Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors

Posted by: drgndrew

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/23/09 09:01 PM

G'day All,

All of the above comments are fair.

What we must remember though, is that this is a training exercise. No single scenario will ever be able to account for every "what if".

Yes in a typical pup there would be furniture, there would be other people, maybe load music, security and a whole lot of other variables. But this is a situational scenario not an environmental replication. Think of all the different environments that a self defence situation can occur in and then think of all the variations within each environment. it is impossible and impractical to try to replicate every environment exactly.

This is a basic scenario of a situation, that could occur, the idea is to be able to integrate and combine your training (including deescalation, physical and disengagement) into a given situation. in this situation the parameters where more open, it is a basic level training aide, as the student becomes better at applying the concepts then more variables can be introduced, for e'g furniture and other "obstacles" can be introduced, limitations to working area etc. Like any training aide you don't chuck the new student into the deep end, you work up to it.

This training is very much concept based and not technique based, hence you will always get people complaining about lack of technique etc.

As for when to strike, as Olderman said, that is up to you and is an individual thing, as is the strategy chosen. Avoidance is king and in this situation Jim tried to avoid violence by deescalating only after he exhausted the attempt did he pre-empt a resort to physical action.

we do not know the Goal of the scenario it may have been to de-escalate if you can.

As for the awareness items mentioned in Oldermans post, he is spot on but there is no way of knowing whether Jim took these into account of not, he is wearing a helmet so no one can say where he was looking, that fact that he circled around would have allowed him to see "friends".

Quote:

That is the first couple of seconds.
Two people are walking towards him, they enter his space, they touch and push him.
He has allowed that.
CCTV in those pubs?
That is the first part within a few seconds where a hard conditioned strike (isnt that why people spend hours doing massive amounts of reps) from Jim could have been justified in the courts.

Maybe, maybe not, it would be much easier to prove self defence in Jim's case after the deescalation, there is no real prove that Jim is in danger in Oz we must use reasonable force, and it could be argued that knocking someone out for entering you space and touching you is not reasonable. his actions are far more justifiable in court then such an early pre-empt.

You mention that the other "could have hit him".... but he didn't, in these situation the attacker is looking to justify his violence, Jim didn't give that too him. personally I would advocate making a serious attempt to de-escalate prior to premature pre-emption (I wonder if there is a pill for that..viagro anyone

)

Quote:

Personly I would have let the other persons hand begin to
be outstretched.
I would not have allowed him to make contact.
Then it would be I am out of here or do I have to fight my way out.

Kind of what Jim did wasn't it, contact was made he tried to de=-escalate and when that failed he fought his way out. you just would have gone physical earlier. (again not my preference but it is your choice, if you honestly feel that that was the appropriate action then you are right)

{quote]As regards talking people down in that situation and given the circumstances I wouldnt have even bothered to attempt it.
If the two were sat down and telling me then maybe I would attempt to discuss why I should be there but there again I would have more than likely not bothered given they could have been drunk.

From verbal begginings all sorts of things can occur.

This is your preference, and although I don't entirely agree I respect that. RBSD training (in particular Clive's) teaches you How to deal with the verbal beginnings if youcan prevent it going physical then isn't that better then just learning how to deal with the physical??

Please don't judge an entire system or instructor on only 1min 15sec's of footage. This is just one example of a fairly basic scenario. It is impossible to account for all of the "what ifs". what ifs are a great way to add to scenario but should never be used as a argument against one. for every situation there will be what ifs that prove it wrong (either real or simulated), the thing is most of the time the what ifs aren't presented so obviously they weren't defended against for eg the two attackers didn't have friends if they did the the scenario would have unfolded differently, there was no obstacles and there was room to move. Judge the scenario on the whats, not the what ifs.

One other thing before I post on Cords reply, is to remember when watching scenarios (especially via video footage) is that we have the advantage of being able to see the whole situation unfolded, we are looking on from a distance and we have the advantage of being able to think about whats happening from a kind of detached hindsight perspective.

It is very different to be in the scenario as it unfolds, having to make decisions on the spot etc, thats the purpose of them, mistakes will be made and thats why it is vitally important to contact a breakdown and analysis of what happened .

Perfection in reality is a myth.

Edited to add. The reason for mentioning he was a Goardie in an Aussie pup was to establish a racial undertone to why the guys where picking him, an e.g. of customizing a scenario to the participant.

Posted by: drgndrew

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/23/09 09:36 PM

G'day Cord and Gavin, I hope your enjoying that UK weather, been a bit hot down here.

Quote:

Sorry, but that clip is a text book example of how to look good in a seminar, nothing else.

I don't know, i think it's a good example of basic scenario training, nothing more nothing less

Quote:

Issues.
1. His fence is good, I have no problem with that, but he could have used better angles to prevent both attackers being square on to him at the time of pre-emption. Passive 'players' could have been used as a bar crowd to facilitate this.

Agreed he could have used better angles, this is something that should be brought up in the feedback and breakdown after the scenario. the addition of other players is a likely next step in the scenario. remember it is a training tool and this is a basic level scenario.

Quote:

2. The strikes dont look hard because they arent. Fencing is about controlling range as well as buying time. All he would have done is annoy them- a lot.

I know Jim and he can hit hard, but fair enough the strikes were not full power and may have been a little light, but this was a training session, we don't always go fullcontact in RBSD just like in Kickboxing, the scenario training isn't the place to develop hard strong technique, it is a tool to gain familiarization with applying the concepts being trained, scenario work is not technique training it is concept and strategy training.

Quote:

3. The idea of the 'human shield' is all well and good, but it doesnt look like that
The shield struggles, drops to his knees, grabs on, tries to bite, spits, headbutts, and this is regardless of you trying to poke him in his eye.

so it wasn't perfect nothing in reality is. mind you I doubt very much that the shield will be thinking about head butting, biting or leg grabs or any other offensive technique when he has a finger an inch deep in his eye. he will be thinking something like get this thing out of my eye" (maybe a little more colorfully put). I will state it fully right here anyone who says they will continue to attack as if nothing has happened during an eye gouge etc is FULL OF [censored].

But in this scenario Jim isn't actually gouging the eye, at most he would have his hand in his face, and yes you can fight through that, especially if you have experienced before but experience or not you will react significantly to an actual eye gouge.

Quote:

The attacker obstructed by his passive 'shield' in this clip has several chances in range to land clean punches to the defenders jaw- he took none of them, merely closed distance and waited to be dealt with- if you get attacked like that, then lucky you.

But he didn't why I don't know, maybe he was letting up a little maybe he didn't see the openings, maybe he was determined to do something else thus didn't think about capitalizing on the openings. again this is a what if, what if the opponent did something different to what he did, then the response and action would have unfolded differently

Quote:

Just another 'MA's are awesome' clip where someone walks away without a scratch.

I don't know didn't look like like that to me, Jim eventually got smashed against the bar at the end and the fact that many people are commenting on how bad it looks sort of counters you statement.

All in all these are your thoughts on the video and I respect them.

Posted by: drgndrew

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/23/09 10:04 PM

G'day Gav.

