The importance of real experience

[Tony Dismukes]

Ther are a couple of important concepts to consider here.

The first is the importance of personal experience as a basis for teaching a martial art that you intend to have actual combative applicability.

The second is the nature of that experience and whether it's relevant to what you are teaching.

In the case of your TKD instructors, even if they had actual military combat experience in a warzone, they almost certainly were not using their TKD in that context. They weren't hitting enemy soldiers with spinning hook kicks to the head on the battlefield. So even if they are both stone-cold killers, it doesn't necessarily mean anything about the validity of what they teach in TKD.

Likewise, even if your BJJ instructor was an IBJJF world champion, it doesn't mean he would have a clue of what to do on a battlefield.

"Self-defense" is kind of a weird category for anyone to claim extensive experience in. Professionals who may have to regularly engage in violence (LEO, CO, bouncers, soldiers combat athletes) typically have different experiences from each other and from civilians defending against a predatory attacker. Anyone who has lots of experience in physically fighting off muggers must be badly failing the most important aspects of self-defense (awareness, lifestyle, target hardening, avoidance, de-escalation, etc).

I think what you can look for in validating yourself as an instructor might be the following:

• Experience in actually applying the material you teach against resisting opponents (whether that be in sparring, competition, self-defense, wherever)
• Experience in teaching others who are able to apply that material against resisting opponents
• Feedback on what you teach from others who have experience in the domains of application that you would like your instruction to apply to
• As much information as you can gather about the contexts in which you have not had the opportunity to apply your skills, so that you can determine what elements of your material might need to be modified in those situations
• The humility and honesty to admit up front the limitations of your experience and knowledge

I'll use myself as an example, because I have limited fighting experience compared to some of the people I've trained with. I've had a few minor street scuffles, a couple of amateur kickboxing matches, some grappling tournaments, and some sport weapon-based competitions. I've never been a high-level athlete in any of those. I've also had a boatload of sparring experience in the gym, including with some very high-level competitors. But sparring is different from a full-on fight, so how do I feel confident in the quality of what I teach?

One way is through feedback from people who do have more fighting experience.

I've never competed in MMA, but I trained with and occasionally helped coach professional MMA fighters and have gotten compliments on my skills and what I teach. Doesn't mean I'd be a good MMA fighter, but it probably means that what I'm teaching is solid from a MMA perspective.

I've never competed in boxing, but my boxing coach is a Golden Gloves champion, a 2x state champion, and has coached professional fighters. I asked him for guidance on being a better boxing coach and now he has me share coaching duties in class, points me out to his students as a technical example, and has me cover his classes when he has a schedule conflict. Doesn't mean I'd be a great boxer, but I trust that he wouldn't do that if he didn't think I was teaching things correctly.

I've never competed in wrestling, but some of my training partners and students were collegiate wrestlers. Whenever I teach wrestling techniques in my BJJ class and one of the wrestlers is there I usually pull them aside and ask them to let me know if I'm showing anything incorrectly. Generally they tell me that I've taught it correctly and occasionally even let me know that they've learned something new from me. Doesn't mean I'd be a good wrestler, but it gives me confidence that the elements of wrestling I teach are technically correct.

I've never had to take a knife away from someone in real life, but when I posted my video on dealing with weapons on the ground, I got some approving feedback from people who have done that. I never want to find out whether I would be successful in pulling that off in a real encounter, but that feedback makes me think I'm not leading people astray.

Another way to judge the validity of what you teach is by comparing it to what you see work in real life beyond your personal experience. I try to teach material that I see work in as wide a variety of contexts as possible - MMA, boxing, Muay Thai, Judo, BJJ street fights, and at as broad a spectrum of skills levels as possible. If I see video of something working in street fights, in high level MMA, and in beginner BJJ, and if I understand it well enough to pull it off in sparring myself, then I figure it's probably valid.

Another way is to isolate those elements of what you teach that you can fully pressure test without putting yourself through experiences that might damage your long term health. I don't know whether I ever had the mental attributes to be a professional fighter. I certainly don't have the physical attributes. And even if I did, I probably wouldn't want to risk the long term brain damage that is an occupational risk. But ... I've spent enough time grappling to know that only a very small percentage of the population can hold me down on the ground and choke me out - and those who can have both a high degree of skill and superior athletic attributes. I'm very confident that the skills I teach for defending oneself on the ground work consistently in a wide range of contexts.

Another way is to look at what your students achieve. I've never been much of a competitor, but some people who started out in my BJJ classes have gone on to do well and have earned their own black belts and surpassed me in skill. I can't take all the credit for that, but I'll claim just a little smidgen of influence on what they've accomplished.

Finally, I'll reiterate the importance of being honest about the limits of your knowledge and ability. I don't claim to be able to kick the *** of everybody who steps onto my mat. I just claim that I can point them towards becoming a little better at taking care of themselves. Occasionally I'll teach a technique that I'm not particularly good at (due to my body type, movement style, whatever) because I think it's an important technique that lots of people do use effectively. In those cases, I'll state up front that I'm not the best person around to demonstrate it, but I give them the best technical details I know and tell them to try it out, because it might end up being something that works much better for them than it does for me.

