Fighting Talk - Part One

Amongst the many skills that individuals operating in a protective role are supposed to possess at an ‘above average’ level, perhaps nothing is so disputed and emotive as being able to effectively respond to a physically violent attack upon a principal or self, at extreme close quarters.

This is perhaps the hardest of all the hard skills – most will accept, begrudgingly perhaps, that a scenario involving violence ?is a possibility, no matter how adept the various soft skills might be, though some will still continue, absurdly, to argue against it. Why is this?

?

It could be that many simply don’t have a realistic, accurate, or relevant frame of reference concerning interpersonal violence, or the threat thereof – it’s no secret that the vast majority of ‘close protection’ tasks exist only because there might be a threat in some very generic format…maybe…not because there is one, specifically.

Therefore for most it is SO unlikely to occur, reinforced by a lack of experience concerning such issues, that it seems to be relegated to a non-event completely.

In truth, the rare possibility of a violent incident is hardly ‘engine falling off a passing jetliner’ rare is it? It’s not exactly gangs of unicorns that are ripping high-end watches off wrists on Bond St? Why would someone engage ‘protective security’ at all…taking into account the eye-watering cost and lifestyle-intrusion of such a service…if there wasn’t at least SOME concern?

?

Perhaps a more commonly understood analogy is needed, to highlight everything in easier to understand terms?

?

How about we look at being a Lifeguard…to be effective in this role you will need many skills to perform effectively, to be employable, as mostly your day-to-day activities will not solely focus upon jumping into the water to heroically rescue drowning victims ‘Baywatch’ style…hopefully this will be a rare event, and you’ll be generally dealing with enquiries, giving advice, enforcing rules, maybe occasionally administering a little first-aid for minor issues – utilising mostly ‘soft’ skills obviously.

However…all this ‘customer care’ activity aside, you’re not just a ‘pool attendant’ are you? Ultimately you need to be able to actually swim…and not just the recreational splashing around stuff, but swim to a high standard, and be able to apply this in such a fashion that you can rescue a third party. That’s the deal…the bottom-line – without this ability, this capacity, you are NOT a Lifeguard, red swimsuit or not.

I’d be hard pressed to find a more accurate parallel I reckon…Lifeguards need to be able to physically swim, and ‘bodyguards’ need to be able to physically protect as a most-fundamental baseline skillset…both roles obviously require a multitude of? ‘less-dynamic’ skills that will be undoubtedly be used far more, but this doesn’t change the baseline one bit. Try applying for a Lifeguard job as a non-swimmer and see how you get on.

?

As always, context is crucial, so what exactly is the focal issue of this piece?

?

Hard physical intervention…beyond the confrontation and verbal aggression…above the discreet manhandling of nuisances, and similar…it’s that worst case lunging attacker, the active-combative determined individual who is a direct and substantial physical threat.

?

For the purpose of this piece I’ll refer to the general skillset required to address this emergency scenario as ‘combatives’ to represent the last-resort nature – it’s not the awareness based ‘self-defense’ or the assessment based ‘conflict management’ material, as essential as these elements might be…I’m talking about the worst-case situation where the avoidance ship has long since sailed, and there was probably never a de-escalation option at all.

It’s the seatbelt, the airbag, the emergency default – for those that are sane enough to actually accept that such a requirement really exists and should be available to the individual the next argument is over what system, or style, or method, is best suited to ‘tick the box’ and provide such competence.

I’m loathe to just make easy recommendations, and I’m not inclined to make all this a personal sales-pitch either – my ‘angle’ is never to tell anyone ‘what’ to think…but rather ‘how’ and ‘why’ to make their own more informed decisions and choices.

There are so many options to choose from within the ‘combatives’ training industry…and each is more effective, and badass, than the last of course – there’s some real magic out there too…that circumvents the laws of physics, and suspends disbelief…

?

Apparently, it doesn’t matter how big or small, how strong or weak…there’s all manner of bold claims to enable ANYONE to prevail over EVERYONE it seems – more than one attacker, weapons involved, no real athletic ability, no intention to train diligently and consistently…no problem!

It's a dodgy business at best…bolstered by huge doses of cliché, logical fallacies, and cognitive dissonance…not to mention a liberal sprinkling of magic-thinking…but to maybe give a few pointers…the purpose of this piece…

When asked for advice, I will always firmly lean towards recommending something that follows the ‘sport’ model in terms of training approach and technical content, as it is almost purely concerned with actual provable performance…right now…right here here…today.

This REALLY cuts down on the hyperbole and boastful rhetoric for the main – the exception being the freakshow tactics used to sell PPV fight tickets, but that’s another story – because there’s a very tangible outlet that looms whenever a claim or challenge is made…the event, the game, the competition – where the truth is decided in no uncertain fashion.

So…unrealistic claims tend to be very thin on the ground – you’re going to get called out if you suggest something that sounds incredible…at the very least with a “show me…” that you will be expected to honour. Compare this with ‘non-sportive’ offerings…where the promise exceeds the product as the default state – everything is just ‘too dangerous’ to actually test properly, so you just have to have faith that it all works as claimed… Funny thing about faith – it’s what you have when you don’t have proof…because if you do have proof…you don’t need faith.

?

I’m very fond of a particular Carl Sagan quote that goes - “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence…” with regards to all this – and I wish this would be taken onboard by the combatives/self-protection industry, and those who dabble for various reasons, a little more heartily…

If field sports followed the ‘combatives’ attitude, people would be claiming that they could throw a javelin 500m…and nobody would ever ask them to prove it… Soccer teams would boast of being able to win 50-Nil, and never have to step onto the pitch if their reputation was big enough, and who knows WHAT the new high-jump record would be…

Obviously, there’s often some nostalgia attached at times…but it’s attached to things that actually happened – and there’s a degree of realism that comes with it, that ensures no ageing athlete still believes they can go head-to-head with the new blood.