Quote:

Quote:

Sorry, but that clip is a text book example of how to look good in a seminar, nothing else.

Exactly which part of that clip did anyone look 'good'?

when does reality ever look good.

Quote:

I could not honestly see any discernible skill in that clip whatsoever. No skilled delivery system from which to attack or defend on,

Instead of looking for technique based skill, look at the skill in applying strategy.

I've discussed the open space of the scenario earlier.

That fact is real world violence doesn't look good
the delivery system is behavioural based, could you explain what you mean by delivery system. from what I see there most definitely a delivery system in play it just isn't technique based. if he had of formed a fighting stance for example it would have been counter intuitive to his de-escalation attempt.

Quote:

abysmal footwork,

he stayed on his feet and maintained his balance, he rather successfully kept them on one front, not allowing them to flank him is that not footwork. how would you do it better.

Quote:

terrible use of space (does Oz have bars the size of football fields? He back peddled more distance than most people run marathons) ),

he used the space available to him, ok so it wasn't typical to a actual pub environment but see my comments previously about that.

His back peddling was in a circular motion, which kept the attacker together and didn't allow flanking.

Quote:

pitiful striking,

It may look that way, and it isn't technically perfect but reality rarely is. I'll point out again that this is a training exercise, technical and pretty striking is not the concern effect striking is. if they weren't wearing helmets i think there would be a different perception of the effectiveness of the striking. or if you were the one in the helmet. the point of the scenario was not the striking

Quote:

grappling on par with your average unskilled untrained drunk and well, that was the good stuff.

What do you expect flying arm bars and wrist locks.

Gavin instead of just saying it sucked could you tell me how to improve it. (genuine question)

Quote:

Why anyone would pay to 'learn' how to do that? I'm utterly amazed....

Because reality based self defence provides you with the best chance of surviving a real world violence encounter.

You are judging an entire movement and an instructor on 1min 15sec's of footage. heres news for you dude people don't pay for a 75second scenario they pay to learn the concepts and tactics (and techniques) that scenario training help to integrate.

Now I understand that these are your believes on the subject, and I respect that, but please don't be to hasty to judge on limited info.

Posted by: drgndrew

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/23/09 10:20 PM

Hey guys How many actual RBSD seminars or training sessions have you attended.

how many real life encounters have you been involved in, and how many of those did you do exactly the same as the complaints leveled at this video.

RBSD is not Martial arts, and trying to make it look like it just doesn't work.

Martial arts try for perfection, RBSD realize that perfection does not exist in the real world. there's nothing wrong with aiming for perfection but there is something inherently wrong with criticizing anything in the real world that is not perfect.

my understanding comes very much from experience, I'm sure I've posted some of it here in the past so I won't post it again in case it comes across as boasting (though to boast about something you need to take pride in it, I take pride in all the encounters I prevented going physical which greatly out number the physical ones.), I have traditional, sporting and reality based systems experience and knowledge. so I believe my opinions are well rounded.

Now I'm not saying that you should listen to me and forget everything else, far from it I'm not that far up my self, but What I do ask is to understand what I say is based on honest belief and empirical evidence that backs up that believe. I listen to all the criticisms of RBSD because I genuinely want to provide my students with the best information and the best "way" available. I'll look at criticism and if it can lead to an improvement of what I do then I take it on board. That being said much of the most common criticisms about RBSD training and philosophy are based on hear say misinformation. I have already proved to my self these are not valid criticisms.

anyway I type too much

Be open minded and try to see where something "MAY' be true. and give up on "what if" arguments that are a waste of intellect and can never be won. if you disagree provide a solution if you can or at minimum explain why you disagree. hey if it just doesn't ring true then say that and use it as a based to discover why you intuitively don't agree.

sorry don't mean to sound like I'm telling you how to think

and I'm still typing.............

Posted by: Cord

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/24/09 02:37 AM

Quote:

Hey guys How many actual RBSD seminars or training sessions have you attended.

how many real life encounters have you been involved in, and how many of those did you do exactly the same as the complaints leveled at this video.

Gavin used to run a school devoted to it. Combat Arena as i recall. He is also a second generation door supervisor.

I worked doors for 10 years, and have been working in security for literally over half my life (18 of nearly 35 years).

Quote:

Martial arts try for perfection, RBSD realize that perfection does not exist in the real world. there's nothing wrong with aiming for perfection but there is something inherently wrong with criticizing anything in the real world that is not perfect.

But I am criticising this clip because it is 'perfect'. He makes lots of mistakes, leaves himself open to very real danger, and the only reason that the 'attackers' dont capitalise on it is because it is not in the remit of the exercise to do so.
That is not reality based at all, and if those had been real attackers, moving through those exact events, he would be picking his chin up off the floor after about 50 seconds.

Sorry, but that is the truth of it.

Posted by: Gavin

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/24/09 04:07 AM

Hi mate,

As Cord said above I used a run a 'reality based' club for want of a better word. My original club, where I trained for 18 years, run by my father, was a breeding ground for Doorman, all barring one of the Black Belts were Doorman and a fair portion of the kyu grades so 'reality' was (and still is) a primary concern there. Within the RBSD world there is a common belief that are Martial Arts are 'technique' led which all though true for the most, isn't totally the norm. A good fighting art (substitute for self defense/protection system if semantics are an issue with 'fighting') should be principle led. A principle is a universal component that powers all techniques, such as the ability to drive shots, throws, chokes, locks etc from the feet, developing the mindset that you can do this without hitting red mist, learning how to be strong from any position and how to seamlessly transfer between fighting ranges as dictated by the environment/situation. A delivery platform is built from the foundation of anything I mentioned above and more. Building skills that are then validated and tested rigorously in fight drills and free fighting. It is through 'techniques' that we have a vehicle from which to explore universal skills that are layered in and refined as the student progresses through their study.

RBSD like in this clip and virtually every clip I've witnessed is snake oil. I honestly don't believe people walk out of these training sessions any better than they walk in. On them there is plenty of talk about posturing, tactics, environmental awareness, etc, etc, a little training on specific 'techniques' and then its out with the funky crash helmets and time to reenact scenes and scenarios from your favorite soap opera pub fights and muggings. In these clips I see people making use of their natural unskilled attributes and the only behavioral traits I see being demonstrated is that of a victim desperately flailing their arms around, everyone clapping and then they all feel safe in the fact that they can do the business. As Cord said I would absolutely love to have had that level of aggression during my time on the Door.

I feel its fair to justify the snake oil comment as initially that might seem like a mindless dig. As I said above I don't believe in these 'scenarios' those guys are developing anything more than their natural untrained attributes, and believe that if they had been attacked like that prior to this training their performance would be no better or worse. Trouble is after the seminar they may go out and get in a spot of bother and low and behold that react exactly the same way as they did in the seminar (which in my lowly opinion they would have performed that way with or without the seminar - and without it the geordie would probably have a bit more cash for Ozzie beer - which probably ain't a good thing

) and thus the 'reality based' based seminar is validated.

