In the previous post I bluntly talked about martial arts being different from self-defense but how can we actually determine if what we are being taught it real self-defense training? Many years ago I was training in a specific style of martial arts. I was lead to believe that I was learning "self-defense". However, after 4 longs years I realized that I was still unable to protect myself during moderately stressful belt tests. If I couldn't protect myself in a controlled environment how in the world would I be able to protect myself during a violent attack? To rectify this situation I spent the next 20 years learning as much as I could about crime, violence, and real assaults. In the process I came up with simple questions that helped me quickly determine if the training was geared to surviving real-world situations, or if it was just martial arts claiming to be "self-defense".

1) Does it require years of training in order to be effective under the stress of a real assault?
2) Does it emphasize sport-based skills- boxing and wrestling?
3) Is the training performed in some kind of uniform or common street clothes?
4) Are the skills equally applicable to men, women, and teens? Are they applicable to the elderly?
5) Are students required to wear protective gloves to protect the hands due to an emphasis on punching?
6) Does the training begin in a symmetrical match-fight scenario, aka dueling?
7) Does the training include education on the legal aspects of self-defense?
8) Are the movements based on unnatural skills that require thousands of reps to perfect?
9) Does the training emphasize attacks most likely to be seen on the street? Does it include defense against common weapons (guns, knives, clubs, etc.)? Does it include defense against multiple assailants?
10) Does the training include post-assault and pre-assault information or is it exclusively physical training?
11) Is the training exactly the same for law enforcement, military, and aware citizens?
12) Are skills practiced on static training partners or someone moving in a realistic and dynamic manner?
13) Have the skills been proven to work during real assaults or at least pressure-tested in a chaotic training environment?
14) Is the training based on techniques or concepts?
15) Does the training include the study of physiology and psychology of self-defense?
16) Does the training emphasize defense against unrealistic attacks like wrist grabs and martial arts-based punches / kicks?
17) Is there an emphasis on learning pressure points or other hard-to-hit or ineffective targets?
18) Is the system itself more important to the instructor than the end result?

I am sure I could come up with many more questions but these generally cover all of the basis rather well. The reality is that any effective self-defense system will be fairly easy to learn, easy to retain and easy to use effectively under stress. The movements will be based on natural and instinctive skills that have been proven to work successfully for survivors of real attacks, not complex techniques that require years to master. The training will be concept-based rather than technique-based and will be equally applicable to men, women, and teens regardless of age or athletic ability. Even elderly will be able to learn and use the skills effectively. It will require the wearing of common street clothes (or duty gear) and the material will be based on the specific needs of the intended audience. Law enforcement, military, and aware citizens all have different needs and the training will reflect this. It will be void of common sport-based skills like boxing and wrestling and instead will focus on skills designed to slow or stop the assault as efficiently as possible. The training will also include all aspects of non-physical skills to include awareness, physiology, psychology, pre-assault, post-assault, and common legal aspects of self-defense. There will be an emphasis on common realistic attacks performed in a dynamic manner during training. This will include defense against all types of weapons as well as multiple attackers. Little to no emphasis on stylized martial arts attacks (wrist grabs, punches, kicks, etc.). Simple but effective attack-stopping targets will be taught, no pressure points or hard-to-hit targets. The end result, the survival of the student will be more important than anything else.

This is the criteria I use to help me determine whether the training truly is "self-defense" or not. If self-defense is what you really seek feel free to use it as a guideline and it will keep you from being lead to believe something that just isn't true.

Stay safe,
Steve Zorn, ICPS