Reality Based Instructors

Originally posted by Karazenpo
My only complaint is this......we are always hearing about the 'McDojos' on these forums but how about the 'Dojo Warriors'-those who fight in theory only and confine their only exploits to within the dojo. Now, don't get me wrong, that's all fine and good for we wouldn't want martial artists going out on the town looking for fights but if you wish to really know what works and what doesn't listen to those that have been their and done that. Just like tournament karate. Should I want some tips on today's tournament fighting I would humble myself and go to those who currently compete and win and learn from them. That is their forte and I respect that but half the time you ask certain people on these forums who are arguing what works in reality when was the last time they used their art on the street, they never answer you! I think one can learn a lot from those martial artists that you mentioned in street survival and sometimes people seem to forget why its called the 'MARTIAL' arts! It's all about reality training-Street Survival!

I agree, but do not be fooled into thinking that what goes on inside a school's walls cannot be reality based. Its like saying that a life saving drug is not a good drug because it was only created and tested in a lab. A school is a "lab" for MA and having many dedicated and experienced MAist under one roof, can produce some deadly results.

7sm
 
Originally posted by kenpo12
MJS,

But my point is that they kept in what seemed most practical for them. There are alot of moves that may not seem practical to you but I may be able to use them successfully and that's part of my own journey in the martial arts. But if someone else cuts down what they learned and then I cut down what I learned from them, pretty soon you have a system that doesn't have much left. I know not all systems and styles are built the same but I like to have the ability to study a whole style and take out what's practical for me. If I teach, I teach everything I was taught and let my student decide what works for them with some additional guidance from me. I have nothing againse "reality based" arts but I think someone really needs to spend at least 5 years or so in a "traditional" system before they branch out and look to a reality based instructor. That's just my two cents.

Very true. We are all different, so yes, what might not work for one person, may work for another. I guess it would have to be up the individual person. I guess I was looking at it from a different point of view. I have trained in Kenpo for 17yrs. so I was comparing the wide assortment of things here to what the RB insturctors seem to be teaching.

As far as the teaching goes. When I was teaching, I would of course teach the material as it was supposed to be taught. However, if a student came up to me and had a question about something, I would not hesitate to show them a different or better way of doing something.

IMO, I really dont think that a person needs to have prior training before they wanted to try a RB style. If they are going to be crosstraining, such as Kenpo and BJJ, then yeah, I'd say, have a good understanding of Kenpo before you attempt another art. But, if the RB style is going to be your sole art, then you'll already be learning all of the material that they (the Inst.) thinks that you should know.

Mike
 
RBSD is so much more in depth than your traditional art IMO (in the ways of fighting...not tradition). The instructors have much knowledge in the ways of street crime, dealing with the police after a fight, home security, etc. They are not just fighters. Everything i have seen that comes from RBSD beats out traditional systems by a long shot, and even though i study kenpo, i mix alot of RBSD with it, and i find that the RBSD gives me much more in a short time, than Kenpo does. Kenpo provides me with the basics, and training partners, which is great however, the sparring is very unrealisitc, and i think that i am fortuante enough to have been in many fights before studying any form of fighting to know what will work and not work for ME.

Also alot of traditional instructors have been in few or no fights at all, and i do not believe that they should be telling their students that certain techniques will work, when tehy don't know that themselves. The RBSD instructors have vast real world experience and they know how fights go down, and end, as well as the pre-fight stage, and awareness. I also love the fact that they teach de-escalation techniques

But I'm sure there are RBSD hacks out there, just like there are many traditional hacks out there. You just gotta find the right instructor, have the "real" state of mind, and work to achieve whatever goals you are striving for.
 
Originally posted by Gotkenpo?
RBSD is so much more in depth than your traditional art IMO (in the ways of fighting...not tradition). The instructors have much knowledge in the ways of street crime, dealing with the police after a fight, home security, etc. They are not just fighters. Everything i have seen that comes from RBSD beats out traditional systems by a long shot, and even though i study kenpo, i mix alot of RBSD with it, and i find that the RBSD gives me much more in a short time, than Kenpo does. Kenpo provides me with the basics, and training partners, which is great however, the sparring is very unrealisitc, and i think that i am fortuante enough to have been in many fights before studying any form of fighting to know what will work and not work for ME.

