Realistic Training !!

[Rook]

That was pretty much it dude. Nothing hidden in my comment, just wanted to clarify what you were saying.

Ok. I just wasn't sure whether you meant train against that type of aggression or if you meant train against knives in general in your followup.

 

[Seattletcj]

Ok, thanks. So basically, you're saying that its not at all possible?

Of course its impossible to completly simulate a violent encounter within a controlled environment of friends.
There are ways to come closer to preparing you for some aspects of this reality IMO.
From Peyton Quinn's site :

THE METHOD The logic is simple, to get used to something you first have to experience it.
The method is to place you into a scenario so real that your body does not know the difference. When you face the armored assailant for that first scenario your heart rate will increase, and you may experience "auditory exclusion" and most likely a profound loss of fine motor control.

This may seem challenging for you to believe at first, but the following is a typical report from attendants "I heard the line screaming loud, and then when it was my turn and I stepped out on the mat, ...suddenly I couldn't hear any of that and my heart was beating a mile a minute".

But with each scenario you will regain more control of your body and your mind. You will strike & throw with full force to the head and groin of a living, moving assailant. Then later, if it comes to a real attack in the street or your home you won't have to "do it all right the first time out". Your body will have already have been there & you will thus respond appropriately and effectively!

Sounds like "alive" training. hmmm

 

[Rook]

Of course its impossible to completly simulate a violent encounter within a controlled environment of friends.

I agree.

There are ways to come closer to preparing you for some aspects of this reality IMO.
From Peyton Quinn's site :Sounds like "alive" training. hmmm

Matt Thorton would say that Quinn is not fully alive in that he still preserves a uke/tori / attacker/defender roles as a condition of his training.

 

[MJS]

Of course its impossible to completly simulate a violent encounter within a controlled environment of friends.
There are ways to come closer to preparing you for some aspects of this reality IMO.
From Peyton Quinn's site :Sounds like "alive" training. hmmm

I'm not disagreeing, and this sounds like what I was trying to say in my post. I stated:

Quick quesiton for you. In your honest opinion, do you feel that this can be replicated with scenario drills? I mean, a drill is a drill, but alot of it is going to come down to how well the attacker is acting. Its up to him to put the defender in the proper mindset. Peyton Quinn does this with some of his drills.

Notice that I did state and acknowledge that a drill is a drill. Maybe theres some confusion here, I don't know. I was suggesting to train as Peyton is suggesting, but it was said that its not possible.

 

[Seattletcj]

Matt Thorton would say that Quinn is not fully alive in that he still preserves a uke/tori / attacker/defender roles as a condition of his training.

I dont know. It does fulfil the need for energy, timing, and motion that Mr Thornton uses to describe aliveness. I dont think from what I've read the SBG wants to train people to be knife fighters, i.e tori with knife. I believe their S.T.A.B program is geared around defense only. I could be wrong. Maybe thats for PR reasons, not sure.

 

[Seattletcj]

I'm not disagreeing, and this sounds like what I was trying to say in my post.

Ok. I see what your saying.

 

[MJS]

Matt Thorton would say that Quinn is not fully alive in that he still preserves a uke/tori / attacker/defender roles as a condition of his training.

I'd say that he (Quinn) is making his training a bit more alive than some. I mean, at least hes not having the attacker attack and stand there while the defender does his thing. The attacker is putting the defender under more pressure than average I'd think.

Mike

 

[Rook]

I'd say that he (Quinn) is making his training a bit more alive than some. I mean, at least hes not having the attacker attack and stand there while the defender does his thing. The attacker is putting the defender under more pressure than average I'd think.

Absolutely. He may even end up putting him under more pressure than he would face in some fully alive sparring with opponents who prefer to fight as a counterfighter.

 

[Seattletcj]

Absolutely. He may even end up putting him under more pressure than he would face in some fully alive sparring.......

