If you had too....

Think of the scariest violent person you can think of. Think of the speed and size of this person, what do they look like? How do they move?

Now if you had to take them down, how would you do it(not taken into consideration that you can take him out in his sleep)?

Be honest, how you you approach this person?

Would you use a weapon?

Would you bring along friends?

Where would you do it?

What is your timing, your cue to do it, to trigger you?

How would you optimize your chances of getting out of that confrontation alive?

I'm guessing that a weapon, bring along friends, and hit the person in the back of the head, while they are alone and not aware would be the best answer.

My point being that to practice self defense, your core training should be from a scenario taken into consideration how the scenario is, but also the mental state of the attacker - be it a predator, monkey dance, angry person or a person under influence. As Tony Blauer states: The scenario dictates all.

Too many self defense teachers start with working face to face, and never move on to the core elements of handling a self defense situation: scenario training - starting off at disadvantage. But also advanced students do themselves a disadvantage not working from a "not ready " position - both physically and mentally. But working with the disadvantage as your spring board will greatly enhance your possibilities of handling the situation.

Coaching / self coaching

It's very common in martial arts that you "learn" either by standing by yourself(could be kata) or with a partner doing techniques. Most of the feedback is from a teacher looking you, maybe all the time or just when he is passing.

It's so common that you see it in movies portraying the student/teacher relationship in a dojo. But you see it many places - the teacher showing and the students doing it, and getting evaluated by the teacher. The sole reference for learning. Some schools have different levels of of reference  "a sempai" or just a higher grade. But it's still the same reference structure.

Its a structure that works, and ensures that what the teacher teaches is the main reference point. The back side of this is just the same. All reference are just the teacher.

Working with scenarios I've used group feedback as a part of learning; for all the students, no matter what role they played. And what I've seen that is the learning has been more thorough, making more sense for the students all the different aspects. A part of this success is to point out for the students the key areas that are to look for - even giving certain groups of students key areas to look at. It is there only focus, that one area. Making the feedback even more precise.

Taking this structure back to normal daily training and instead of having students train 2 and 2, I've let them work in groups of three, where the function of the third person is to "spot" different key areas. One at a time.

This has given a whole new team feeling, and enhanced the students understanding of the techniques taught. They have also become better at given structural feedback. They have gone from being coached to also being self coaching and ingraining their knowledge in their daily workouts.

So the next time you have to work in a group of 3 ( because the groups numbers isn't even), use it to get better at "spotting" and given feedback, and get better at self coaching!

Training "principles"

Doing techniques ”in principle” is the new black. You’ll hear teachers say “you do this but think of it as a principle”, “it’s the principle that is important” or “Understanding the principle will take into consideration the variation of the situation.” I heard it, seen it and done it in class. There’s nothing worng with it, but looking at Blooms taxonomy a certain buildup to understanding “principles” is needed.

The different level of Blooms are:

·         Knowledge

·         Comprehension

·         Application

·         Analysis

·         Synthesis

·         Evaluation

There is a logical build up of the first three levels ; Knowledge, comprehension and application.

Knowledge being the fundamentals like names, fundamental movements, facts about self-defense. Since this blog is about self-defense it could be fundamental understanding of attackers or you reaction patterns/flinches .

Comprehension being - understanding the knowledge - being able to describe and show the main ideas of the learned knowledge. This could be showing the technique you’ve learned, and being able to explain the key points of the technique. But the key points are learned points and not something the person has analyzed themselves to.

Application being able to show that the knowledge and comprehension is put to use, in a new situation. This could be taking the technique and applying it to a defense that hasn’t been seen, taught or used before.

Many teachers stop teaching here, and let their students stay at these levels, since the next levels have the risk of the students doing “new stuff”. But it’s the next levels that really show the principles. The three next levels show that that the student moves from thinking “technique” to think in principles. But more on this in another blog.

My point for today is that you can’t think principles without having the fundamentals in place, and that is  :certain techniques, certain keypoints and a certain level of understanding(application).