Also alot of traditional instructors have been in few or no fights at all, and i do not believe that they should be telling their students that certain techniques will work, when tehy don't know that themselves. The RBSD instructors have vast real world experience and they know how fights go down, and end, as well as the pre-fight stage, and awareness. I also love the fact that they teach de-escalation techniques

But I'm sure there are RBSD hacks out there, just like there are many traditional hacks out there. You just gotta find the right instructor, have the "real" state of mind, and work to achieve whatever goals you are striving for.

Very good post!! Its nice to see another Kenpo student realize the pros and cons of both.

Mike
 
thanks MJS :) From what you said about my post, i assume you think the same way as me, therefore, i to, am glad there is another kenpo practitioner out there that thinks this way :)

peace.
 
Originally posted by Gotkenpo?
thanks MJS :) From what you said about my post, i assume you think the same way as me, therefore, i to, am glad there is another kenpo practitioner out there that thinks this way :)

peace.

You're quite welcome!:asian:

Mike
 
After seeing the marketing ploys my 1st instinct was a mixture of revulsion and a strong desire to make fun of it.

Yet, after reading a bit and trying to get through the marketing crap, some of it does make sense.

But because some of it makes sense, that doesn't mean that the style is credible or effective.

I would have to check it out for myself before I could really make a decision as to whether it is crap or not.

Either way, I dislike their marketing tactic of "our style is superior to all others".

PAUL:cool:
 
Let me weigh in as both a practitioner of Traditional Chinese Martial Arts and someone who has studied with a Blauer Coach. Additionally I've had the opportunity to see another Blauer Coach in action (more on that later).

A good RBSD is going to prepared someone to deal with a "normal" (if there is such a thing) street attack faster than your average martial art. Hands down, there is no question of this. Why?

1. RBSD systems typically contain far less techniques for a beginner to learn.
2. RBSD immediately teaches the emotional, psychological, and physiological aspects of a confrontation.
3. RBSD also begin with the model of an untrained/street trained attacker (not a martially trained attacker)

Those three aspects put them at a short term (and sometimes even a long term advantage over most martial arts). Why? Let me break each one down:

1. Less techniques: In Blauer's systems, you learn the S.P.E.A.R. (a centerline crashing technique using immovable arm principles), basic palm thrusts, elbows, rakes, knees and basic straight/front and roundhouse (Thai) kicks (all to the low line). And that's about all a beginner gets. While that may seem like a substandard arsenal, it's also all they practice. So they get really good at applying them fast.

2. This is a killer aspect. From the first class people are training in simulated confrontations. So they are learning how to sense that they are being engaged from a distance. They learn verbal defusing skills. They also learn how to pick up "pre contact cues" that help them to judge the intent of an attacker. And they also begin to get used to the adrenaline dump that happens at the beginning of a nonconsensual confrontation and how they can convert that to a tactical response. And that's critical and something that most martial artists don't train for (especially at early levels). The flat out truth is that if you are surprised, fine motor skills go out the window (and what are may martial arts responses predicated on? Fine motor skills). Much of Blauer's material is how you convert a flinch into a tactical response and from there access your full arsenal.

3. Most TMA train first against themselves and for other systems and attacker types at higher levels. The issue here is that the average attacker in the street will have no formal martial experience. And therefore their technique will not necessarily conform to the training context of a given system. Example, most beginning Wing Chun (and yes I do have experience with Wing Chun) Pak/Lap/Trapping drills are predicated off of a Wing Chun style center line punch. How many schools start people working these off of a boxer/street cross? Or a jab/cross combination? Not many that I've encountered in my travels. The RBSD student however starts dealing with haymakers and a more sloppy boxing style model from the beginning. Granted, if they got attacked by a Wing Chun man they might have some problems. But RBSD is all about scientifically playing the odds if you will.