If your opponents look like world conquering robots from a 1940s scifi movie
then ya that can create more pressure.
On the other hand its kind of hard to miss your target when the [SIZE=-1]circumference[/SIZE] of his head is 3 feet.

 

[jks9199]

IMO, I really don't think it is necessary to be constantly on that red-alert level of awareness. I firmly believe that if you relax and just enjoy life (but be aware, but relaxed), your senses will alarm you when the time comes. I think to go about constantly on guard stifles those signals and feelings and it is counter productive to what is real and what is not. Just my opinions.

Cooper's Color Code provides a reasonable model for good & functional awareness levels. It's relatively easy to find (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Cooper_(colonel)#Combat_Mindset_-_The_Cooper_Color_Code), so I won't break into the details. Most people should be in Condition Yellow when they leave home; a cop, corrections officer or other similar professions should regularly be escalating into Yellow or Red as necessary in their course of duty. I was taught that Condition Black is panic; others use a different definition for Black (Cooper himself seems not to have used Black). To me, most civilians won't ordinarly escalate under control to Orange or Red; they'll suddenly find themselves going from at best Yellow to Black. I would hope anyone reading this board would be at least in Yellow to start, and hopefully recognize the developing situation and escalate more appropriately.

 

[Rubber Tanto]

I see randori and sparring as different creatures with different mindsets, as per the Japan trip there are the various Shihan to train with as well as Soke. I certainly got more from the latter...

For Bujinkan training, I see randori and sparring as the same thing and that is a situation with one pre-agreed defender and one or more pre-agreed attacker with the scope of trying to use what we have learned in our taijustu to a) as defender, shut down, subdue and nuetralise our attacker/s and b) as attacker, to wear down, subdue and nuetralise the defender.

At any point where your opponent can no longer defend himself with correct technique/movement, you stop or slow it down until you move at a pace that they can once again continue.

But I also train with guys outside of the system (grappling, stand up etc) and in these cases sparring/randori is exactly the same except the is no attaacker/defender agreement. Each hunts the other and shifts in and out of attack/defend mode accordingly. Everything else is the same.

I've trained where one person is only allowed to do a certain attack (jab/cross/hook combo) and the other only allowed to block. But both are free to move and circle and attack as the please...keeping it still completely dynamic so I consider this to be controlled randori/sparring.

That is my definition.

I consider "fighting" to be any sparring session where the goal is to "win" the bout. I do this occasionaly as well, only because I like to see how I cope with the stress of unrelenting pressure, and I have found that rules do not hinder me in any way. I make it my practice to roll with serious realistic training partner. If I manage to grab two fingers they will tap to acknowledge a finger lock/break etc...

In the end... sparring/randori/touching gloves/cross kicks...call it what you like, train it the way you are comfortable. It is that simple really.

On Randori: To me the best thing about randori is it takes away the "fear" linked to someone randomly attacking you inside your personal space where you no longer have the luxury and time to stop and think about what you are doing.

 

[exile]

Cooper's Color Code provides a reasonable model for good & functional awareness levels. It's relatively easy to find (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Cooper_(colonel)#Combat_Mindset_-_The_Cooper_Color_Code), so I won't break into the details. Most people should be in Condition Yellow when they leave home; a cop, corrections officer or other similar professions should regularly be escalating into Yellow or Red as necessary in their course of duty. I was taught that Condition Black is panic; others use a different definition for Black (Cooper himself seems not to have used Black). To me, most civilians won't ordinarly escalate under control to Orange or Red; they'll suddenly find themselves going from at best Yellow to Black. I would hope anyone reading this board would be at least in Yellow to start, and hopefully recognize the developing situation and escalate more appropriately.

It's definitely situational. On the street, in broad daylight, in most contexts, I am somewhere in the yellow range. If I have to go into a parkade to get my car, it goes into red automatically, and I have weapons immediately available (I do not like parking garages!!) This is also true when I'm in other enclosed spaces (e.g., on a bus) where there's little chance of assistance if things start getting weird. At night, I'm in red under most circumstances.