Hope that helps.

 

[Jared Traveler]

Ther are a couple of important concepts to consider here.

The first is the importance of personal experience as a basis for teaching a martial art that you intend to have actual combative applicability.

The second is the nature of that experience and whether it's relevant to what you are teaching.

In the case of your TKD instructors, even if they had actual military combat experience in a warzone, they almost certainly were not using their TKD in that context. They weren't hitting enemy soldiers with spinning hook kicks to the head on the battlefield. So even if they are both stone-cold killers, it doesn't necessarily mean anything about the validity of what they teach in TKD.

Likewise, even if your BJJ instructor was an IBJJF world champion, it doesn't mean he would have a clue of what to do on a battlefield.

"Self-defense" is kind of a weird category for anyone to claim extensive experience in. Professionals who may have to regularly engage in violence (LEO, CO, bouncers, soldiers combat athletes) typically have different experiences from each other and from civilians defending against a predatory attacker. Anyone who has lots of experience in physically fighting off muggers must be badly failing the most important aspects of self-defense (awareness, lifestyle, target hardening, avoidance, de-escalation, etc).

I think what you can look for in validating yourself as an instructor might be the following:

• Experience in actually applying the material you teach against resisting opponents (whether that be in sparring, competition, self-defense, wherever)
• Experience in teaching others who are able to apply that material against resisting opponents
• Feedback on what you teach from others who have experience in the domains of application that you would like your instruction to apply to
• As much information as you can gather about the contexts in which you have not had the opportunity to apply your skills, so that you can determine what elements of your material might need to be modified in those situations
• The humility and honesty to admit up front the limitations of your experience and knowledge

I'll use myself as an example, because I have limited fighting experience compared to some of the people I've trained with. I've had a few minor street scuffles, a couple of amateur kickboxing matches, some grappling tournaments, and some sport weapon-based competitions. I've never been a high-level athlete in any of those. I've also had a boatload of sparring experience in the gym, including with some very high-level competitors. But sparring is different from a full-on fight, so how do I feel confident in the quality of what I teach?

One way is through feedback from people who do have more fighting experience.

I've never competed in MMA, but I trained with and occasionally helped coach professional MMA fighters and have gotten compliments on my skills and what I teach. Doesn't mean I'd be a good MMA fighter, but it probably means that what I'm teaching is solid from a MMA perspective.

I've never competed in boxing, but my boxing coach is a Golden Gloves champion, a 2x state champion, and has coached professional fighters. I asked him for guidance on being a better boxing coach and now he has me share coaching duties in class, points me out to his students as a technical example, and has me cover his classes when he has a schedule conflict. Doesn't mean I'd be a great boxer, but I trust that he wouldn't do that if he didn't think I was teaching things correctly.

I've never competed in wrestling, but some of my training partners and students were collegiate wrestlers. Whenever I teach wrestling techniques in my BJJ class and one of the wrestlers is there I usually pull them aside and ask them to let me know if I'm showing anything incorrectly. Generally they tell me that I've taught it correctly and occasionally even let me know that they've learned something new from me. Doesn't mean I'd be a good wrestler, but it gives me confidence that the elements of wrestling I teach are technically correct.

I've never had to take a knife away from someone in real life, but when I posted my video on dealing with weapons on the ground, I got some approving feedback from people who have done that. I never want to find out whether I would be successful in pulling that off in a real encounter, but that feedback makes me think I'm not leading people astray.

Another way to judge the validity of what you teach is by comparing it to what you see work in real life beyond your personal experience. I try to teach material that I see work in as wide a variety of contexts as possible - MMA, boxing, Muay Thai, Judo, BJJ street fights, and at as broad a spectrum of skills levels as possible. If I see video of something working in street fights, in high level MMA, and in beginner BJJ, and if I understand it well enough to pull it off in sparring myself, then I figure it's probably valid.

Another way is to isolate those elements of what you teach that you can fully pressure test without putting yourself through experiences that might damage your long term health. I don't know whether I ever had the mental attributes to be a professional fighter. I certainly don't have the physical attributes. And even if I did, I probably wouldn't want to risk the long term brain damage that is an occupational risk. But ... I've spent enough time grappling to know that only a very small percentage of the population can hold me down on the ground and choke me out - and those who can have both a high degree of skill and superior athletic attributes. I'm very confident that the skills I teach for defending oneself on the ground work consistently in a wide range of contexts.

Another way is to look at what your students achieve. I've never been much of a competitor, but some people who started out in my BJJ classes have gone on to do well and have earned their own black belts and surpassed me in skill. I can't take all the credit for that, but I'll claim just a little smidgen of influence on what they've accomplished.

Finally, I'll reiterate the importance of being honest about the limits of your knowledge and ability. I don't claim to be able to kick the *** of everybody who steps onto my mat. I just claim that I can point them towards becoming a little better at taking care of themselves. Occasionally I'll teach a technique that I'm not particularly good at (due to my body type, movement style, whatever) because I think it's an important technique that lots of people do use effectively. In those cases, I'll state up front that I'm not the best person around to demonstrate it, but I give them the best technical details I know and tell them to try it out, because it might end up being something that works much better for them than it does for me.