Are the concepts of RBSD new? Hell no. They've been around since the dawn of time and are in most TMA systems. However what RBSD programs did was help bring these concepts to the forefront, give them names and better define them. They also crashed through some TMA dogma that had been built up over the years (that dogma btw, if you examined it closely, would often run counter to the base concepts of the system).

So does it RBSD work? I offer this parting example. I was attending a conference where a gun defense workshop was being put on. At the end of the workshop (where no real techniques were taught) a handful of participants were able to go up against a person who had a gun loaded with chalk rounds. The attacker would have this live gun against the person’s stomach. The defender would have to disarm or stop the attacker before he/she was shot. I saw three people attempt this. The first two managed to clear the gun, but in grappling with the person the gun passed across their centers and they got shot (again the gun was loaded with Chalk rounds and it was clear where they were hit). The final participant was a Blauer trained coach. He successfully cleared the gun and took the attacker out (I should not that he almost had to be pulled off the attacker because in order to do this correctly he "threw the switch" if you will. The attacker was fine, but more than a little rattled). Now you could chalk (excuse the pun) this up to the quality of the individual, but he used text book Blauer principles to accomplish the task. In fact, with my limited experience with the S.P.E.A.R. system I was able to predict every step he took because it was so text book.

It's one thing to see the founder of a system accomplish a task. It's something else to see one of his students live up to the systems claims.

As for you need experience in a Traditional MA before you can really practice a RBSD system... as others have already stated, that's a load of hooey. There are people in our PDR program who don't have a lick of traditional MA experience that could, in a self defense scenario, deal with many experienced TMA people that I've encounted. However, they would have a difficult time dealing with those TMA people in a sparring scenario. It all comes down to what you train for and why (as others have said). We TMA folks tend to split our time and attention. And that's fine. RBSD have only one focus.

Also, as others have stated RBSD can supliment TMA training and visa versa.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents...

- Matt
 
Great post Matt! Excellent job of breaking down all the fine points

Mike
 
Matt,

Would you have any information on that chalk gun you referenced?

Could you elaborate a little on the people that tried unsuccessfully to do the gun disarm. What were they attempting to do that forced them into a grappling match?

Appriciate your reply.

:asian:
 
Originally posted by Disco
Matt,

Would you have any information on that chalk gun you referenced?

Could you elaborate a little on the people that tried unsuccessfully to do the gun disarm. What were they attempting to do that forced them into a grappling match?

Appriciate your reply.

:asian:

Sure, I'd be happy to. This workshop was at the "Super Summers" Martial Arts camp in 2002. The person administering the workshop was a Federal martial who had training rounds with him. My understanding was that they were chalk rounds (though I could be wrong about that). Either way they were being used in an actual pistol (I believe it was a 9mm semi-automatic, though again I could be wrong).

The scenario began with the defender facing the gunman. The gunman had the gun in his right hand on (or near) the person's stomach/center of mass level, one the defender's centerline. I don't believe the gunman had both hands on the gun, they might have. The gunman was wearing facial protection (as was the defender in case of a shot to the head).

There was a count given and then the defender could do "anything" they wanted to neutralize the attack. The gunman was not to fire unless "threatened" and at that point they were to do what they could to shoot the defender.

What happened in the first two cases is that the defender was able to clear the gun by checking/palm striking it out of the way (though it was still being held on to by the gun man). Then in both cases the defenders grabbed the gun with both hands and attempted to wrestle it out of the control of the gunman. Unfortunately the action of grabbing it with both hands naturally tends to bring an object to the center of the body. That combined with the wrestling for control that was going on caused the gun to swing multiple times across the defender's frame. On one of those passes the gunman pulled the trigger and the defenders were hit in the stomach or legs.

The Blauer coach took a different tact. He began his hands in a non-violent posture and with a (I'm going to use Bluaer terminology here) pattern interrupt distraction... he asked the gunman a question. While the gunman was momentarily processing the question, the coach cleared the gun off of his centerline. He then S.P.E.A.R.’ed the gunman (basically a forward check to his center of gravity). With the gun still checked out side of his frame (because he was so on top of the gunman, the gunman's arm was prevented from returning by the coach's body mass) he began a Blender on the guy's face. The blender is a series of elbows that convert into rakes. It was at this point that the workshop organizer called the Blauer coach off. As I stated earlier it took a second or two for him to stop. The gunman WAS NOT hurt. However, because the coach was in full self defense mode (positively utilizing his adrenaline, etc.) he needed a moment or two to shift out of the attacking mindset.