This realism extends into other areas…weight categories for instance – in combat sports these do NOT exist to protect the bigger fighters from the smaller ones – and there is a marked tendency for athletes to accept whatever limitations they have…stay in their proverbial lanes…and then absolutely crush what they are actually capable of instead of just talking and promising a big game.

As already mentioned, sports have an outlet…an event – and this keeps everything extremely honest regarding performance – there’s no “fake it till you make it” attitude ANYWHERE in ANY sport…there just can’t be. Everything is geared up for performance, for results – what makes a sport a sport is that there are conditions applied to level the playing field somewhat, in order to get a full and fair honest comparison of abilities. Almost akin to a scientific-method experiment of sorts, where as much bias as possible is removed to get clear and uncontaminated objective data.

?

Some might be thinking that I’ve just painted myself into a corner with all the above ‘sport’ talk…because, in a REAL fight there are NO rules…

?

Well…I’m sorry to ruin any “Gotcha!” moments…but No…I know exactly where I’m standing on the issue – and could even use a little ‘appeal to authority’ to say I’ve stood right here, many times before…but I won’t because raising your voice is never as effective as raising your argument, and I don’t aim to persuade anyone…rather I prefer to convince...

The apparently massive divide between ring/cage/mat and ‘street’ is not actually so massive at all – far from it in fact. Only if you’re partial to very shallow thinking, and can’t look beyond the superficialities of different clothing, if shoes are worn or not, and the immediate environment, is it very different at all – even considering various rulesets…it most certainly is NOT the diametrically opposing game-changer some will insist it is.

?

To be clear…rules make a sport fight harder, not easier – they remove artificial advantages and leave behind a true representation of what a fighter can actually do.

Put that proven fighter in an environment that has no rules, and it’s not going to be detrimental to their performance at all…but the complete opposite! So now with his or her already existing highly developed skillsets, honed against actually resisting and malevolent adversaries possessing similar abilities…they are now ‘allowed’ to gouge eyes, headbutt, and kick groins…use weapons…and they don’t have to stop if someone ‘taps’ out? They are somehow going to be at a disadvantage against someone…how?

?

Arguments are put forward ‘reminding’ me that sport fighters are not used to fighting multiples, or armed adversaries…unlike the ‘street’ combat experts – well…this might be the case, but at least they ARE used to actually fighting a single unarmed person, for real, which is a great place to start…certainly much better than just simulating being able to fight multiples and armed adversaries…

?

This is seen at every turn when training is run at a more realistic and ‘free’ pace, not just as endless carefully choregraphed sequences that assume effectiveness in lieu of actual resistance and real kinetic energy. At least the ex-sport fighters have a good base, a working vehicle to adapt to more challenging situations – sure they get blind-sided by third parties, and stabbed aplenty…early on, but then they adjust, and it all gets less and less.

On the other hand, those without such a ‘vehicle’ are the ones found actually lacking when things get real…even though they think they have it all covered, once the heat is turned up, and the script is thrown away, you soon see who the fighters are – who is actually ‘conversational’ at a fluent level, and who just half knows a few choice ‘phrases’ only.

?

Some may baulk at my use of the term ‘real fight’ above regarding a combat athlete’s event – but rather than argue it out, just turn up at your local Muay Thai, MMA, boxing gym, etc, and ask if you can get into it with one of their senior guys, all out.

Let me know how this ‘fake fight’ works out for you…shouldn’t be a problem I imagine…

?

My advice is always to look to a combat sport as a base…look past the rules, the mats, the bare feet, etc – if you can’t imagine how to adapt workarounds to these issues and see the immense value of training to actually fight, then I’d say that perhaps you’re a lost cause.

Whatever approach you choose…you need a solid REGULAR base. Occasionally attending seminars and workshops is not enough - much talk is made of all this stuff being ?made up of ‘perishable skills’ however for this to be true, it has to have actually existed in the first place – a few very short courses once upon a time have not created a high level of skill that has since perished…let’s be honest.

Regular consistent training is a necessity…and this must involve dealing with fully-resisting and free-thinking opponents on a regular basis – ?just flailing away at compliant ‘attackers’ wearing huge padded suits is NOT the same, no matter how validating and empowering it might be…nor is memorising what are ostensibly ‘movie fight sequences’ either….this is not ‘training’ but ‘rehearsing’ when all is said and done.

?

To this realistic base…add dirt. Eye gouging, headbutting and the like are not exactly difficult to figure out, as ‘bolt-ons’ to a solid combative delivery system and attending specialist short course training that introduces tactics for managing multiple adversaries, and weapons, etc, are now very useful and worthwhile additions – but they should never be the base, or all there is.

?

In closing, mention was made earlier about being ‘conversational’ for good reason – interpersonal violence is a language of sorts…a very unpleasant and difficult one for sure, and if faced with someone who is fluent, it’s no good just trying to think back to a few cool phrases you once memorised and hope it will all work out – you won’t be gently ordering a drink in a foreign country, or asking for directions with plenty of preparation…you’ll be having an argument, needing to answer tough questions spontaneously…no crash course or occasional dabbling will provide this ability.

?

In Part Two the issue of attitude and mindset will be explored and addressed….hardware is only as good as the software that runs it...