Hope that helps.

The credibility law enforcement professionals bring to civil self-defense comes in a variety of ways. However what is a fairly universal component is the fact that street patrol officers take all of the violent crime reports in a city.

They show up, interview the victim, and do an initial investigation. This involves understanding how the crime was committed, often the who, what, when, where and why of what happened. And they do it every day for years. That gives them a pretty solid understanding of how and why people are victimized.

Also they are the ones initially deciding on who conducted themselves legally and who committed a crime. To the point of listing one person as a victim and the other as a suspect. On in some cases as an arrest, because they place that person in custody. Also identifying and collecting evidence.

So if you have a question about how violent crimes occur and how you should or how you can legally respond, street cops have a lot of experience on that subject.

This is aside from personal experience they have dealing with criminals and violent attacks. Of which they typically have a lot of experience that translates well.

 

[skribs]

In the case of your TKD instructors, even if they had actual military combat experience in a warzone, they almost certainly were not using their TKD in that context. They weren't hitting enemy soldiers with spinning hook kicks to the head on the battlefield. So even if they are both stone-cold killers, it doesn't necessarily mean anything about the validity of what they teach in TKD.

We also don't use spinning hook kicks in the self-defense portion of the class. This is a bit of a rabbit hole, so I'll try to keep this part brief. As far as I can tell, TKD (at least the style I learned) is basically three styles in one. The forms, sparring, and self-defense portions of class barely resemble each other. I could probably separate each aspect out into a separate class and claim to teach three different martial arts, and most people wouldn't know the difference.

Taekwondo self-defense is usually called "one-step sparring", although I consider it to be more like "one step drills". An example would be something like:

1. Attacker grabs defender in a cross-grab
2. Defender steps to the outside, breaks the grip, grabs and twists the wrist; other hand pushes down on the elbow to hyper-extend
3. Defender steps past the attacker, lets go of the elbow and transitions to a figure-4 shoulder lock (kind of like an Americana)
4. Defender continues walking and uses the shoulder lock to take the attacker down
5. Finish with a giftwrap and punch to the face, finish the shoulder lock, or finish with a wristlock

Of course, this is my experience with Taekwondo. There is very little oversight of this portion of the curriculum in my organization. You can skip self-defense entirely, or you can teach flashy self-defense that typically ends up on McDojo Life (i.e. person stands there with a punch hanging out while you do 10x punches and then a jump spinning kick).

• Feedback on what you teach from others who have experience in the domains of application that you would like your instruction to apply to
• As much information as you can gather about the contexts in which you have not had the opportunity to apply your skills, so that you can determine what elements of your material might need to be modified in those situations

I didn't quite get these. Can you explain these bullet points in different words? Especially the second one.

• The humility and honesty to admit up front the limitations of your experience and knowledge

I'll come back to this one.

I've never competed in MMA, but I trained with and occasionally helped coach professional MMA fighters and have gotten compliments on my skills and what I teach. Doesn't mean I'd be a good MMA fighter, but it probably means that what I'm teaching is solid from a MMA perspective.

I've never competed in boxing, but my boxing coach is a Golden Gloves champion, a 2x state champion, and has coached professional fighters. I asked him for guidance on being a better boxing coach and now he has me share coaching duties in class, points me out to his students as a technical example, and has me cover his classes when he has a schedule conflict. Doesn't mean I'd be a great boxer, but I trust that he wouldn't do that if he didn't think I was teaching things correctly.

My experience is mostly with the response I got from kids (and their parents) and hobbyists. "Kids love me" isn't really a credential, though. Especially not one that makes sense on a website.

I've never competed in wrestling, but some of my training partners and students were collegiate wrestlers. Whenever I teach wrestling techniques in my BJJ class and one of the wrestlers is there I usually pull them aside and ask them to let me know if I'm showing anything incorrectly. Generally they tell me that I've taught it correctly and occasionally even let me know that they've learned something new from me. Doesn't mean I'd be a good wrestler, but it gives me confidence that the elements of wrestling I teach are technically correct.

I've never had to take a knife away from someone in real life, but when I posted my video on dealing with weapons on the ground, I got some approving feedback from people who have done that. I never want to find out whether I would be successful in pulling that off in a real encounter, but that feedback makes me think I'm not leading people astray.

Another rabbit trail. This is why I don't like the gatekeeping that I've seen on this site and others that unless you've successfully used a technique in a life-or-death situation or in a professional MMA fight, your skill is unverifiable, and therefore you suck.

Another way to judge the validity of what you teach is by comparing it to what you see work in real life beyond your personal experience. I try to teach material that I see work in as wide a variety of contexts as possible - MMA, boxing, Muay Thai, Judo, BJJ street fights, and at as broad a spectrum of skills levels as possible. If I see video of something working in street fights, in high level MMA, and in beginner BJJ, and if I understand it well enough to pull it off in sparring myself, then I figure it's probably valid.