Like many Doorman I really loved Geoff Thompsons early work and heard the message that to survive you need to be able to punch, kick, grapple, fight with weapons AND be able to do it 'f*cking hard' and I also heard the message that you need to train everyday with top quality people to become 'world class'. Learn to jab properly then drill and drill it until you can fire it off without thinking. Learn to throw by drilling and drilling until that becomes an attribute you can use should the need arise. That is the only way to learn self defense, it is from a position of skill and strength that people gain confidence and that takes time and hard work. I believe that the guys on that and virtually all of the seminars I've seen would be better off enhancing their natural attributes down the gym than they would going on these sorts of seminars.

I stopped calling my club a RBSD club and I eventually disbanded it because eventually it just turned into a fight club attracting already skilled Martial Artists looking for hard sparring and the unskilled Doorman who liked to scrap. The training was fun and hard, but was actually in reality providing a fairly negative environment that was eventually producing very little skill. I don't like selling snake oil so closed the doors.

Here is a great article by a UK guy called Mick Coup who is a UK guy who I think sums RSDB perfectly for me... and he has a tiny bit of experience:

http://selfprotection.lightbb.com/q-a-wi...rview-t6786.htm

Posted by: drgndrew

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/24/09 04:26 AM

Quote:

But I am criticising this clip because it is 'perfect'. He makes lots of mistakes, leaves himself open to very real danger, and the only reason that the 'attackers' dont capitalise on it is because it is not in the remit of the exercise to do so.

Sorry Cord but where in the video did you hear anyone instructing the attackers not to attack the defender, if the attackers did not capitalise on openings then that is the attackers fault for what ever reason. Now the attackers may not have been as experienced at being attackers (they were after all seminar attendants), But I can assure you they were not performing with the indent to make Jim look good or any other such BS.

Quote:

That is not reality based at all, and if those had been real attackers, moving through those exact events, he would be picking his chin up off the floor after about 50 seconds.

Sorry, but that is the truth of it.

So what your saying is basically if the attackers acted differently then what they did and Jim still did exactly what he did it would have ended differently ......[b} Well Duhh!!, do you think maybe Jim would have responded differently himself.

The attackers didn't take advantage of some openings (for what ever reason), if they did then those openings would have been dealt with.

man I have to giggle at arguments that basically say "if he was attacked differently then what he did wouldn't work". it's worst then the what ifs, at least you can use what ifs to build a scenario the if he was attacked differently argument is just plain pathetic.

guys throws a hay maker the attacker evades, but wait a sec thats wrong because if he did that against someone throwing a front kick it would work.....Well Duhh!!!

Dude it's a introduction to a training exercise.

I understand what your saying, and I agree there are things that could've been done better. These are the type of things that would be discussed in the feedback/breakdown session afterwards.

but It WAS REALITY BASED, it was an introduction to reality based training using a scenario that is very possible even if simplified (eg no tables and chairs etc)

From your background you should know that this is how these things start, and the begining of this video is an example of that and it does happen in reality just like that. the main difference between the scenario and a real world event that started the same way is that the guy tries to deescalate it instead of the usual "f**k off, Pr!*k", which would instantly escalate the situation with both attackers jumping in straight away

In reality it wouldn't have made it to 50 seconds. The attackers wouldn't be just getting up and starting again would they, if they were knocked down with helmets I would bet they would be less willing to get up and have another go if they weren't wearing them. So yes in one sense it isn't reality because of the over kill of the attackers coming back.

OK thats my argument for the video, if you honestly think it is crap then so be it, but at least judge it on what it is and in context. It was an introduction to scenario training, it was 75 seconds of a 4 hour (I think it was 4 hours might have been longer) long seminar for members of the public, it was not an advanced (level) participant seminar.

I would like for you guys to post an example of what You consider to be "Good" Reality Based Training, that can be reproduced with in a budget.

Come on guys show me the light.

Posted by: Olderman

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/24/09 09:22 AM

Quote:

Like many Doorman I really loved Geoff Thompsons early work and heard the message that to survive you need to be able to punch, kick, grapple, fight with weapons AND be able to do it hard' and I also heard the message that you need to train everyday with top quality people to become 'world class'. Learn to jab properly then drill and drill it until you can fire it off without thinking. Learn to throw by drilling and drilling until that becomes an attribute you can use should the need arise. That is the only way to learn self defense, it is from a position of skill and strength that people gain confidence and that takes time and hard work. .

Agreed and I believe Jeff Thompson got this strategy from his former mentors.
Rep after rep after rep. Put on the decent music not the crappy music. Its going to be a long laborious session.

Quote:

I believe that the guys on that and virtually all of the seminars I've seen would be better off enhancing their natural attributes down the gym than they would going on these sorts of seminars

I suppose people have to see the light. In that by attending these and other seminars they realize there is no quick fix.
So they train harder. Then attend seminars. When something is offered that they would need.

Posted by: Olderman

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/24/09 10:04 AM

Quote:

Hey guys How many actual RBSD seminars or training sessions have you attended.

Reality Based Self Defense.
Reality, there is an interesting word.

If it is reality and the scenario is a pub then I would have thought using a pub setting would be realistic. Either hire a pub ( guy who owns it might be strapped for cash)
put in some typical pub weapons e.g plastic glasses, bottles,something soft that could said to be an ash tray.
Is smoking banned in Oz pubs?
Soft furniture and some mats and do some pure this is how fights occur in a pub routine and do what ever defensive measures you think would work against unarmed or armed people.
Or set up a pub setting in a gym.

Quote:

how many real life encounters have you been involved in, and how many of those did you do exactly the same as the complaints leveled at this video.

A few.

Quote:

RBSD is not Martial arts, and trying to make it look like it just doesn't work.

Personally I wouldn't be looking for a difference. Martial arts should mean lots of reps, running, conditioning and hard graft.(Work)
Drilling workable techniques until they are automatic.
Regardless where they come from so long as they will work and have the desired effect.
The application in say S/D in pub setting well with your soft weapons pub the applications could be worked out or if they are already available and being taught they could be practiced and improved up on.

Quote:

Martial arts try for perfection,

Well it is a nice mental feeling when techniques become second nature, they work and are usable to the best of that persons ability. Just takes a lot of time , graft and is never ending

Quote:

RBSD realize that perfection does not exist in the real world.

I think it can or at least as perfect as an individual person can make something work at that given time. I would agree applying a technique to a given scenario would have to take in to account improvisation.

Quote:

there's nothing wrong with aiming for perfection but there is something inherently wrong with criticizing anything in the real world that is not perfect.

So why not make it so it is as perfect to that persons ability at that given time?
I suppose it is levels. Crap technique fighter attacking trained person should mean (I do state should, because I don't think everything always goes to plan) trained person does ok.
Training technique should be one thing. Real application is another. Then the two meet? Or something along those lines.

Practitioners of a style of karate fought some Thai boxers and then changed their training methods and some techniques after the bouts.

Adapt and improvise or so the actors in films state.

Posted by: Olderman

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/24/09 10:06 AM

Is RBSD good business down under?