Hope this helped. Note that the idea of checking vs. grappling with weapons isn’t unique to Reality Based Self Defense. Most unarmed knife defense in Pekiti Tirsia Kali (for example) is predicated on checking the weapon arm and then attacks to the arm, body or head rather than attempting a disarm.

- Matt
 
"I'm always a bit suspect about "reality based" systems. The reason is that most of the so-called reality based systems were made up or designed by people who trained in traditional systems to begin with."

I think you hit the nail on the head. Once you get past the marketing-speak and the "trademarks" most of it seems to be JJ-based scenario type work. And I have to wonder when I read stuff like:

"The best part about it is that its easy to learn, any 4'5" 90lbs women can use it to kill a crazy biker rapist"

"The officer couldn't pull his gun, club, or mace and could not fight her off. She ended up tearing off half of his face and doing serious damage to one of his eyes."

"We are all Soldiers. Life is our platoon, the streets our battlefield"
 
Matt, thanks for the reply. Would love to get my hands on some of those training rounds.

One of our Instructors has some training with the SPEAR system and also with the Peter Boatman (England - edged weapons) system. As with anything else in life, it's what the individual likes and feels confident in. What they and many other's call reality based training, and this is not meant to detract in any way, is just their effort in attempting to control a situation in a way that they perfer. Many Traditional arts, I hate using that term but you know what I mean, actually have very affective and brutal disarms. These techniques can only be walked thru because they call for some sort of limb destruction. It's surprising that when these people attempted disarms, that no wrist techniques were used. Again, thanks for the reply.

:asian:
 
Originally posted by RobP
"I'm always a bit suspect about "reality based" systems. The reason is that most of the so-called reality based systems were made up or designed by people who trained in traditional systems to begin with."

I think you hit the nail on the head. Once you get past the marketing-speak and the "trademarks" most of it seems to be JJ-based scenario type work.
Originally posted by Disco
What they and many other's call reality based training, and this is not meant to detract in any way, is just their effort in attempting to control a situation in a way that they perfer. Many Traditional arts, I hate using that term but you know what I mean, actually have very affective and brutal disarms. These techniques can only be walked thru because they call for some sort of limb destruction. It's surprising that when these people attempted disarms, that no wrist techniques were used.
Great quotesMy take, for what it's worth... I don't think most Reality Based Self Defense (RBSD) Instructors hide their previous training. Bluaer doesn't. And just about everything in a RBSD program exists in Traditional Systems.

But the problem is that many (note I did not say all) Traditional Systems also have a ton of Dogmatic beliefs that have built up over the years about the execution of their technqiues in self defense situations (such as in a suprise situation I'll be able to access fine targeting and motor control techniques). Or they've modified their mindset for to focus on other material (like point sparring). A good RBSD system breaks throught that dogma. Do some RBSD programs go to far in TMA basing? Yes. Definetely. But there are lots of traditional martial artists who "bury" their heads in the sand convinced that when attacked they would easily be able to rip out an attackers throat (or even catch and break a punching arm).

Btw, the people who failed at the disarms did try wrist techniques. The gunman simply resisted. And that was enough to start a wrestling situation.

Why didn't the wrist throws/locks work. To speculate, under the duress of the situation, they defenders were not able to correctly position for a wrist lock. So they might have gotten close. But they also did nothing to soften up the gunman to allow them the manipulation. Without any reason to go soft, the gunman simple reacted like anyone would and resisted. Que wrasslin' music.

- Matt
 
Yes, the softening up aspect for the vast majority of people is a must. There are those that have the pure physical strength to just manipilate a limb (wrist - elbow), but it still is much easier to inflict some pain prior. One can assume that this did not happen when those people attempted the disarm.

I am not all that familiar with the training curriculum of RBSD systems. Can anyone elaborate on how long the training time frame is in comparison to standard martial arts schools?