Same rabbit trail as above. I notice similarities between certain kicks in Muay Thai and Taekwondo, and some folks online call me a liar.

The funny thing is, now that I've started Muay Thai, I can see how what I've trained is similar and what is different. Leg kicks are throwing me through a loop, but my coach loves my teep.
Different rabbit trail, this is part of why I wanted to go to BJJ and Muay Thai for a time before going back to TKD. So when some prospective student goes on r/martialarts and posts my website and asks "is this a good school", all of those gatekeepers I mentioned above will go "Normally I'd say to back away from TKD schools, since most of them are McDojos, but if this guy also has a purple belt in BJJ and done Muay Thai for 5 years, he's probably legit."

I'm doing this for a number of reasons, that's just one of them.

Another way is to isolate those elements of what you teach that you can fully pressure test without putting yourself through experiences that might damage your long term health. I don't know whether I ever had the mental attributes to be a professional fighter. I certainly don't have the physical attributes. And even if I did, I probably wouldn't want to risk the long term brain damage that is an occupational risk. But ... I've spent enough time grappling to know that only a very small percentage of the population can hold me down on the ground and choke me out - and those who can have both a high degree of skill and superior athletic attributes. I'm very confident that the skills I teach for defending oneself on the ground work consistently in a wide range of contexts.

This can help give me confidence, but I'm not sure how it relates to confidence of potential students.

Another way is to look at what your students achieve. I've never been much of a competitor, but some people who started out in my BJJ classes have gone on to do well and have earned their own black belts and surpassed me in skill. I can't take all the credit for that, but I'll claim just a little smidgen of influence on what they've accomplished.

This can help down the road, but I'm not sure how helpful it is when first starting.

Finally, I'll reiterate the importance of being honest about the limits of your knowledge and ability. I don't claim to be able to kick the *** of everybody who steps onto my mat. I just claim that I can point them towards becoming a little better at taking care of themselves. Occasionally I'll teach a technique that I'm not particularly good at (due to my body type, movement style, whatever) because I think it's an important technique that lots of people do use effectively. In those cases, I'll state up front that I'm not the best person around to demonstrate it, but I give them the best technical details I know and tell them to try it out, because it might end up being something that works much better for them than it does for me.

Coming back to the point I held off on above. When described in one sentence, it almost sounded like this was part of orientation. "Hi, welcome to my school. The free trial is $25. I've never actually used my martial arts before, but I'm pretty sure what I teach you will work." That didn't make sense to me as a sales pitch.

But for individual techniques or concepts, it makes more sense.

Spoiler

Yes, I just realized I just said "free trial" is $25, but thought it was funny so I left it in.

 

[Steve]

We also don't use spinning hook kicks in the self-defense portion of the class. This is a bit of a rabbit hole, so I'll try to keep this part brief. As far as I can tell, TKD (at least the style I learned) is basically three styles in one. The forms, sparring, and self-defense portions of class barely resemble each other. I could probably separate each aspect out into a separate class and claim to teach three different martial arts, and most people wouldn't know the difference.

Taekwondo self-defense is usually called "one-step sparring", although I consider it to be more like "one step drills". An example would be something like:

1. Attacker grabs defender in a cross-grab
2. Defender steps to the outside, breaks the grip, grabs and twists the wrist; other hand pushes down on the elbow to hyper-extend
3. Defender steps past the attacker, lets go of the elbow and transitions to a figure-4 shoulder lock (kind of like an Americana)
4. Defender continues walking and uses the shoulder lock to take the attacker down
5. Finish with a giftwrap and punch to the face, finish the shoulder lock, or finish with a wristlock

Of course, this is my experience with Taekwondo. There is very little oversight of this portion of the curriculum in my organization. You can skip self-defense entirely, or you can teach flashy self-defense that typically ends up on McDojo Life (i.e. person stands there with a punch hanging out while you do 10x punches and then a jump spinning kick).

I didn't quite get these. Can you explain these bullet points in different words? Especially the second one.

I'll come back to this one.

My experience is mostly with the response I got from kids (and their parents) and hobbyists. "Kids love me" isn't really a credential, though. Especially not one that makes sense on a website.

Another rabbit trail. This is why I don't like the gatekeeping that I've seen on this site and others that unless you've successfully used a technique in a life-or-death situation or in a professional MMA fight, your skill is unverifiable, and therefore you suck.

Same rabbit trail as above. I notice similarities between certain kicks in Muay Thai and Taekwondo, and some folks online call me a liar.

The funny thing is, now that I've started Muay Thai, I can see how what I've trained is similar and what is different. Leg kicks are throwing me through a loop, but my coach loves my teep.
Different rabbit trail, this is part of why I wanted to go to BJJ and Muay Thai for a time before going back to TKD. So when some prospective student goes on r/martialarts and posts my website and asks "is this a good school", all of those gatekeepers I mentioned above will go "Normally I'd say to back away from TKD schools, since most of them are McDojos, but if this guy also has a purple belt in BJJ and done Muay Thai for 5 years, he's probably legit."

