Why self defense doesn't work OR the "anti" mindset

**Hedgehogey** · Posted On: 3/12/2004 1:44pm

Today i'm here to talk about the "anti" mindset. I got the term from "anti-grappling" but it is applicable in many places.

What is the "anti" mindset?

Think of an instructor teaching a defense against a lapel grab. The instructor shows the student to grab the hand and execute a wristlock. The students then take turns performing the technique.

This "defense" is flawed. Why? Because it distances you from the attack itself (also there is no resistance to the technique). It teaches the student to think "I know a defense for this!" without having to learn the attack they're defending against.

Now think of two judo players doing randori. Each is trying their hardest to establish a grip on the others lapel and get into position to throw.

The judoka have probably not learned a single lapel grab defense, but they are much better equipped to defend against a lapel grab than the first example.

My point here is that it is impossible to have a "defense against" something because in order to truly counter it you will have to learn how to do the thing you're defending against.

Another example: "Anti" grappling. Anyone with an ounce of sense knows the way to counter grappling is to learn grappling, and that "anti" grappling moves simply don't work. So after learning grappling you become the thing you were defending against, a grappler!

Bruce lee said it best when he said it is better to "do combat" rather than "do something ABOUT combat".

Another example: A student comes into an MA class wanting to defend agains "Thugs" (READ: working class youth he's been taught to fear). After learning and a lot of hard sparring he has adopted the "thug's" kill or be killed mindset, effectively BECOMING a thug himself!

So how is this applicable?

Well one way would be to stop learning "self defense" techniques and replace that with sparring in the applicable range (instead of learning wrist grab defenses, have the students spar for head and wrist control, for example).

Gimme feedback and questions.

**Ronin** · Posted On: 3/12/2004 1:48pm

anti grappling = 44 magnum

**HAPKO3** · Posted On: 3/12/2004 1:51pm

good post.

**WingChun Lawyer** · Posted On: 3/12/2004 1:53pm

Originally posted by hedgehogey

Well one way would be to stop learning "self defense" techniques and replace that with sparring in the applicable range (instead of learning wrist grab defenses, have the students spar for head and wrist control, for example).

Gimme feedback and questions.

I agree with you that fighting techniques and realistic sparring should never be separated from "self defense".

However, it seems (from what I have heard about KM, I have no personal experience on that) that schools of self defense put lots of emphasis on defense against weapons and situational awareness, as well as endless repetition of drills against weapons and surprise attacks. That, I think, is the only real difference between a self defense "style" and a MA that only (insert irony here) teaches you how to fight.

In that sense, I think such skills (situational awareness, defense against weapons and surprise attacks) should be taught in any self defense course, as sparring itself doesn´t necessarily teach those things. Of course, sparring should not be ignored.

**Hedgehogey** · Posted On: 3/12/2004 1:55pm

Then make the weapons defense etc. into a kind of sparring, rather than teaching it against static opponents.

More BL nutriding: "You can find a method, a path, to something that is dead, but never to something alive. Combat is always alive"

Fighting doesn't follow a script and neither should your training.

**HAPKO3** · Posted On: 3/12/2004 1:57pm

Training can follow a script in the very begining stages of intruducing techniques. The problem is that in a lot of places, it stops there.

Good KM schools do exactly what hegehogey is describing, by the way, and knife "defenses" turn into knife sparring. The problems is that most KM schools ain't good, but that's another story.

**WingChun Lawyer** · Posted On: 3/12/2004 2:01pm

Originally posted by hedgehogey
Then make the weapons defense etc. into a kind of sparring, rather than teaching it against static opponents.

I agree with that.

Remember that I never had any personal experience with self defense styles, so I am more or less talking out of my ass here, BUT I believe they do teach some kind of defense against multiple attackers in KM - according to my friend, it consists of a series of defenses against a bunch of people trying to choke you, who attack one at a time (a far cry from real sparring, but against multiple attackers I can´t see any other way to do some non-suicidal sparring).

Could the KM people here confirm this? I heard they also do some gun defense exercises with paintball weapons, which seems a good idea to me.

**Beatdown Richie** · Posted On: 3/12/2004 2:04pm

IMO, there's a difference between learning something in order to do it, or to avoid it. Of course, anti-grappling is grappling, but with an emphasis on sprawling, breaking the clinch, and escaping from inferior position, rather than shooting, pins, and submission. Similarly, a grappler who wants to learn how to strike will focus on defense and striking to set up his game, and not necessarily work on one-shot-KO power. Of course you have to understand the basics of the attack, but you don't have to work for excellence on it.

**Matt W.** · Posted On: 3/12/2004 2:04pm

Hedge is correct.

It's the difference between learning techniques, and learning to fight. Only one process actually enables you to fight.

Matt

**HAPKO3** · Posted On: 3/12/2004 2:07pm

Yeah. But the thing is that the only way to learn a sprawl is to train against someone with a good shoot. And unless you can afford to bring in wrestlers and whatnot that involves learning it yourself. In addition, working on your shoot, you get to see how you set it up, and gain a much better understanding of how to counter it.