Posted by: Cord

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/24/09 12:06 PM

Quote:

Sorry Cord but where in the video did you hear anyone instructing the attackers not to attack the defender, if the attackers did not capitalise on openings then that is the attackers fault for what ever reason. Now the attackers may not have been as experienced at being attackers (they were after all seminar attendants), But I can assure you they were not performing with the indent to make Jim look good or any other such BS.

Q. When is an attacker not an attacker? A. When they dont attack

Quote:

So what your saying is basically if the attackers acted differently then what they did and Jim still did exactly what he did it would have ended differently ......[b} Well Duhh!!

Can you show me one piece of that footage where the instructor was actually attacked? You know, punched, grabbed, kicked?.....How about one piece of footage where anyone even attempts to do any of those things?
All they did was move into range to recieve his techniques. Unless we are due a wave of 'Complaint Uke Muggers from Mars' then this is not a reality.

Quote:

The attackers didn't take advantage of some openings (for what ever reason), if they did then those openings would have been dealt with.

Show me.

Quote:

man I have to giggle at arguments that basically say "if he was attacked differently then what he did wouldn't work". it's worst then the what ifs, at least you can use what ifs to build a scenario the if he was attacked differently argument is just plain pathetic.

If he was attacked at all it would be a start.

Quote:

guys throws a hay maker the attacker evades, but wait a sec thats wrong because if he did that against someone throwing a front kick it would work.....Well Duhh!!!

No kicks or haymakers were thrown in that clip.

Quote:

From your background you should know that this is how these things start

Things much be different in OZ

Quote:

In reality it wouldn't have made it to 50 seconds.

On that we can agree, but for different reasons.

Quote:

The attackers wouldn't be just getting up and starting again would they, if they were knocked down with helmets I would bet they would be less willing to get up and have another go if they weren't wearing them.

And the instructor wouldnt have been able to hang on to that guy for so long if he had fought back realisticaly, not just went along with.
The instructor would also have had less time to try eye gouges etc if he was actually defending himself from strikes from the standing attacker

Quote:

OK thats my argument for the video, if you honestly think it is crap then so be it, but at least judge it on what it is and in context.

It purports to be based in reality, yet shows attackers not attacking. I have never seen a situation play out like that in my entire life.

Quote:

I would like for you guys to post an example of what You consider to be "Good" Reality Based Training, that can be reproduced with in a budget.

You have to pay Ukes to try and hit you back in Oz?!?!

Posted by: Kimo2007

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/24/09 12:33 PM

My thoughts are RBSD have always been they spend too much energy on saying TMA doesn't work, and ignoring the foundation resulting is some fairly poor fighting abilities. Most of these schools focused on drawing on high levels of intensity because they believe in the heat of the moment it's ugly anyway.

BS. I have to agree with Cord, this person made several major errors, including poor use of angles (they were squared up on him). He let them get way to close, if they actually intended to hurt him they were often well inside striking range.

Reality? I have never in my life seen anything go down like that. People like to say "it's not going to look like kata" as if fights will always be this wild out of control event. Maybe, if you not any good at it. I mean sure it's possible things might degrade into a sloppy brawl. But if you are a well trained MA, know how to keep your wits about you and are aware of your surroundings, there is a very good chance should have to do anything, it will be quick, clean and over in an instant.

No promises, anything can happen. But the MA's I know who have actually been in altercations, myself included, have been pretty clean affairs for the most part.

Sorry to those who train under this style of training, I just don't think by and large they do a very effective job. Too many holes and the instructors tend to rely to much on being tough guys, and not enough on applicable technique.

Now I am sure there are good programs out there, but I can only speak to what I have seen and the people I have worked with and my experience has not been very good.

Posted by: drgndrew

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/24/09 06:59 PM

Wow I didn't realize how long my posts were until I had to scroll through them to get to the new ones.

If you guys did actually read them all then I thank you if you didn't then I don't blame you.

My next replies will be more concise .... well I'll try

Posted by: drgndrew

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/24/09 09:01 PM

G'day Gav, I didn't see you post yesterday sorry for not replying to it.

Thank you for relaying you r experience in RBSD.

From what I read your RBSD was very Bouncer oriented and GT like. This approach is great for the alpha type male. I don't want to take anything away from GT's work he is a pioneer of RBSD. however his approach wasn't really idea for the average (or less then average person).

It seems that in the UK the RBSD scene is very much door oriented, nothing wrong with that as door men are the front line when it comes to dealing with violence. but door men are not really reality. Not to the average person. if you have had a long stint on the door then you will have (or will have developed) a aptitude that is very much in line with GT's approach (early approach I should say). you will be able to make this approach work, but the majority of people can not pull it of.

I can not imagine a 5'2' shy young lady being able to do the type of RBSD you describe. now I ask Who is more in need of the the SP training those who seek out the type of RBSD you provided or those who couldn't handle it.

one thing I'd like to clarify is my earlier comment that Bouncers or not really reality. when I re-read this I could feel all the door man out there singing in unison "are you saying what we face isn't real". no that's not what I mean.

How ever the BEP (I knew I couldn't last too long with out mentioning it) of a bouncer V's attacker differs from that of a victim v's attacker. the people bouncers face are fighting differently to when they pick a patron. the approach is different and the tactics are different. in many ways the guy taking on the bouncer will be more committed to the attacker and more determined, they are fighting for different reasons.

Drilling to be able to throw automatically is fine, but it is pretty pointless drilling a technique if you have no blueprint or experience in delivering the strike in conjunction with the BEP of the situation. this is were many Technique Perfect ( well as close to it) TMA-ist come undone on the street. They have not performed under the BEP conditions of real world violence, it's like swimming by learning to perform the strokes on land. this is where Scenario training comes into it is the Number one most effective way to link the training to the real world.

P.S. not implying drilling should be abandoned, just that it should be accompanied by some sort of catalyst for the real world (In my opinion, the best catalyst is progressive scenario training, I've look at other methods and scenario training still comes out on top, again not saying the others don't have their place).

.

Posted by: drgndrew

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/24/09 09:57 PM

G'day Olderman ( exactly how much older are you

Quote:

Reality Based Self Defense.
Reality, there is an interesting word.

your right but it is the easiest term to describe what we do.

Now here is my personal view of what reality means in this context.
It is how violence happens in the real world, that is specific for the reality of the individual.

eg a navy seals reality is different to that of a teenage shop assistant, which is different from a bouncer, which is different from, an office worker etc etc etc.

RBSD , in my view is an individual thing because everybody has a different reality. we all see the same bowl of fruit but from a different angle.

Not everyone shares my view.

Quote:

If it is reality and the scenario is a pub then I would have thought using a pub setting would be realistic. Either hire a pub ( guy who owns it might be strapped for cash)
put in some typical pub weapons e.g plastic glasses, bottles,something soft that could said to be an ash tray.
Is smoking banned in Oz pubs?
Soft furniture and some mats and do some pure this is how fights occur in a pub routine and do what ever defensive measures you think would work against unarmed or armed people.
Or set up a pub setting in a gym.

Mate you are 100% correct, and as you progress through the scenario work each of these things can be added to increase reality and up the variables.