Since people have different levels of understanding and technical fundaments, it’s very important that the teacher teaching “principles” understands that the foundation of the student is really going to be the springboard for their “principles”, and if the teacher isn’t sure that alinge with the teaching , they might be experiencing  a whoæe new set of “principles” or misunderstanding each other, and in worse case the student  thinks he’s doing the correct “principles” but is doing something that won’t work in a self-defense situation.

Which brings us back to another point – you can’t do principles training without having a foundation to build it upon, which is not “principle”.

Feedback is important

One of the good qualities of a good teacher is the feedback that they can give. Not only the quality but the timing and usefulness for the student. Students that want to learn are in “learning mode” and are focused on learning. All of there senses are open and ready.  As a teacher you really can’t ask for more. This window of opportunity shouldn’t be lost, and not lost to ignoring a student. “Ignoring” is probably the lowest and most insecure way of teaching. It’s at the bottom were you hear teachers say “Don’t ask, look , and do as I do”.  

Copying at this level is Blooms lowest level. Being able to repeat/mimic what is done. But the understanding is not qualified. Some of the teachers might just say “But I can see if the students are doing the correct thing”. Which is true if doing the same thing is ie. moving your left foot in a certain pattern. But the reasons why this was done, and how it fits will only be guesswork from the student. Sometimes certain adjustments have to be made, be it a throw were the person you want to throw is really heavy, much smaller or taller. Or the person you want to punch has longer arms and can keep you further away.  These are just simple things and are examples, it can be more complex as in a scenario.

It’s very clear when a student that has been taught this way, when they themselves start to teach. They will on a daily basis meet these normal human deviations, and respond with “don’t ask, look , and do as I do”.

Students that are unsecure with not understanding the “why, where and what”, will probably just try something else(another style or something completely different). This really isn’t a problem, since the student will find a teacher(or a hobby) that fits them, but in reality as a teacher we all probably have this “Don’t’ ask, look, and do as I do” more or less in our way of teaching. Be it unconscious or conscious.

This makes it even more important that feedback is a part and acceptable teaching, since this will encourage the student to ask in situations where doubt will arise.  And by connecting doing with feedback, the lack of feedback will in itself point out the fact of needed feedback.

To much feedback or empty feedback (babble) will confuse students, so the feedback has to be precise, and at a level of understanding for the student. And we are backup at Blooms different levels. Having a group of students at different levels it can be hard to give everybody the correct feedback – or you just might have to differentiate the groups so each group can benefit from each other’s feedback.

But this kind of feedback in self-defense training can be very critical, since much has to do with the student himself; at least if they are working with self-defense built on a person own abilities. Students are the same and different at the same time, coming from different parts of society and moving in different parts.  So they are likely to meet some of the same things, but at the same time chances are different on certain things.  This is were the feedback from the teacher becomes crucial and needs to go hand in hand with the student, or they’re risk of learning something that won’t work is considerably higher.

Point of branching

Many of the martial arts students I teach want a "technique" to solve their problem. And the technique is typically a long cascade of movements, sometimes based on the attackers movements(while the technique is being utilized) but mostly while the attacker is just standing still.

The "dead attacker" isn't that hard to explain to people  they "get it", but sometimes it takes time. What is more harder is that the technique can change depending on the attacker, but also yourself.

At this seminar I was teaching I was showing a simple response to a straight punch to the "face". Step aside and start doing your thing. I knew before hand that there were going to be many different variations of "I can't get it to work", and had planned on showing the different variations, and how they got started. And behold, the students started asking on why the technique didn't work for them.

Sometimes the step to the side combined with the force of the attack made made the student end up more to the back of the attacker, while the opposite also happened ending up beside the the fist of the attacker.

Using these differentiations I showed them the natural "stop"/evaluation or point of branching. It's like a tree, where most of the techniques and movements are part of the steem, but sometimes you need to branch out. It could be the attackers is higher than normal or a weapon is involved.

Knowing these points of  branching are key areas of seeing and letting your movements be an integrated part of responding to your attacker. It's like learning when to know when your elbow can connect and when it can't.

