Recently I stumbled upon the following description on a website and it honestly made me cringe. Why? Because it shows a true misunderstanding of the subject. I have changed the actual description using my own words because I have no interest in bringing negative attention directly to this school or their website. However, I do believe that if an instructor or a school doesn't truly understand the difference in training methodologies, they shouldn't be in this business. My objective is to help readers understand the difference between those instructors that actually care about the student's safety and those just looking to make a few dollars.


---------------------------------------------
Self-Defence / Mixed Martial Arts

Through the same training that law enforcement receive, learn how to protect yourself during real-life attacks.

Description:
Combining boxing, jujitsu, and law enforcement techniques to create a devastating street survival system useful by anyone regardless of size and strength. Learn how to protect yourself in real-life scenarios. Taught by a law enforcement officer using the same techniques he uses on the job.
----------------------------------------------


The title of the class should be the first warning sign. Self-defence and Mixed Martial Arts are two very different animals. One is used for surviving violent situations including unarmed assaults, weapon assaults, as well as multiple attacker situations. The other is used for winning tournaments. These are two separate and distinct objectives that require very different training methods. Anyone that claims otherwise truly doesn't understand the difference or just doesn't care.

Although the title claims it's self-defence and mixed martial arts the next sentence mentions "training that law enforcement receive". OK, now I am totally lost. Does the course teach self-defence or mixed martial arts or law enforcement techniques? Again, these are all different objectives and require different training. Law enforcement officers generally use control and containment strategies more so than defensive skills. When forced to protect themselves officers generally team up or escalate the level of force through weapon deployment in order to maintain control over a combative subject. In other words, they rely on weapons to defend themselves when the subject becomes too combative for control and containment techniques. This is obviously different than what is taught in mixed martial arts. It's also different than what is taught to civilians, because civilians have no true need for control and containment strategies. The goal of civilians should be to use the amount of force necessary to escape the situation. They should NOT be taught to stay with an attacker and attempt to control them, which is what is being taught by both law enforcement and mixed martial arts.

Now we move to the actual description which states that the system is a combination of boxing, jujitsu, and law enforcement techniques that make a devastating street survival system. Say what? Anyone that has read my previous posts will know my thoughts on "boxing" for self-defense. Again, I have nothing against boxing or MMA for what they are. They offer many benefits but realistic self-defense isn't one of them. Boxing is a sport that requires years to master. Even then, there are no guarantees that the skills learned in boxing will be applicable to self-defense. Jujitsu, especially old-school stand-up jujitsu is a great art that has many useful techniques and skill-building exercises. However, teaching a student to try to out-grapple an attacker is both futile and dangerous.

Then we learn that the instructor is a law enforcement officer. While this isn't necessarily a bad thing this doesn't guarantee that the material taught will be applicable to civilian self-defense. In fact, unless the officer has specialized training in civilian self-defense it's a safe bet that the material offered will be more geared to law enforcement than civilians. 

All of this being the case, how can such a system prepare the student for "real-life scenarios" when most of the training seems to be based on sport fighting and law enforcement techniques? Statistically, we rarely see the same kind of attacks on the street during real assaults that are frequently seen in the ring. Even attacks on police officers are different than what civilians are forced to face. Again, the difference between sport, law enforcement, and civilians is obvious and the fact remains that each requires different types of training. Don't be fooled by these instructors claiming that they are one in the same. Generally, such claims are based on making money rather than keeping the student safe from crime and violence.

Steve Zorn, ICPS
www.personalsafetyunlimited.net

To my surprise there are tons of so-called “self-defense” systems out there that emphasize closed-fist punching as the primary method of striking. There are even rape awareness programs geared toward women that teach the absurd idea of punching with a closed fist. In fact, during these classes the instructors will not only wear large protective suits but each female participant will be required to wear large protective gloves to keep the hands safe while practicing their punches. Am I the only one that sees a problem with this idea? What kind of instructor chooses to teach techniques that are more dangerous to the defender (intended victim) than the attacker? Obviously, only those with little real-life experience would teach such dangerous and ineffective techniques.

1. Punching is unnatural- Yes, there is some research that supports the use of the closed-fist as a striking implement. This goes without saying. Both primates and primitive man likely used their fists to resolve conflict and protect themselves. If we ask a child to strike a pad or some other object without showing them some special striking method we will see this primitive response in action. While a closed fist may be used, it will be performed in a natural and instinctive manner. The emphasis will be on what is commonly referred to as a hammerfist. This is the simple act of performing a large hammering motion with the fist while making contact with the soft portion of the hand just under the little finger. You most certainly will not see a typical boxing-style jab, cross, hook, or uppercut because these are unnatural movement patterns that require specialized training.
   