The video you posted is AN INTRODUCTION to scenario training. as such it had few variables and was ...well ...basic.

just like any training tool we start basic at a beginner level and we increase the intensity (in this case the reality) more and more.

To be honest a beginner is going to benefit more by starting out with a realistic scenario but with fewer variables, and building up to a replication scenario.

How is KATA taught, usually only a few steps at a time, how is Kumite trained, it is in a progressive manner adding difficulty until full contact sparring is reached, you don't jump straight into full contact (well not if you have a responsible instructor).

just like Kata and sparring and gym and fitness work, scenario training starts basic easy if you like and then progresses to provide greater challenge.

A new student thrown into a full blown scenario with all the bells and whistles, would simply be too overwhelmed to actually benefit from it, much the same as a newbie thrown straight into FC sparring.

We also must remember the cost of making scenarios more realistic. now if we replicated the inside of a pub for this scenario complete with music furniture, smells etc etc then you can imagine the extra costs (plastic cups, maybe chair hire etc) but more importantly there is a major cost in time and convenience. Most scenarios only last a minute or so imagine the set up time, and hassle needed to build such an accurate representation of every environment that is used as a base in scenarios.

Like I said you are 100% right, what you describe is far more realistic then what was shown on the video, but its a difference between basic and advance, cost and benefit

Quote:

how many real life encounters have you been involved in, and how many of those did you do exactly the same as the complaints leveled at this video.

A few.

Quote:

RBSD is not Martial arts, and trying to make it look like it just doesn't work.

Personally I wouldn't be looking for a difference. Martial arts should mean lots of reps, running, conditioning and hard graft.(Work)[/quote}

But this is not a requirement for self protection, this is proven by the greater then chance number of untrained, smaller and weaker "victims" that have fought off a larger attacker

Plus not every one has the time to do this, if they do then I say go for it, it provides substantial long term skills and abilities. (I'm not discounting the effectiveness of this type of training, the results speak for themselves. it's not for everyone)

Quote:

Drilling workable techniques until they are automatic.
Regardless where they come from so long as they will work and have the desired effect.

yep but scenario training enables a more concrete transition from training the reps to perform in the real world. THE BEP of violence does have an effect on the persons ability to deliver under real circumstances, scenario training provides the link.

Quote:

The application in say S/D in pub setting well with your soft weapons pub the applications could be worked out or if they are already available and being taught they could be practiced and improved up on.

which is what scenario training does

Quote:

So why not make it so it is as perfect to that persons ability at that given time?

Who say's we don't, RBSD (at least how I look at) is about providing real world self defence skills to everyone as quickly as possible, that is our primary concern. improvement is a natural follow on from that heres where you drill you shots, but we are still concerned with reality it is useless to have a perfect technique if it falls to pieces in a real go.

All in all Olderman I think we pretty well agree, I just tend to shout out for the beginner and Mr/s under average NOW as opposed to them after significant training. I am an advocate of high reps drilling etc but My first concern is to get the student to a level of ability as quick as possible and then build upon that. RBSD to me should concentrate on the first step not the end result (if that makes sense) were as MA tends to do it the other way around.

Same mountain different path.

Posted by: drgndrew

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/24/09 10:00 PM

Quote:

Is RBSD good business down under?

NO WAY DUDE

If you want to make a small fortune then start with a very large fortune and open up a RBSD club.

RBSD is still very young down here, its focus tends do be more Civilian oriented then security and military. but there is a good mix of all three it's just small but slowly growing.

Posted by: Olderman

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/24/09 11:52 PM

Me? Older.

I am of the old school. I dont think there is a quick fix.
Sure people can be shown something and they might have some success with it if the person who attacks them isnt too good.
But I think in the end it will come down to technique training.
How would a person who has no experience learn to use that training ?
Well there are seminars run here by Geoff Thompson and the likes.
A person still has to be able to do something.
That something is technique training, fitness and conditioning.
So I am afraid for effective S/D training its a mixture.

No short cuts I am afraid.

Posted by: drgndrew

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/25/09 01:31 AM

G’day Cord,

Quote:

Q. When is an attacker not an attacker? A. When they dont attack
.
If he was attacked at all it would be a start.
.
Can you show me one piece of that footage where the instructor was actually attacked? You know, punched, grabbed, kicked?.....How about one piece of footage where anyone even attempts to do any of those things?
.
All they did was move into range to recieve his techniques. Unless we are due a wave of 'Complaint Uke Muggers from Mars' then this is not a reality.
.
And the instructor wouldnt have been able to hang on to that guy for so long if he had fought back realisticaly, not just went along with.
.
The instructor would also have had less time to try eye gouges etc if he was actually defending himself from strikes from the standing attacker
.
It purports to be based in reality, yet shows attackers not attacking. I have never seen a situation play out like that in my entire life.

note: I’ve cut and pasted your comments into one quote, mainly to stop me waffling on too much ….. yeah it’s true, I tend to do that. .

It seems the main complaint you have for this video is that the attackers do not attack realistically.

Fair enough I can’t argue with that, I agree there should have been a little more intent (ok maybe a lot more) on the attackers part.

All I can do is offer an explanation as to why, chances are they had not done much scenario training before, it is very likely that they just hadn’t had experience at being a bad guy. Remember this was an Introduction Seminar not an advance one.

I’m sure you would appreciate the difficulty in playing a bad guy role realistically if it isn’t in your nature or you simply don’t know haw a bad guy acts, these guys are trained bullet men they were simply seminar participants.

Now I don’t know if this was the actual reason behind the lack of realism on behalf of the attackers, I wasn’t there and I don’t know the guys. But it is a common occurrence with relatively new participants to scenario training. Some may have experienced being a victim but that doesn’t automatically transmit to understanding what the bad guy did. Others have limited exposure to violence so may based the acting on unrealistic examples such as movies.

I’ve seen this all with my own students at first. Some of them just can’t play “good” bad guys, others pick it up relatively quick the point is there is a learning curve for the attackers in a scenario, My guess is that these guys where at a fairly early stage of their learning curve.

Quote:

Quote:

guys throws a hay maker the attacker evades, but wait a sec thats wrong because if he did that against someone throwing a front kick it would work.....Well Duhh!!!

No kicks or haymakers were thrown in that clip.

Your right mate, I meant the above as a separate example of how the "if he was attacked differently then what he did wouldn't work" argument

Quote:

Quote:

From your background you should know that this is how these things start

Things much be different in OZ

No mate violence is pretty universal world wide, though there are cultural differences.

What I meant was that you should know that violence doesn’t just happen, that there is a “story” behind the violence. It has a lead up, the attacker often is trying to make the victim give him a reason to go physical. That’s the whole purpose behind the “What you looking at” approach. Scenario training enables a better transition of training into the story line

Posted by: drgndrew

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/25/09 02:41 AM

I think I've covered everyone

I need a break

, does any one have any 2" pine boards.

Posted by: drgndrew

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/25/09 10:56 PM

G'day Ames

Quote:

Not wanting to turn this into a semantic discussion, so if it appears I'm picking at your words, I apologize.