Teaching this level is hard for students that have for years worked on the techniques that had 1 solution for 1 attack, but after a while you could see the students combined that knowledge and grow their understanding of their curriculum. They were showing the higher levels of Blooms taxonomy!

You are either in it or your not

If you can't see yourself as part of the "problem", you won't be looking for a solution.

Normally something you would meet in a management seminar or hear at some kind of pep- motivation talk.

But it really applies to self-defense too. In any confrontation you will be a part of it, and that part of the confrontation that IS at you, will have you as the focus point. So take the responsibility of being there and look for the solution in that situation.


1) Get in there
One of the first steps is to put yourself in there, not the physical violence, but how you define it. Who hasn't be on the mat saying "The problem is that his arm is not correct" or "I think that is stupid". Both of them distancing yourself from the actual situation and from your partner. It can easily become a"blaming game" - your doing this - that - not doing what sensei told - Get in there and be a part of it, find out why and how to solve it.

2) Take responsibility
Next - a natural extension of the first step - drop putting responsibility on others. Your the one training - your the one that is learning - your the one that is teaching. Take on the responsibility of the situation your in. The question that can motivate you hear is "what can I do to change this". Emphasis "I". There is not doubt that other people and situations influence you and your possibilities.   But  by focusing on these, you missing focusing your energy on what you can to; "what can I do to change this"!

3) Focus on the goal
In a self defense situation  or just training up to it, it is very common to react on "what you don't want"; don't want to get hit, or get thrown,  feel the sweat of the other guy or bruise our ego. Our mental powers don't convert to the correct inspiration or movement by themselves to get us over to what we want. Our powers focus on what we focus on. So shift the focus to the goal - which should be easy in a self defense training since the goal is tangible - getting out of that hold, moving around the threat, throwing that stun.....

4) Use the greater picture
Having a lot of small goals - techniques - motivation quotes, will only stress you to much if they are not aligned to a greater goal or bitter picture. Use the greater picture to steer your "long run" planning - ensuring that the underlying goals support it. Using different scenario training to support which areas you want to practice.

5) Remember that your not alone
Nobody is an island. Your experience, daily training partner, family, friends, the coffee guy on the corner. They all influence you and are a part of who you are. You wouldn't be you without them - so respect them. You don't have to agree with everybody - everybody shapes you. It's how you handle them that defines you. Remember that integrity leads to happiness.

Building up guide lines like these help the brain to handled different situations, even those that it has never tried before, since the mental patterns are being used and tried. And in situations were you do get side tracked, it's easier to get back on track, since you know what the main track is, and each time you do get side tracked, you learn how, and train how to get back on track.

So get in there and be a part of your "problem" so you can find the solution!

Teaching/learning

Yesterday I had planned to work on punching. It steamed form the thought that even if your working with self-defense, you sometimes might have to be the aggressor. Situations were you can't run when necessary, but have to ensure that you or your loved ones are not in danger, until you can get away.

So, I teach how to punch. I categorize punching into three primary categories  1) Straight punch like wing chun, 2) Straight punch like Karate and 3) Punching like a boxer, which is more curved. These types are fundamental movements playing into how the body moves and how you try to get maximal energy on impact with the punch, compared to protection, speed and possibility of next movement. But ultimately a question of getting most power from the punch under impact.

What I wanted to write about was how to teach somebody how to punch, when their primary focus(and ultimately a time issue) is to learn self defense. How much time and resource can you use on this aspect? Most situations will have the possibility to "run", so why not use your time to get better at this. And the question of time/resource comes to light again when talking about what is important to learn when punching. How much focus on the correct hand placement, the wrists, part of which you hit with, and so on.

But as teaching is a great way to learning, so is learning to "punch". Learning the mechanics of a "punch" will make you more conscious of the pre-contact ques and possibilities.

Time is the issue. Having a person learn self defense, and only have 1 hour. I wouldn't teach him how to "punch". But when a person has a fundamental understanding of self defense  it's time to teach how to"punch". Because now they correlate that information with what they've learned on self defense. This being   a higher level on the Bloom taxonomy - being able to process and make new connections with the information given - thus deepening the understanding. Students now have the possibility to understand how they themselves improve their own self defense techniques and situations.