   
2. Punching poses risk of injury to user- The reality is that punching poses more of a risk for injury to the defender than the attacker. When I teach self-defense I focus on those techniques and tactics that statistically have the highest rate of success. While punching has been shown to work for some people some of the time, it's generally considered to be a low success technique because of the risks that it poses to the user. What many people, especially instructors tend to forget is that the bones of the hands are both smaller and less dense than the bones of the human skull? Why? Simply put, the bones of the hands are designed for movement and dexterity while the bones of the skull are designed to protect the human computer, the brain. When discussing this with my clients I often use the analogy of punching a bowling ball. I ask how many in attendance would be willing to punch a bowling ball with full force? Of course no one raises a hand. Punching the human skull with a closed-fist is no different. If the punching of a bowling ball makes little sense, how can anyone in good conscience promote the idea of punching the human skull in self-defense?
   
   
3. Punching requires years to master- Like many martial arts techniques, punching is a learned motor-skill that generally requires many months and even years to master. Once mastered there is still no guarantee that the user won't receive injury during the use of punches in self-defense. In fact, most people are aware that famous boxer, Mike Tyson broke his hand during a street altercation. If a highly trained boxer of Mike's caliber can't avoid injuring the hand while punching, what can we expect from average men and women with far less training? Keep in mind that the hands represent the ability to protect ourselves. Even if only one hand is injured, the ability to protect ourselves or our loved-ones is greatly diminished.
   
   
4. Hands require protection- Even if a person has mastered the art of punching the hands still require some kind of protection in order to reduce potential injury. This is why boxing gloves were invented. Before that, the old-time fighters would take steps to condition and toughen the hands to withstand the impact. Even in ancient times Roman Gladiators would wear protective gloves (gauntlets) to reduce hand injures during combat. So, in order to keep the hands well protected a person would essentially need to wear gloves 24 hours a day, just in case they happen to get attacked and need to punch. This obviously isn't practical or convenient.
   
   
5. Closed fists appear more aggressive- This goes without saying. If you see two people engaged in a physical altercation and one if punching the other into unconsciousness, what's your first general thought? If you are a reasonably civil person you will likely assume that the person executing the punches is the aggressor. Even if this was a legitimate self-defense situation, bystanders may see a different picture.

1. Open hand strikes are more natural- Unlike punching, the use of the open hand to push or drive things away from the human body is natural, instinctive and as old as man. Almost everyone can relate to using a simple pushing movement for everyday activities like opening doors, pushing grocery carts and lawn mowers, or even shoving the car off the road after it runs out of gas. By keeping the hand open we properly activate all of the muscles of the hand, arm and upper body that are designed for pushing. This not only makes the “open hand” more natural than punching but it also makes it a more powerful strike for average men and women who have little time or interest in learning to punch like a boxer. Because of the natural nature of this technique it is generally easy to teach and easy for most people to retain with very little training. 
    
2. Open hand striking appears less aggressive- Obviously the open hand strike appears far less aggressive than punching, especially to bystanders. If we see a situation that involves a series of powerful shoves or open hand slaps, we are less likely to automatically assume that the user is the aggressor. 
    
3. Open hands are safer for both parties- The very nature of “open hand” strikes makes them very effective. However, the same thing that makes them so effective also makes them safer, for both the intended victim and the attacker. Unlike punches that focus the strike into a smaller surface area of the first two knuckles, the open hand strike spreads the impact evenly out over the entire surface of the hand. This means that we can still use the same amount of power but because the impact is more evenly distributed it greatly reduces the chance of injuring our hands. It also greatly reduces the chance of injuring the facial bones of the attacker. Not only does this reduce potential injury but it increases the effectiveness of the strike. How so? Simple...when we make contact with the entire surface of our hand it spreads the impact energy out over a large area of facial skin. This can result in major stimulation of the facial nerves. When multiple facial nerves are stimulated at the same time it increases the potential for creating nervous system overload. The result of such an overload? A person can be knocked unconscious, obviously. So, not only does an open hand strike allow for a concussive knockout (the brain impacting the inside of the skull) but it also increases the potential for a nervous system knockout. All this is done without risking the small bones of the hands.
   
   
4. Open hands are easier to justify- Based on the above information we can see that not only are “open hand” techniques safer, more effective, and easier to use but they are more easy to defend in a court of law.

The next Warsaw, Indiana seminar is scheduled for Saturday January 19th from 12-3pm at Absolute Fitness Academy.

The topic to be covered will be "Defensive Knife". In a nutshell this is learning how to use a knife to save your life. This is not the typical knife dueling, or flashy martial techniques often passed off as tactical and practical. Due to the sensitive nature of the material it will be suitable for adults 18 and older.

To be covered: legalities of the defensive knife, fixed blades versus folders, standard grips, angles of attack, efficient fight-stopping targets, striking methods, inclusion of the empty hand, attribute-building exercises, self-defense scenarios, and more...

The cost for this intensive overview of the defensive knife will only be $25.

If you currently carry a knife for personal protection or have plans to start, this is an opportunity to learn how to use it effectively and efficiently.

Contact me to pre-register...

http://personalsafetyunlimited.net/seminars.html

Think you have a solid grasp of personal safety and self-defense? Test your knowledge with the Personal Safety Unlimited quizzes and crossword puzzles. More to come...

http://personalsafetyunlimited.net/quizzes.html