I'm doing this for a number of reasons, that's just one of them.

This can help give me confidence, but I'm not sure how it relates to confidence of potential students.

This can help down the road, but I'm not sure how helpful it is when first starting.

Coming back to the point I held off on above. When described in one sentence, it almost sounded like this was part of orientation. "Hi, welcome to my school. The free trial is $25. I've never actually used my martial arts before, but I'm pretty sure what I teach you will work." That didn't make sense to me as a sales pitch.

But for individual techniques or concepts, it makes more sense.

Spoiler

Yes, I just realized I just said "free trial" is $25, but thought it was funny so I left it in.

I approve of your effective use of a spoiler tag. Well played.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I didn't even realize the forum supported spoiler tags. Good to know.

 

[Steve]

Spoiler: Soylent Green is...

And you can next tags, too... that's kind of neat.

 

[skribs]

I didn't even realize the forum supported spoiler tags. Good to know.

It's hidden by the vertical ellipses on my browser.

 

[JowGaWolf]

The cops, bouncers, and prison guards I trained with had a lot more experience using their MA than the military folks.

Yeah I would pick their brains for hand to hand before I would reach out to someone in the Military. My main reasoning is because the likely hood that I'll find myself in a "special forces" operations environment is going to be very slim.

A special forces operator may not be your best teacher for navigating the streets. If I want to learn what will keep me safe on the streets then I wouldn't rely on anyone's special forces operator skill sets. Fighting skills help but on the streets you want to have some really good awareness and analysis skill sets. At least in the US, when I'm on the streets. I want to know where my escapes are and where my cover is. I would also want to know how to avoid certain areas or at the least recognize when I'm in a high risk area. In terms of hand to hand combat, I'll want to be able to quickly identify possible threats which will help to determine my course of action.

War is one thing. Street violence is something totally different. So much that even operators overseas who have to hit the streets actually learn that similar awareness from the streets and from non-special forces operators.

Training is simple: What environment will your students find themselves in 90% of the time? Train to that standard and that context.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Except you didn't say that you know he's seen combat. You said because of his role (and because of the role of your previous teacher) you know they've seen combat.

This doesn't even matter. Take him to a bad area in the U.S. and the danger ques change. Some of it would stay the same but a lot of it will change.

Indianapolis: Dutch commando dies after shooting outside US hotel

The special forces soldier was one of three Dutch commandos wounded in an attack early on Saturday.

www.bbc.com

Just because they can kick but on the battlefield doesn't mean that the streets can't get them.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

@skribs , I'm going to reply to some points in your last post individually and then follow up with another post with some additional thoughts that might be helpful for you.

We also don't use spinning hook kicks in the self-defense portion of the class. This is a bit of a rabbit hole, so I'll try to keep this part brief.

Yeah, that was just a random sort of trademark TKD technique to make my point. Other techniques you're unlikely to see on the battlefield: wristlocks, shoulder locks, reverse punches, knife hand blocks, etc. Bottom line is, the vast majority of combat veterans never engage in any kind of unarmed combat on the battlefield, so someone's military experience is not much of a predictor for the validity of their instruction in an unarmed martial art.

As far as I can tell, TKD (at least the style I learned) is basically three styles in one. The forms, sparring, and self-defense portions of class barely resemble each other. I could probably separate each aspect out into a separate class and claim to teach three different martial arts, and most people wouldn't know the difference.

Yeah, I don't know how universal that is, but I've certainly seen it in both TKD and Karate schools. Drastically different body mechanics for the three areas of practice. If you plan to be an independent instructor rather than following a curriculum set by an organization, then you get to decide if that's a model you want to follow.

I didn't quite get these. Can you explain these bullet points in different words? Especially the second one.

The first point (Feedback on what you teach from others who have experience in the domains of application that you would like your instruction to apply to) is the sort of thing that I was talking about in my personal examples of the feedback I've gotten from experienced MMA fighters, boxers, wrestlers, LEOs, etc.

The second point ( As much information as you can gather about the contexts in which you have not had the opportunity to apply your skills, so that you can determine what elements of your material might need to be modified in those situations ) relates to what Jared was saying in his comment immediately above your last comment. Suppose you want the skills you teach to be relevant to self-defense against a street assault. The first step might be to consult with the available data and subject matter experts to learn how attacks normally unfold on the street, including the legal aftermath. Then you can look at the way you normally practice your techniques and how that differs from the street context and how you might want to adjust your practice to account for those differences.

My experience is mostly with the response I got from kids (and their parents) and hobbyists. "Kids love me" isn't really a credential, though. Especially not one that makes sense on a website.

Are you looking for credentials to put on a website to impress potential students or are you looking for confidence that your instruction is effective for someone wanting to learn fighting skills?

As far as the first goes, if you're running a school that teaches kids, then testimonials from parents saying "Little Timmy loves classes with Master Daniel. He's learned discipline and his grades in school have improved since he started TKD here" is going to be a better draw than having an instructor with Special Forces experience.