This is the basics, and from this scenario training is done - it's bringing the chaos to the structure and learning how to use the learned structure to navigate in real life. But more on that in a later blog.

One technique - one defense

I can't count the amount of times I'm asked to provide the one technique that can solve a physical confrontation. Everything from a semi-innocent wrist grab to some insane ninja attack. Not looking at the probability of the attack it's nearly 100% that every person that has asked me that question wanted one single answer. And looking at at many schools/dojos and such many of them try and provide at single answer.

It's not that I'm not a fan of simplicity, it's more the focus on it. It tends to forget the opposite of the answer.... the what if what you did didn't work or isn't working. How do you get back into "the game".

What if you are mentally and physically out of balance (hit and maybe hit hard), how do you get back? Since we can't pratice being hit hard ie. the head, how do you really know how to get back in "the game". If you've never been "out there", how are you sure your learning how to do it?

The only way is to practice the "it didn't" work scenario; allowing yourself to be pushed hard in areas you don't want to be. Most people will in advance, since they know the scenario, already before the they start have mentally and physically prepared themselves to "do it right".

Knowing that what you do works is good, but remember that isn't the real mindset the day the bells ring. So your really not working the scenario and getting better. Your setting yourself up for a bigger surprise than expected.

I believe that when somebody asks for one technique for one attack it's always at least two things you have to practice  the wanted response and "a failed one" were you have to work to get into place. So when somebody asks for the one technique, tell them you have to at least practice 2......

The same technique

Yesterday we were working on breaking out of a headlock. Being a jujitsu and aikido practitioner I’ve tried my fair share in my time. Everything from practical moves to more fun but unpractical.

What really hit me was while I was teaching, that my thoughts were going through the “that this move is from jujitsu – that style, and this is from aikido” and so on. What really hit me was the moment I doubted myself not really knowing if the movement was from 1 style or the other. It was then I came to see them as the same. It wasn’t really the technique that was different but the principle behind that was different. A greater understanding on the Blooms taxonomy levels.

So when teaching I don’t know were the technique is “from”, but use the terminology and ideas the student knows. If he’s from jujitsu I explain using that terminology and techniques, and from karate I use  those. Students might think what they have is unique to their style, but that’s because they are only on a low level of understanding on the Blooms taxonomy. Or as some have put it, level of substance understanding.

Mental training of Scenario Training

Training in scenario should be more than just running physically through a scenario. It should also incorporate "the why we react as we do", since that will be the core of your reactions when you need to react.

Our minds work by focusing at one thing at a time, and the concept of multi tasking is just an illusion, were somebody shifts fast between tasks. What the minds strength is, is to recognize what i'ts experiencing and find a reaction that fits to it. It uses a lot of subconscious process and known reaction types, some more basic than others.

In stressed situations these sub conscious process and reactions surface and define what you'll be doing. At the same time a shift towards gross motor skills is seen, making it difficult to do fine/complex motor skills. Scanning's in the brain show a shift from using left/right part of the brain to more right sided, pushing logic and  objectivity in the background. Making the reactions more intuitive, illogical and emotional.

Depending on how the stimulis "hits", you primal reaction may differ from fight, fear or posture, linking your reaction type to the commonly know as the fight-flight-fear-(posture) theory.

All this just happening in that split second, altering your perception of reality and altering your emotional/psychological  state.

Ensuring that your Scenario training has part of it's fundamental training is ensuring that you can do what you have to in a stressed situation.

Scenario-what is important?

As many of you know, I'm writing down everything I know about scenario training. I'm thinking about making a book of it. It's a hard process and easy at the same time. The first part of just getting things written down seems easy, but I can already see that there are overlaps and inconsistency of what parts to be first. Not to talk about pictures and drawings that are consistence with each other.

