students start to learn defense techniques.

In Chinese wrestling, it's better to attack and lose than to defense and win.

Which isn't really a good self-defense strategy.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Why not? A similar technique is taught at Ranger school.

But that's not self-defense. It's infiltration and elimination, which is important from a military perspective.

 

[gyoja]

And I'd expect it to be expensive, to have a team that varied and expensive. I could be wrong, but that'd be my expectation. Which brings to mind an "ideal" quality the OP excluded: it fits the student's budget. For someone who wants to deep-dive into SD, with a lot of hours per week to commit, this might be an ideal school (with some alterations I've mentioned in other posts). For most folks, it wouldn't be ideal.

The civilian operated schools that I attended that taught some of these subjects relied heavily on DOD students to bankroll their school.

 

[gyoja]

But that's not self-defense. It's infiltration and elimination, which is important from a military perspective.

It is taught as self defense in a SERE situation where you are unarmed, but facing an armed attacker that you are attempting to evade.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It is taught as self defense in a SERE situation where you are unarmed, but facing an armed attacker that you are attempting to evade.

There are so many things that have to happen to get you to that technique in a confrontational situation (including having some sort of cord or rope in your hands). And so many options that don't require you have a rope of some sort in your hands. It's an edge case, and I don't see it being particularly valuable in a SD curriculum. What's shown is not a response to confrontation - the target is clearly turned away.

 

[gyoja]

There are so many things that have to happen to get you to that technique in a confrontational situation (including having some sort of cord or rope in your hands). And so many options that don't require you have a rope of some sort in your hands. It's an edge case, and I don't see it being particularly valuable in a SD curriculum. What's shown is not a response to confrontation - the target is clearly turned away.

I agree. We do a different version where you use your belt. A fellow Ranger actually used this technique when several men made trouble at a gathering that we were attending and one pulled a knife.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

I agree. We do a different version where you use your belt. A fellow Ranger actually used this technique when several men made trouble at a gathering that we were attending and one pulled a knife.

It’s just flexible weapon stuff. It’s not specific to choking someone out from behind.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

Ideal for whom? For most students wanting to improve their odds in a self-defense situation, even including touchpoints on all this would dilute their focus on core material.

Also, taking the focus away from "perfecting" specific techniques seems to imply not drilling them over and over, over time. That repetitive drilling is what makes them functional in chaotic situations.

You also mention specific arts (Silat) and generic competition description (MMA) as requirements in the same sentence, which is odd. While I'd assert MMA competition training is a good base to work with, you can get a solid base without needing to reference MMA. And what you can get from Silat or FMA that is most useful for self-defense can be had from other sources. My point here is that requiring specific arts or competition focus isn't as useful as wanting coverage of specific concepts or approaches.

And some of what you suggest is a edge-case material (lockpicking, anti-abduction) or just interesting but not useful for SD (how criminals make and procure weapons).

Any role-playing scenarios (talking to authorities, de-escalation, etc.) can get really sketchy. I've been to communication skills seminars where the instructor couldn't get role-plays to stay realistic (people don't react in a role-playing scenario the way they would in reality), so I'm really leary of anyone claiming they can do these well with highly stressful situations like you describe.

To me, an ideal SD school has a focus on SD applications, encourages some level of competition for the core skills, has some coverage of SD law, de-escalation, situational avoidance, and other "knowledge" segments by people who use them regularly, and fits the needs of those attending within the time commitment their priorities support. That last part is very important, and isn't at all the same across all people interested in SD.

I'll also add that while I prefer instructors who have experience in multiple arts, that's not at all necessary. Someone who is very experienced in BJJ, and has played with folks from other arts (but not trained in those arts), and has some job-related experience, is likely (but not necessarily) better equipped than someone who has done some BJJ and some Karate, but lacks those other points.

I’m not excluding systems. Context is provided in further comments.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

And I'd expect it to be expensive, to have a team that varied and expensive. I could be wrong, but that'd be my expectation. Which brings to mind an "ideal" quality the OP excluded: it fits the student's budget. For someone who wants to deep-dive into SD, with a lot of hours per week to commit, this might be an ideal school (with some alterations I've mentioned in other posts). For most folks, it wouldn't be ideal.

Depending on the subject, instructors usually host an SME for a seminar.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Depending on the subject, instructors usually host an SME for a seminar.

Understood. But the base of all that still requires a pretty wide range of expertise/experience, and it'd be rare to find one or two people who can cover all that and dedicate their time to a program with the amount of teaching hours that curriculum would require.

And seminars add to the cost.