No need to apologize mate. Clearing up semantics leads to better understanding.

Quote:

But I don't think that scenerio training offers a 'better' way at all, merely a different one. Both TMA and combat sports offer methods of becoming aware of imiment attacks, or aggresive behavior.

I honestly believe it is better then anything else offered by TMA or sport MA (in general) that I have come across, and I have done considerable research, but I may have missed something and I'm always open to better ways.

Could you give me examples of how "TMA and combat sports offer methods of becoming aware of imiment attacks, or aggresive behavior" and how they are better or on par.

Quote:

It really does depend on the 'TMA' being studied, doesn't it? Just like RBSD can be defended by suggesting that there is a lot of crap out there, and that one shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water, I think the same is true for TMA.

I full on, 100% agree, and I may be guilty of over generalising, but when discussing a topic that has so many different “way” you nearly have to be general.

Quote:

The simple fact is that a lot of the techniques taught come directly from TMA. Although it is true that RBSD can provide help extracting those techniques that have more 'real world' applicability, the fact is that the long term student of good TMA should also be versed in these techniques, and be able to seperate those techniques in the system that are meant for the street from those that are most surely not.

I agree my view is to provide it the other way around, in the long term I believe that an RBSD student and a TMA student SHOULD be on par (providing the TMA is Street effective, many are not), It’s the beginner to novice part, the first few months that are different. Where as the foundation of TMA is primarily technique based (instead of saying in general all the time, assume I am taking generally) the foundation of RBSD is primarily Behavioural and application. As I see it TMA provides a strong technical foundation on to which to build self-defence ability. RBSD provides self-defence ability to which technical foundations can be added. (I’ll post a separate post explaining My personal approach to RBSD which may explain why I can disagree and agree at the same time.)

Quote:

For this reason, I don't feel it is accurate to characterize TMA as being lacking in the kind of self defence skills RBSD promises to ingrain in the trainee.

in the long run I agree (again providing the TMA is a street effective system) in the short run I disagree.

Quote:

I don't want to leap to judgement on RBSD as a whole, because I'm sure there are many out there that do train the foundation. However, I think that the marketing and promise that many RBSD schools and gurus make is for a rapid gain in self defence skills. The very nature of this makes it so that basics are often overlooked, and in place of them is the scenerio training that is the hallmark of RBSD.

Now, I think this makes sense from a commercial standpoint. After all, the scenerio training is what attracts folks to RBSD to begin with. But I also think it is fair to say that the majority of RBSD schools out there (that is, if their marketing is accurate), promise a rapid development of s.d. skills, and that usually that means forgoing the basics. I've seen numerous adds that promise taking a trainee from zero to have effective self defence skills in a weekend.

OK I agree. I do not count those who market RBSD with such lines as “ beat anyone with one move”, defeat a three hundred pound man in 3 seconds”, “learn the secrets that other MA instructors don’t want you to know”, learn secret military techniques not shown to civilians” and so on and so on, as being RBSD.

To use the term often associated with TMA they are Mc’RBSD schools.

I don’t include these “schools” under banner of RBSD, just like I don’t include the TMA equivalent under the TMA Banner

Quote:

What this tends to produce is people with good command of the theoritical aspects of violence, but without the (imo) needed skill base to apply a technique should they need to. I think that the video posted shows this quite well.

I have to disagree here dude, RBSD does provide usable techniques, In fact we don’t include any techniques that can’t be used under the stress of real violence, the scenario-based training provides the tool (one of many) to the application of the techniques in the real word.

Ok the video isn’t the best representation of that. But the scenario is just an intro to scenario training, (a demo), it was probably focused on one or two particular concepts of multiple attackers; passive stance, de-escalation, angling, shielding, pre-emptive striking, and so on the exaggeration of some of these things (such as the shielding) could be for instructional purposes Ie to show where it is, when to do it etc. it might not be (I wasn’t there) it could have just sucked in some places. Though having witnessed a fair amount of scenario training with newbies, it isn’t an uncommon type of effort. To be improved on by all means that’s the point…. stuff up in training to reduce the stuff up for real.

Quote:

From a personal perspective, I don't think any of those people should have been bothering with scenerio training. What they should have been doing was focusing on basic combative skills.

That’s what they are doing mate just from a behavioural perspective rather then a technical one., but fair enough it ‘s not apparent in this vid (it is only 1.15 minutes)

Quote:

problem is that they are inputting into their muscle memory far from perfect technique application (even in a free style sense), and personally I think that this could be detrimental in the long term, as they will have to unlearn many of the behaviors highlighted in this video.

Muscle memory deteriorates with stress. That’s one reason you see people throwing wild punches when they have been trained to throw tight. It’s not needing to unlearn but learning new better ways.

Quote:

Further, as you say Drew, the scenerio itself suffered from a major flaw, that being the attack was in no way realistic. I think this could have been avoided had those attacked had a good foundation of skills, because as it stands the poor attacks have the effect of undermining the entire drill.

True, but these guys are probably fairly new to being bad guys. They will no doubt improve with practice. And yes a “good Bad guys makes a big difference.

Think about this if you where put into the checkout position of a major supermarket with very little training (ie here are the basic keys, here is what you should expect), you would be able to still operate the register and serve customers but you are not going to be able to perform like a seasoned operator. Three days later with still no extra training you are going to be performing much better then your first day, but you are still not going to be as good as an experienced op.. The point being we can’t expect people to be able to perform like real bad guys when they aren’t like that.

Quote:

Quote:

so it is more effective to make a person train for 2 or three years before becoming competent to defend themselves.

Honestly, I would say yes. I think the question here is can these skills be gained quicker than 2-3 years? Maybe, if the actual basics are drilled repetively, and the student attends class very often. But by and large I think 2-3 is not off the mark for the development of good self defence skills.

See I don’t believe that, there is a quicker way, via specialisation.

Quote:

Quote:

Hmmm I would have thought it more effective the other way around give the student usable skills and a blueprint on what to expect and then develop greater abilities over time.

Again, the question is, 'How usable are the skills?'.

Very usable, the basics are condensed easy to learn and natural to perform under stress, we don’t learn technique and then learn application we learn both at the same time concentrating on application, technique can be perfected over time. In the mean time even bad technique can be effective if it can be applied.

Quote:

Let's take Karate as an example, well a karateka should also have basic striking skills developed in the first few months of training. I believe this whole line of thinking does not take this into account. Although TMA or combat sports may branch out from the basics, that basic skill is still developed. As a matter of fact, I would offer that this comment you have made can also sum up nicely the kind of training done at most dojo's.

Same mountain different path.

Quote:

However, going off genearality's here, I think that instructors and students should be taken in isolation of each other. As you say, most instructors do have training in a system that provides a foundation of technique. The student do not. I can see this being a potential problem. That is, unless the students also learn that skill set.

You are spot on Ames, and this is very much the position I take. I am very much into an individual difference approach to instructing. Every one is different, and although there are some common themes that we all share training should be tailored to an individual and his/he/it’s specific reality. (that is what I see as the R in RBSD)

Quote:

So if they do need to learn that skillset, what is it about RBSD that acts like a fast forward button, so that the skill set is learned faster than in other arts, or combat sports?