My experience started all the way back in 1988, when I went into Aalborg Selvforsvars & JuJitsuKlub. A dojo that had realistic training in their program, where we some times went out in the local parks and did reaction training. This consisted of a route through the park were the students were scattered on different posts. One post would be a strangle  another just a sobbing woman, another would be a knife attack were some were fully view able while others were more predator types either by persuasion or ambush behind a bush were you couldn't see them).

Us teachers would walk the student through the route, knowing the attacks, and could evaluate on the 3 phases of a physical conflict.

This training sometimes was taken into the dojo, so everybody could learn from the different aspects; successes and the less successful.

As time has past, and I got older, many different ways of training scenario have been tried, both old and new. Books, videos and meeting with different teachers have given much information to work with. With all this information there is one basic question that is important; what is it REALLY you want to learn from what you are doing(the scenario your are to embark on)? With out this you might just be thinking about the scenario in your sofa at home, nice and comfortable without you really learning anything.

To many teachers just put up a sequence of situations and call them scenario training, which isn't totatly wrong, but isn't more than the first step; the recognition of a scenario. As see in Blooms taxonomy this is only the basics - being able to comprehend, but there is no learning or understanding and most important no working on how to use this. real learning comes when focusing on what you want to learn, and need to learn.

So next time you step into a scenario pratice, make sure what you want to learn and at what level.

One Breath

I teach alot, being it Martial arts, self defense or some of the management stuff at my day work. A part of it is stepping into a situation and start teaching on a subject I ain't necessary 100% into. It's stressful and dealing with customers you have to step into character.

Last class go me thinking about preapring to a situation you know you are going into. A lot of self defense is about not knowing and getting into the "fight" from that situation. But some people will know in advance that they are going into a situation. Learning to prepare for this is also a part of the training, and making this preparation as short as possible.

Taking " a step" back and see how to set up and get ready many use rituals. Some sports people have a certain ritual they run through. Some entertainers have special quotes or movements to set the right frame of mind. I've grown up with martial arts, and meditation associated to it., in some schools very elaborate breathing techniques while in others, just three quick deep breaths. Also in some classes certain gestures like bowing or making hand/arm movements, the same each time, were a part of the daily training ritual.

But the breathing was the single most thing that connected directly to my core, both physically and mentally, and connecting it to training(and by time) and teaching, it became my mental and physical button.

Stepping into a situation mentally and physically aligns my body and mind, and makes it more focused, when I do one breath. A strong tool for getting prepared on short notice. Practice your breathing, and connect it to what you want to use it for..

A copy or are you yourself?

Meeting up with two good friends, that both are very competent martial artist, we started a discussion about the teachers/sensei's and coaches we’ve meet through the years. All of us started about 35 years ago and have meet and tried many different teachers. Typically we started off in the city were we lived, with the teachers that were there.  At seminars new connections were made, and off we went trying new stuff.

Looking back some teachers were really good, while others were really bad. And even some of the good teachers probably wouldn’t be that good after all these years, but we meet them a place in life were they had some good stuff to helps us on in our quest. And then there were those that stood out, and even do. Both the good and bad teachers. Both of them rare in their own sense, but both of them have left an impression , thus influencing our lives even now.

I was thinking about writing an article about honoring all the teachers, sensei's and coaches I’ve been influenced by. But after our talk it got me thinking about “influence”, and what it is. A good teachers gets defined by what I feel brings me forward to what I think is my goal, and the opposite for a bad teachers. Acknowledging that even a bad teacher at the time did give me experience to understand and evaluate were I was.

From this I wanted to write a list of teachers to honor them for the fact that the experience I have is based on their influence. I found myself writing down every single teacher, the good and bad, even people who didn’t do martial arts since they influence my way of thought and possibilities. I know that I’m the sum of my experience, but still it surprised me. But what surprised more was the fact that each time I thought of a “bad” teacher I became aware of what I did learn by having that teacher.

There is a side of me stating that if I had be a student of the “right” teacher I would have learned the correct way. Bu this experience showed me that if I didn’t learn the “wrong things” I couldn’t really understand what I was doing now – I would only be a copy of that “teacher”. And between the two… me or a copy, I’d always pick being me.