Honestly, most people will sign up for a school based on location, price, the general vibe, and how much they enjoy their trial class. They don't know the difference between a 3rd dan and a 10th dan, they don't know the difference between styles and lineages (other than what you tell them) and they don't really know that much about how experienced the instructor is in actual fighting. There are plenty of commercially successful schools where the instructor has no significant fighting experience to speak of. The folks here who will break go through a school's website and analyze an instructor's bio and credentials and lineage in depth - well, we're not really representative of the average martial arts student. We're a bunch of obsessive nerds.

Another rabbit trail. This is why I don't like the gatekeeping that I've seen on this site and others that unless you've successfully used a technique in a life-or-death situation or in a professional MMA fight, your skill is unverifiable, and therefore you suck.

(This was in response to my comment about getting feedback from collegiate wrestlers on how I teach wrestling, and from LEOs on dealing with potential weapons.)

I really don't see how your reply follows what I said. As I said, I haven't applied those skills in a MMA fight or in a life-or-death situation. But I when I teach wrestling or boxing or MMA or street applications, I do check with people who have proven success in those arenas to make sure I'm on the right track. So far, the feedback hasn't been "your skill is unverifiable and therefore you suck." It's generally been very positive.

Same rabbit trail as above. I notice similarities between certain kicks in Muay Thai and Taekwondo, and some folks online call me a liar.

Who cares about these "some folks online"? What does that have to do with either having confidence in your material or marketing yourself as an instructor? There are commonalities between MT and TKD kicks and there are differences. Being able to understand both just makes you a better martial artist.

This can help give me confidence, but I'm not sure how it relates to confidence of potential students.

I understood your original question as having to do with your own self-confidence in what you teach. If you're just looking for advertising hooks, see my comment above.

This can help down the road, but I'm not sure how helpful it is when first starting.

Yeah, starting out is hard for a number of reasons. One of them is that you don't have a track record where you can point to the wall and say "look at all the trophies my students have won." But there are a lot of other difficulties with being a new school owner as well. I'm sure there are others on the site who are much more qualified to address the best way to approach that situation.

Coming back to the point I held off on above. When described in one sentence, it almost sounded like this was part of orientation. "Hi, welcome to my school. The free trial is $25. I've never actually used my martial arts before, but I'm pretty sure what I teach you will work." That didn't make sense to me as a sales pitch.

I don't believe I've ever had a new student come in and ask how many fights I've been in or demand proof that what I teach works. They come in, I teach, and if they like it they stick around. I do roll with students regularly, so if any of them have doubts about my skills that usually settles it.

I had some additional thoughts about avenues you might explore during your training prior to the point where you start your own school, but they were based more on the idea that you wanted confidence in what you were teaching rather than wanting credentials to impress students. If the latter is your concern, let me know and I won't bother.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Anyone who has lots of experience in physically fighting off muggers must be badly failing the most important aspects of self-defense (awareness, lifestyle, target hardening, avoidance, de-escalation, etc).

This is the irony. There's experience with fighting and then there's experience with avoiding danger. You can't really be an "expert in both."

In order to be good with fighting off muggers, then I would need to do things that aren't good for self-defense. In order to be good with self-defense, I'll need to be good act preventing a situation from getting to the point where I need to fight. One is being good at being in a fight and the other is good at avoiding them.

One of the things I often tell people is that I've been in a lot of conflicts vs fights. Then I sell my experience of being able to de-escalate, avoid, or prevent the danger or a physical fight. I haven't always scored 100% on the preventive side. Sometimes I went looking for the fight, sometimes I couldn't avoid it or prevent it.
Those experiences count too even though they are failures on the preventive aspects of self defense.

If my teacher told me that he's been mugged 20 times and survived them all, then I'm going to politely decline any lesson he has on self-defense. However, I may gladly accept his lessons on fighting.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I don't believe I've ever had a new student come in and ask how many fights I've been in or demand proof that what I teach works.

This is same for me as an instructor and as a student. I have never asked these of any of my teachers. The closest that I've gotten to questions like that is "Have you ever had to use it in a fight?" I keep the question simple, and I don't ask for anything beyond a yes or no response.

Students that I taught only cared if I could actually use what I was teaching. When I taught, I was honest about the techniques that I could use and techniques that I couldn't use. But that was only part of it. The biggest part was focused more about the type of learning experience and learning opportunities that they would have and that they would be exposed to. The sparring videos that you guys have seen was more than enough to make people feel comfortable about my abilities. I've never had anyone challenge me. I've had people test me through sparring but that has always ended in respectful ways.

I just don't think the bar is set that high when it comes to martial arts and self-defense. I think the expectations only become high when we as instructors start to talk too much about our qualifications instead of focusing on what we can do for the student and how we can help them.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

The folks here who will break go through a school's website and analyze an instructor's bio and credentials and lineage in depth - well, we're not really representative of the average martial arts student. We're a bunch of obsessive nerds.