I think the crucial skill that needs to be developed is, for most people, the ability to identify strange behavior in other people, things even subtlely different from normal patterns of action and reaction. The sucker punch is always a possibility, so you need to be ready to react when someone imposes on your space in a way that could be threatening (whether or not they show obvious intent), just as seeing a driver on the road getting a bit too close to your car should immediately pop your defensive driving skills to the top of your stack.

In principle, yes, you want to minimize the amount of time you spend in the red zone. The problem is that it's only in hindsight that you know which were the genuinely threatening situations and which were harmless. The incidence of the former is only a minute fraction of the frequency of the latter—but you don't know which is which while you're in the situation. It's like working with corrupted data: if you know that only a tiny amount of the data you're working with is corrupt, but you don't know which data are the baddies, then you can't trust your results. So I find it better to anticipate trouble that, statistically anyway, will very likely never occur—just in case it does. Doing it that way is costly in terms of stress, but, I'm betting, not as costly as what I'll have to pay if, as Andy M.'s signature puts it, I'm caught nappin'.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

It's definitely situational. On the street, in broad daylight, in most contexts, I am somewhere in the yellow range. If I have to go into a parkade to get my car, it goes into red automatically, and I have weapons immediately available (I do not like parking garages!!) This is also true when I'm in other enclosed spaces (e.g., on a bus) where there's little chance of assistance if things start getting weird. At night, I'm in red under most circumstances.

I think the crucial skill that needs to be developed is, for most people, the ability to identify strange behavior in other people, things even subtlely different from normal patterns of action and reaction. The sucker punch is always a possibility, so you need to be ready to react when someone imposes on your space in a way that could be threatening (whether or not they show obvious intent), just as seeing a driver on the road getting a bit too close to your car should immediately pop your defensive driving skills to the top of your stack.

In principle, yes, you want to minimize the amount of time you spend in the red zone. The problem is that it's only in hindsight that you know which were the genuinely threatening situations and which were harmless. The incidence of the former is only a minute fraction of the frequency of the latter—but you don't know which is which while you're in the situation. It's like working with corrupted data: if you know that only a tiny amount of the data you're working with is corrupt, but you don't know which data are the baddies, then you can't trust your results. So I find it better to anticipate trouble that, statistically anyway, will very likely never occur—just in case it does. Doing it that way is costly in terms of stress, but, I'm betting, not as costly as what I'll have to pay if, as Andy M.'s signature puts it, I'm caught nappin'.

Nice post! Beyond just amping up your visual, hearing and mental acuity into a range or awareness there is also the ability to just feel when something is not right. Bigshadow alluded to this earlier in his post. This ability to sence danger is within all of us and if you ever get a chance to read Gavin De Becker's book "The Gift of Fear" I would highly recommend it. Learning to trust your gut feelings/intuition is essential and allows you to be protected even when in a yellow stage. This type of sensitivity is very important for people involved in high risk jobs and right down to your average eveyday citizen. Once again nice post Exile!

 

[exile]

Nice post! Beyond just amping up your visual, hearing and mental acuity into a range or awareness there is also the ability to just feel when something is not right. Bigshadow alluded to this earlier in his post. This ability to sence danger is within all of us and if you ever get a chance to read Gavin De Becker's book "The Gift of Fear" I would highly recommend it. Learning to trust your gut feelings/intuition is essential and allows you to be protected even when in a yellow stage. This type of sensitivity is very important for people involved in high risk jobs and right down to your average eveyday citizen. Once again nice post Exile!

Thanks for the kind words, Brian :asian:—I've heard nothing but good things about De Becker's book, from a number of different sources—it's definitely on my `must read SOON' list. I agree with you completely that the ability to train our situational radar is inside all of us—wired into our nervous system, almost certainly. But like a lot of latent abilities, it stays latent unless we supply it with the right kind of training experiences to bring it out and switch it on.