Ok basically we strip down the skill set to include only a few/couple of techniques that are easy/quick to learn, natural and effective under stress. (eg palm heals, hammer fists), we provide a familiarisation with the behavioural aspect of violence for ( how the attacker initiates the attack, predator behaviour etc), and we drill the techniques under the condition similar to what is likely to be experienced by the person.

You don’t need to have perfect technique and you don’t need to have more then a couple of techniques, all that matters is being effective and being effective is not being technically perfect. For eg you don’t need to drill a hammer fist 1000’s of times for it to be effective in the street (the drill makes it more effect yes)

Go get a five year old and tell them to hit you as if they are trying stab you with a ice pick grip. That is all that is needed for defence (as far as technique skill goes), show them where to hit (two or three basic effective targets (eg eyes/face throat groin etc note these aren’t specific to the hammer fist and are targets for ant impact tool). now show them how to recognise and control the pre-fight lead up. (note. a five year old would have more difficulty understanding this section but I don’t believe full RBSD training should be given to young kids at least not the way it is for adults (different realities different threats).

The knowledge is enough to improve your chances of successfully defending your self, but combine it with application under similar and progressively more realistic scenario types that are realistic to the person for eg you would be wasting time setting a scenario in a busy pub for a tea totaling priest)

Using this approach you can very quickly provide effective ability to any one. Now I am not saying that in 1 lesson you can have a person with the self defence skills to match a Black belt, but you can provide them with the self defence skills to effectively fight off a likely attack (remember there reality is being catered for not every reality)

My personal approach is one of first bringing to the surface and enabling a person to use there natural defensive and offensive abilities (most of which we learn and develop well before kindergarten, some before birth) these are our in build instinctual defence mechanisms that have evolved over the life time of our species and even before we became human.

I show how to use these and provide an understanding of how violence occurs (particularly taking into account the person reality/lifestyle etc).

From there I modify the natural defences to be more tactically sound, Include some of the basic strikes to add tactically to the natural repertoire. From there we built upon that base.

Note this is a brief explanation of my approach and is not meant to represent RBSD in general.

Quote:

Drew, I'm not going to lump you in with others, so this is a general comment. But I don't think Kimo's view is that off base here: it the one that is engendered through the marketing of much of the RBSD instructors. You have guys like Wagner suggesting that in a weekend you will go from learning basic self defence, to knife and gun disarming, to how to defend yourself against a dirty nukes, car bombs, etc. What I'm saying here is that there might be a reason why this is the typical response to RBSD...because there are a lot of seemingly bogus claims made by some of the top instructors out there in order to make a quick buck.

Jim’s (Wagner) material is rather good, But I fully understand the advertising/marketing thing. It may very well be different outside of OZ. RBSD is still very young down here, where as in The UK and the US it is at least 10 years older and far more wide spread.

It’s very possible that I simply haven’t been exposed to as much as this type of marketing, it may also be that I tend to filter it out. I still get annoyed at the general stereotyping of RBSD as typical to this type of marketing, but hey I’m willing to see why it has gained such a reputation. (se my Mc RBSD comment previously)

OK I agree. I do not count those who market RBSD with such lines as “ beat anyone with one move”, defeat a three hundred pound man in 3 seconds”, “learn the secrets that other MA instructors don’t want you to know”, learn secret military techniques not shown to civilians” and so on and so on, as being RBSD.

To use the term often associated with TMA they are Mc’RBSD schools.

I don’t include these “schools” under banner of RBSD, just like I don’t include the TMA equivalent under the TMA Banner

Quote:

All that being said, I can understand why someone wouldn't want to train TMA (but that is a whole other thread). My point here is not that TMA is better than RBSD, my point is that good training is good training, and that we should forget the labels. People should choose that teaching style which best suits them personally and feel lucky that there are so many options availible.

--Chris

I’ll yell Amen to that too,

Posted by: Ames

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/26/09 11:31 AM

Drew, there is a lot to speak to here, but I chose to focus on a few points.

Quote:

Could you give me examples of how "TMA and combat sports offer methods of becoming aware of imiment attacks, or aggresive behavior" and how they are better or on par.

Well, to begin with, as I said, I'm not saying what is 'better'. 'Better' is in the eyes of the beholder.

Combat sports help make you aware of imminent danger and threats, an aggressive behavior, because you are forced to deal with it on a regular basis and you get used to the physical cues that an attack is coming.

Trying to speak about 'TMA' as a whole is difficult as far as this is concerned, due to the fact that TMA encompasses many divergent disciplines.

But the short answer is that a core component in many TMA is the idea of an uke attacking with 'intent'. As you progress, the idea is to develop sensitivity to the attacker, both in a direct physical way, as well as a more subtle mental way. For me to go into the science of this is impossible, as I've never read a study on it. But I can go my experience and say that TMA and combat sports do seem to engender a 'Spidey Sense' about forthcoming danger, that is if the person pays attention to their surroundings.

Quote:

in the long run I agree (again providing the TMA is a street effective system) in the short run I disagree.

I think it is true that most TMA folks initially have less idea about the surrounding issues of violence, because their training does not directly deal with that from the start. But what it should give them (again, I'm assuming the best here) is a good physical skill set.

Quote:

Muscle memory deteriorates with stress. That’s one reason you see people throwing wild punches when they have been trained to throw tight. It’s not needing to unlearn but learning new better ways.

And through good, regular training you should feel less stress when the situation arises then you would otherwise.

Quote:

See I don’t believe that, there is a quicker way, via specialisation.

A quicker way in what sense? To become aware of the theory of violence through direct information about it? Yes, I agree with that.

But a quicker way to developing a good basic skill set? I would need to see some proof of that.

What I'm saying is that, no matter what, it always takes time to develop a core set of physical skills. And then it takes longer to make them second nature.

Quote:

Very usable, the basics are condensed easy to learn and natural to perform under stress, we don’t learn technique and then learn application we learn both at the same time concentrating on application, technique can be perfected over time. In the mean time even bad technique can be effective if it can be applied.

To me, this seems no different from most (good) TMA or MMA with a self defense bent. I know that most JMA, especially the classical arts, are traditionally taught in this way.

The thing is, no matter what it takes time to perfect technique. The better your technique is, the better chance you have of surviving.

Quote:

My personal approach is one of first bringing to the surface and enabling a person to use there natural defensive and offensive abilities (most of which we learn and develop well before kindergarten, some before birth) these are our in build instinctual defence mechanisms that have evolved over the life time of our species and even before we became human.

I'm not going to speak for all arts here, because I haven't studied all of them. But I would like to reference this to Aikido, if I may. The thing is, Aikido (at least the Yoshinkan style), trains this very thing as well. Most of it is premised off of using the flinch mechanism. To demonstrate, here is Tony Blaur discussing his 'spear system', and using the 'spear'.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=--74CtXS6Y4&feature=related

Now please watch at 1:42 of this video:

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=urZChurQIp8

we call that 'elbow power number 1', and although not a catchy name, it is used in exactly the same way as the spear in many techniques, and it works with the flinch, startle response very well (I can say this from experience). In essence, it is the exact same thing, and is trained from day one until you stop attending class. Many of the first techniques you learn are based off this 'entering' movement.