Even the posters here don't make their decisions on our nerdy analysis of the instructors. When looking for a new place, I found some that on paper were almost perfect, yet in-person they all had issues that made me decide against it. Then I ended up at a muay thai gym who's website didn't make it seem anything amazing, but I love the vibe. They do compete, but I likely would have trained there regardless of if the main coach has been in fights or not.

 

[skribs]

Thanks for the reply Tony. I'm only addressing a few things you bring up, because I don't have anything to add to the rest of it, and this getting quite long.

Yeah, I don't know how universal that is, but I've certainly seen it in both TKD and Karate schools. Drastically different body mechanics for the three areas of practice. If you plan to be an independent instructor rather than following a curriculum set by an organization, then you get to decide if that's a model you want to follow.

Based on conversations I've had, I think Karate might integrate the different components better than Taekwondo, but that could just be marketing.

Honestly, I don't mind it so much. I find value in the components as they are more than I would trying to change them into what they're not. I started working on a curriculum that would connect the three better, and I didn't like what it was doing to the sparring and self-defense portions.

Are you looking for credentials to put on a website to impress potential students or are you looking for confidence that your instruction is effective for someone wanting to learn fighting skills?

Yes.

I really don't see how your reply follows what I said. As I said, I haven't applied those skills in a MMA fight or in a life-or-death situation. But I when I teach wrestling or boxing or MMA or street applications, I do check with people who have proven success in those arenas to make sure I'm on the right track. So far, the feedback hasn't been "your skill is unverifiable and therefore you suck." It's generally been very positive.

I'd say a lot of this is because you do BJJ. In most online communities I'm part of, the biggest vocal majority about what is and isn't effective are guys who do MMA, Muay Thai, and/or BJJ. Typically if you do a combat sport, they take you at your word, but if you do another type of martial art, they treat you as if you're an idiot and/or liar.

I know this happens from every art and it does happen in the other direction as well, but the majority of folks who do this on here or on reddit are in the combat sport crowd.

Who cares about these "some folks online"? What does that have to do with either having confidence in your material or marketing yourself as an instructor? There are commonalities between MT and TKD kicks and there are differences. Being able to understand both just makes you a better martial artist.

Because these "some folks online" might be reviewing my school on behalf of someone else.

 

[Rich Parsons]

My first Taekwondo master was a US Special Forces instructor. My second master (for TKD and HKD) was a Korean Special Forces instructor. In those roles, you know they've seen combat, and that carries some weight to what they teach. My BJJ professor, as far as I know, doesn't have any real-world experience, but has plenty of competition experience in an art that's known for being up there in realism. My Muay Thai coach (also a BJJ black belt at my school) has had professional MMA fights and documented real-world self-defense results. I've seen the pictures.

My Dad and I recently tried a Hapkido class with a guy with credentials on IMDB, and we found him rather pompous. On the drive home, we had a lot of criticism for his approach. One question my Dad had is if he'd ever really used martial arts, because our old Hapkido Master has most likely killed before.

This brings me to me. I plan to continue learning BJJ and Muay Thai for the next several years, after which I'd like to open a TKD school. I'm doing these as a hobbyist; especially Muay Thai. I don't want a concussion. I don't want to give anyone a concussion. If I do compete in BJJ, I'm going to be competing at the beginner belts. I don't have much competition record from TKD either.

I guess its a bit of an identity crisis. I feel blessed to be trained by people that I know have done real stuff with their martial arts. I feel I'm a great teacher (based on my experience teaching for several years). But I don't really have the real-world experience to back it up, and I feel that gaining such experience is not really in anyone's best interest. I'd rather not fight than fight (and have successfully done so on many occasions since I got back into martial arts).

Just because some one is a LEO or in the military does not mean they have pulled a weapon and actually used it.
Many do use hand held and their own hands and limited training ( in my opinion ) , on the job.
.
Just because someone is someone in the military has an assignment or designation for socom , it does not mean they have trained empty hand and or been in the field. Same for the Alphabet soup agencies. Many work in officers, reviewing data, (pictures, tapes, audio or video or new reports or .. ) and they are good and value added analysts.
.
Not all Seal Teams go into the field for super secret missions,
Some go for training other countries,
Some go for information gathering.
.
So, having experience helps.
I have experience.
.
I have been shot at (in person, from a moving vehicle and being stationary, and from vehicle to vehicle), pointed at with firearm, Had many brandished towards me,
.
I have been stabbed and cut.
I have taken away blades from people.
And every time they had one and I cleared one, then no engagement occurred.
.
I have tire irons, bats, all sizes and material and styles (cricket) and 2x4 and 2x6 and ...
.
I also have had to deal with cattle prods (Tazers meant to get the attention of cattle)
.
Lots of empty hand and dealing with multiple people.
.
I have been hit by moving vehicles.
I have jumped on them to avoid being run over.
I have gone through a plate glass window with other people.
.
And when it comes to TKD/ Hapkido I would suck at being a teacher there.
I can teacher FMA empty hands, but not Muay Thai nor Boxing.
.
While I know Joint locks, the small locks are almost always breaks ( when used against resisting people who don't know better than to submit ) and larger locks including heel, and leg.
Does that make me any good at BJJ? Not officially and with my endurance right now, pretty much not good at it in any case. .
.
.
Does it help ? Yes it helps.
.
Does that experience get met with lots of resistance? Yes.
I bet you and others who have read this far and not just reported or ignored , think I am being arrogant. Bragging about things.
.
I am not. Just data.
Also I can bet that any LEO or Alphabet soup type that doesn't already know me in person is thinking they need to check the doxing thread and check me out and see what they can find for criminal background. And when not found to assume that everything is false.
.
So, I do not preach realism or experience. I educate and teach.
.
I have been called out in the FMA a few times and met them on the floor. I got hit. I also know that they lost, and so did the crowd.
.
Yet, I say things like, "Thank you for letting me play with you and letting me move like that. " They know, so does everyone else. Yet in public verbal I gave them a way out. As they called me up to check me out. I answered. and then let them walk away with something.
it also stops them from following me in person or online to make me their favorite target.
.
So, yes experience helps.
The resisted training in BJJ is good.
They even do what I call singles which is let you work the move first with no resistance and then with very little and keep stepping it up .
.
.
Best of luck and wishes in your training journey.