:asian:
 
I think most of us have seen Marco Lalas ads out there for a long time now. Has anyone ever trained with him personally or know someone who has?

:asian:
 
I can't for a moment imagine why folks like Sammy Franco, Peyton Quinn, Marc "Animal" Macyoung, Richard Ryan, Tony Blauer, Richard Dimitri and Geoff Thompson would be considered "little known". They've been doing their thing for a long time, and are widely published and talked about. With the internet, there are no longer any secrets. Anyone who has really searched for realistic self-defense will have run into these guys. Even a hardcore traditionalist trying to shun contemporary systems will have run into them in magazines.

Much of what they have developed is highly convergent and overlapping, which is telling.

I spent about five years training under the Blauer tactical system. Learned lots from it, and to be honest it made me throw out a lot of what I learned from TMA. I've dialogued online with Quinn, Dimitri, and Franco, and read some Geoff Thompson. All good folks. Oh, I can't say that I like them all personally, but they've made substantive contributions to keeping people safe.

RBSD is better suited than TMA to short-term training, but many of the students, like MA students, train continually for a couple years or a few decades.

As for Marco Lala, "Tettsu bushi", he's more in line with TMA or MMA. He's a big believer in cross-training, hard training. Main karate, boxing, and subwrestling. Very technical, smart guy. I have a stack of his tapes.
 
Originally posted by Black Bear
I can't for a moment imagine why folks like Sammy Franco, Peyton Quinn, Marc "Animal" Macyoung, Richard Ryan, Tony Blauer, Richard Dimitri and Geoff Thompson would be considered "little known". They've been doing their thing for a long time, and are widely published and talked about. With the internet, there are no longer any secrets. Anyone who has really searched for realistic self-defense will have run into these guys. Even a hardcore traditionalist trying to shun contemporary systems will have run into them in magazines.

Much of what they have developed is highly convergent and overlapping, which is telling.

I spent about five years training under the Blauer tactical system. Learned lots from it, and to be honest it made me throw out a lot of what I learned from TMA. I've dialogued online with Quinn, Dimitri, and Franco, and read some Geoff Thompson. All good folks. Oh, I can't say that I like them all personally, but they've made substantive contributions to keeping people safe.

RBSD is better suited than TMA to short-term training, but many of the students, like MA students, train continually for a couple years or a few decades.

As for Marco Lala, "Tettsu bushi", he's more in line with TMA or MMA. He's a big believer in cross-training, hard training. Main karate, boxing, and subwrestling. Very technical, smart guy. I have a stack of his tapes.

Blackbear-First off, welcome to the forum. I look forward to having some discussions with you!

As for not being so well known. I do realize that theses guys have been around for a long time. I have read about them online, I have some of their books and plan on getting a few of the tapes. When I made that comment, I was basically referring to people who come from more of a TMA background rather than someone from a MMA, or crosstraining student. I have been doing Kenpo for 17yrs, and that IMO, is a TMA, with ALOT of negativity when it comes to crosstraining. I, thank God, have been crosstraining for a while now and am VERY happy with I am. I train in Arnis to supplement my weapons, as well as a few other FMA. I also do BJJ with a guy whos heavily into that as well as MMA. When I want to get my best training, my best learning exp. and my best workout.....thats where I go.

Again, welcome to the forum.

Mike
 
Thanks for the welcome here. I'm glad you're taking the time to cross-train and explore. I think that videos are a fine way of getting acquainted with other methodologies. Many TMA'ists spread ridiculous paranoia about videos. At the worst, a video may be useless, and you've lost $30. This is no worse than going to a month's worth of classes at a lousy studio, moneywise, and you've lost only one evening of your time, not eight.

Restricting cross-training is a cultlike mind-control tactic of some TMA'ists. What is it they have to hide? As a member of the Straight Blast Gym, one of the ethical guidelines we abide by is that we never tell a student not to train at another studio. Rather than framing it as some sort of "loyalty" nonsense, we should be grateful for earnest students who are seeking the truth in combat.

Wish you the best in your search, MJS.
 
Back
Top