I have written about this topic numerous times over the years but it's something I have to keep bringing to the surface...

There are many martial arts schools and now MMA schools out there claiming to teach "self-defense". As I have said thousands of times over the years there is a HUGE difference between martial arts and self-defense. While some of these martial arts and MMA schools do include physical movements that might be applicable in self-defense, the majority of what they offer is not conducive to surviving potentially violent or life-threatening situations. Any instructor claiming otherwise is essentially out to make money, nothing more. The reality is that there are thousands of martial arts for a reason. Some focus on art, tradition, and culture while others tend to focus on fitness and aesthetics. There are also arts that emphasize the sport aspects such as MMA. The point is that even when a martial arts style or system includes several of these aspects, they still tend to specialize in one specific area. We all know that MMA is sport-based. Anything they do will be heavily influenced by the rules, regulations, and principles of sport competition. Most people are aware that Tae Kwon Do is heavily based on tradition as well as modern competition. While these two dramatically-different arts will be extremely valuable for those seeking sport-based training they have little to offer the average man or woman seeking to survive a violent assault. I am not picking on either of these arts but just using them to make an extremely important point...in order to effectively teach specific skills the system or training methodology should be geared specifically to the desired objective. If surviving modern violence is that objective then the system and instructor should specialize in this subject.

I always come back to the term "subject-matter expert". Someone that teaches sport martial arts would be a subject-matter expert on the topic of martial arts for sport competition. To be more specific, this person would be a subject-matter expert on the particular art that they have trained in. In other words, a Tae Kwon Do instructor may be an expert in regards to Tae Kwon Do and it's sporting applications but that wouldn't make him/her an expert at Mixed Martial Arts or all of things that go along with it. Also, the act of earning a black belt in any style or system of martial arts doesn't automatically turn the person into a subject-matter expert on this particular art. This generally requires going above and beyond the simple act of earning a belt and delving deeper into the complex details of "mastering" the knowledge and the skills of said art. Also, it's important to note that the act of training in martial arts alone doesn't automatically qualify anyone to teach "self-defense". On a similar note, law enforcement officers and soldiers aren't necessarily qualified to teach civilian self-defense either unless they have undergone extensive specialized training to do so. Keep in mind that those working in such fields have different options for dealing threats than the aware citizen.

That being said, would you go to a plastic surgeon to get treated for a common cold? Would you take your vehicle to a construction company to have the oil changed? Would you go to an Italian restaurant to order a cheeseburger? The point is obvious. If you want to gain the knowledge and skills to successfully survive a violent life-changing event be sure seek out a subject-matter expert that can provide said knowledge and skills. Don't risk your safety, your health, or your life by attending those martial arts schools that teach unrealistic sport-based or traditional skills claiming it's "self-defense".

Take care and stay safe,
Steve Zorn, ICPS