 

[skribs]

Are you looking for credentials to put on a website to impress potential students or are you looking for confidence that your instruction is effective for someone wanting to learn fighting skills?

I'll elaborate on this a bit.

The thing I love about Taekwondo (and similar East Asian arts like Tang Soo Do and Karate) is that it is a striking art with relatively low concussion risk compared to an art where you're going for knockouts. It's in a bit of a sweet spot for me in that regard. I find that the value of the forms is biggest for kids and for older adults, so I realize that's where my market is.

What I'm doing right now in training BJJ and Muay Thai is serving several purposes:

In the short-term, I'm getting exercise and learning new skills. I'm also paying attention to what's the same about my professor's teaching style compared to my Master's, what's different, and what I like about each. There were things I liked about my TKD Master and things that frustrated me, and there are things I like about BJJ and things that frustrate me. For example, there are some teaching methods that I think are better suited for beginners, which TKD uses all the way through; and some teaching methods that are more suited for advanced students that BJJ starts out with.

Having trained both TKD and (by the time I open my own school) BJJ, I feel I will have a much better approach at each level than had I just done TKD.

One thing is it's nice to be a white belt again. Even though sometimes it sucks feeling like the mat is the ocean and I am a lion, it's also nice to have 0 responsibility for a while. I was doing 20 hours per week at the dojang on top of a full time job, so its nice to just fly under the radar.

In online discussions, it gives me the opportunity to say I've trained both the TMAs (TKD and HKD) and the combat sports (BJJ and Muay Thai). So when someone tries to give me the "Well you just do TKD so you don't know crap" I can say, "My base is in TKD, but I've done X amount of Muay Thai too, and this was what I found." Or even just to have "BJJ" and "Muay Thai" next to my name so most of the trolls will not even bother trying to go "Just do BJJ lol".

I will say my first couple weeks of BJJ and first couple classes of Muay Thai validated for me the training that I've done, but not in a way that I feel above BJJ and MT as a result. I feel I benefited from my time in other arts and I'm benefiting from my time now in these.

And there's the long-term plan of opening a school, so in the back of my mind there's the long-term plan of what my bio on my website will look like. This goes for prospective newbies, prospective transfer students, and experienced martial artists doing research on their behalf.

I have a lot of goals. Luckily, BJJ and Muay Thai solve 100% of my short-term goals and roughly 80% of my long-term goals, so I'm pretty happy with where I'm at.

 

[drop bear]

I know what gatekeeping is, I just wasn't certain how you were implying it was being used. I'm not saying it's a prerequisite. I'm saying that type of experience is a lot more important, because it's directly relevant. Also because there is SO MUCH miss information out there on those topics.

I'm also saying that type of experience will only take you so far.

There is misinformation from people with real world experience as well though.

For example. In Timor where the routinely murder each other. They also carry magical amulets that stop bullets.

 

[Jared Traveler]

There is misinformation from people with real world experience as well though.

For example. In Timor where the routinely murder each other. They also carry magical amulets that stop bullets.

That's a different type of police work.

 

[Jared Traveler]

One of the quickest ways to make your experience irrelevant is to proclaim you know "the way" or that because you did or experienced something that you know how they need to do it.

Of course people do these things and proclaim these things without experience also, largely linking their experience to a linage or a trainer who gave them the knowledge.

 

[Jared Traveler]

The difference teaching a subject like self-defense or anything tactical in nature is the fact that these skills are being trained to be used against real world threats.

While it is a bit hokey to say, the reality is there are no second place trophies in this environment. Which should add weight to the responsibility in providing quality, relevant instruction.

If you coach them wrong and don't prepare them in BJJ, your students get tapped, maybe you lose students. But if you coach them wrong in CCW or self-defense, they get killed, maimed or put in jail.

While the probability of needing real world self-defense is unlikely, the impact of these events when they do happen is very, very high.