A lot of people unfortunately confuse this kind of awareness with paranoia. But paranoia is genuinely delusional, involving the absolute conviction that there are specific plots and threats already afoot which specifically target the individual holding the delusion. What's at issue here, however, is just the sober recognition of the built-in hazards of life in society and the need to anticipate infrequent events which are however genuinely catastrophic should they occur—kind of like planning for tornados in the midwest, earthquakes on the west coast, and so on. Ya gotta have a plan!

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Thanks for the kind words, Brian :asian:—I've heard nothing but good things about De Becker's book, from a number of different sources—it's definitely on my `must read SOON' list. I agree with you completely that the ability to train our situational radar is inside all of us—wired into our nervous system, almost certainly. But like a lot of latent abilities, it stays latent unless we supply it with the right kind of training experiences to bring it out and switch it on.

A lot of people unfortunately confuse this kind of awareness with paranoia. But paranoia is genuinely delusional, involving the absolute conviction that there are specific plots and threats already afoot which specifically target the individual holding the delusion. What's at issue here, however, is just the sober recognition of the built-in hazards of life in society and the need to anticipate infrequent events which are however genuinely catastrophic should they occur—kind of like planning for tornados in the midwest, earthquakes on the west coast, and so on. Ya gotta have a plan!

Absolutely having a plan is a great position to be in when a violent encounter happens!

 

[Grey Eyed Bandit]

Just because you're paranoid it doesn't mean that they're not out to get you. %-}

 

[jks9199]

A lot of people unfortunately confuse this kind of awareness with paranoia. But paranoia is genuinely delusional, involving the absolute conviction that there are specific plots and threats already afoot which specifically target the individual holding the delusion. What's at issue here, however, is just the sober recognition of the built-in hazards of life in society and the need to anticipate infrequent events which are however genuinely catastrophic should they occur—kind of like planning for tornados in the midwest, earthquakes on the west coast, and so on. Ya gotta have a plan!

Paranoia is negative awareness. Being TOO stressed about what may happen means that you won't realize when something DOES happen. (Robert Asprin once wrote something along the lines of "If you spend all your time worrying about tomorrow or yesterday, you'll trip right over today.")

Functional awareness is just common-sense. (Which means it's not too common in reality!) Knowing dangerous situations, and preparing to respond appropriately is just plain being smart.

 

[exile]

Paranoia is negative awareness. Being TOO stressed about what may happen means that you won't realize when something DOES happen. (Robert Asprin once wrote something along the lines of "If you spend all your time worrying about tomorrow or yesterday, you'll trip right over today.")

Functional awareness is just common-sense. (Which means it's not too common in reality!) Knowing dangerous situations, and preparing to respond appropriately is just plain being smart.

Oddly enough, though, a lot of people seem to believe that if you don't prepare for the worst, it won't ever happen. It's a kind of magical thinking. There are also people who seem to believe that if you obsess about the worst case, it'll never happen.

But I think that it's very common for MAists to assume that technical mastery equates to combate effectiveness. The mistake is confusing what's necessary—martial skills—with what's sufficient—martial skills plus mental/emotional awareness plus a maximally realistic training program. Technical ability is just the starting point. As you say, common sense, but in fact rather uncommon, when you start looking for it...

 

[Seattletcj]

From a slightly different angle....

If you are caught off guard and the _____ hits the fan, will you have the presence of mind to respond quickly and appropriately? Here is a clip of a boxer (*sport fighter*) who immediately springs into action with the appropriate overwhelming response needed to neutralize the threat of the multiple attacker scenario. (In another longer version of the same clip it shows the two thugs practicing together previous to the encounter, on how to grab and control someone)

This response time is related to awareness and the OODA loop.....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OODA_loop

So bringing it back around towards the origional topic, is your training helping you to process fast enough through the OODA loop to be effective during a real time interaction, with unpredictable and resistant opponents (and your own adrenal dump), if you only train slow and with mainly compliant partners?

 

[Grey Eyed Bandit]

Kata training isn't always slow. Nor is it always done with totally compliant people.