Quote:

Jim’s (Wagner) material is rather good, But I fully understand the advertising/marketing thing. It may very well be different outside of OZ. RBSD is still very young down here, where as in The UK and the US it is at least 10 years older and far more wide spread.

His material might be good, but his advertising is ridiculous. I've actually read an article in Black Belt (I think it was) where you shows how to survive a dirty nuke. I've also read an article where you demonstrates anti-grappling and it was very much sub-par.

My main problem with Wagner, aside from his need to inflate his military/leo background, is that he caters to fear and paranoia. Rather than decreasing stress, this type of behavior tends to increase it.

Quote:

Same mountain different path.

I agree, and that's really all I'm saying.

--Chris

Posted by: Cord

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/26/09 06:15 PM

You know, when it all comes down the line, all you need is a really hard punch, a good clinch, a strong headlock and/or decent standing choke hold, and a good headbutt and the confidence to use any and all of them before things get out of hand.

You cant learn to 'read' aggressive dangerous people by dealing with others 'pretending' to be dangerous aggressive people. You cant ask a nice guy, who is in a class to learn to deal with an element of society he fears, to become that element with any conviction- its a different headspace, and a different motivation. Then you have to add alcohol and drugs to the mix.

Getting someone to pad up and go 'grrr you spilled my pint' relies on stereotypical behaviour projected from our psyche. Whilst you do get 'fronting' and verbal aggression, this is often used instead of physical violence- plenty of lads shouting alsorts of threats at each other from a safe distance is very common

. When it comes to guys who really want to smack you, they tend to just do it.

You asked for my experience and that is it- time and time again, picking guys off the floor with blood all over their faces, who have no clue as to what happened or why.

Same thing when breaking up a scuffle and trying to find out what happened- tearful Girlfriends saying 'we were just laughing and he came out of nowhere...'

Sure the verbal stuff can escalate, and its best to knock it on the head, but if someone is shouting, they are not hitting.

I believe in having solid physical strength and skills, combined with a mindset that will allow you to use them, in a ring, or in a pub, with no hesitation.
The rest is all just 'blah blah blah'

Posted by: drgndrew

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/26/09 08:50 PM

G'day Chris. ( I'm going to be quick as I really should be working on other stuff at the moment )

I say RBSD does it better BECAUSE it is specialised. specialisation results in quicker, and more effective ability in the item/action being specialised under the conditions that the spcialisation operates.

We specialise in defending violence as it happens on the street, this is not just a guess or based on 1 persons experience it is a cumulative result of empirical evidence and experience of many, not just those on the front line such as LEO and Door-persons, but also victims of violence, survivors, and victim statements, medical reports etc etc

It is Better at providing real world solutions to violence and it does it in a shorter period of time. Not that it is better then TMA overall.

Combat sports and TMA do provide familiarization of the physical aspects of violence, and as such to provide a better ability to handle to fear and stress involved with being physically harmed.

BUT, we are not just physical beings we are behavioural emotional psychological and physical beings ( you could through spiritual in there to I f you want through it is sort of covered by the BEP). Violence is also BEP and physical not just physical, in reality BEP of violence cannont be separated from the physical violence.

This is where RBSD (as i teach it) provides the quicker self defence readiness and it is related to specialisation. You see fear and stress is stimulus specific, the BEP of real violence provides a different stimulus to the BEP of combat sport and traditional MA training. Yes full contact sporting MA does very effectively provide immunization (or at least familiarization) with the fear of physical violence (pain injury, physical harm etc). I don't doubt that and indeed Vouch for it.

However the TMA and Sport MA, training methods do little to deal with the different BEP of real world violence, they deal with the BEP of sport arena and the BEP of the Dojo Training, eventually the gap will close with more and more experience and more understanding.

What RBSD does is to provide for the BEP and Physical aspects of Real World Violence (RWV) straight from the get go. provide natural weapons and concepts to effectively apply those weapons under RWV conditions.

Instead of building up a skill base first (we still do build a skill base) we provide the ability to deliver any skill they already have to RWV, that way every skill or technique that they acquire after this can be directly applied to RWV.

RBSD Sport and TMA are oriented towards different arenas, as a result they are better able to equip the student for the BEP of violence in context with that arena. Each is better at what it does, and there is most definitely a cross over any Martial artist "should' perform better in RWV then someone with no training what so ever, same as in the ring any MA training will be better then nothing etc. but for the ring I would recommend Sport MA, for the street I would say RBSD.

A good basic skill set is not required for effective self defence...desired but not required, this is supported by the thousands of cases of untrained victims fighting off larger, seemingly more able attackers. What makes something effective is the ability to apply it under specific conditions (ie In the ring on the street, etc).

by the way

Quote:

Now please watch at 1:42 of this video:

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=urZChurQIp8 />

This video is nothing like the SPEAR, other then it is an entry method, it may be triggered off the flinch but that does not make it a SPEAR.

Posted by: drgndrew

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/26/09 08:55 PM

Hey Cord,
If that approach works for you then that approach is right for you.

but what about when you first started, before you had strength and skill.

Will your approach suit every one, what about someones Mum or little sister, or the feminine high school male, with noe self esteme.

Your approach works I do not deny that, but it takes time to get to that level. Why not provide something that can be used straight away with out months of training. that will be added to by the training following.

someone with 10 years on the door will most definately be able to defend them selves better then most, even with no additional training. but a door vet has different experiences and developed different attributes and psych to the average person.

just my thoughts.

PS when i support RBSD, my perspective is always from a beginners point of view, not mine. From self defence and not a street fight.

Posted by: Cord

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/27/09 12:01 AM

I always had strength. I doubt I have significant skill per se, to this day, but I work with what I have got.

My point is, that in intellectualising this stuff, you can end up 'over egging the pudding'.

You have to understand that, no matter what you do with scenario based training, those involved know that they are in no real harm, that the attackers are no such thing, and that it is a safe controlled environment. No amount of posturing and shouting can remove that reality from your subconscious, and therefore your interperetation of that situation.

Outside of class, where an instructor cant step it, where the guy in front of you is not Jeff from work, and where the knife is made of metal and held by someone who is really trying to rape you, you will feel as far removed from your class as if you had been only been doing kata for the previous 4 years.

Now, the advantage hard contact, non scenario sparring has is that the motivations of your oponent are real- they want to hit you, they want to dominate, they want to drop you on your a$$- its not make believe, and the strategies and technique that you come to rely on under that pressure, will come more easily under other pressure.

As for "what about someones Mum or little sister, or the feminine high school male, with noe self esteme."

I would sooner send them into the world with the actual physical attributes than a head full of false confidence born of an illusion.
Now before you say 'Its not an illusion', consider this- everyone involved is part of the class, therefore the 'attackers' are there to learn what is on offer. In turn this means that they want the defender to succeed, as this will reinforce their conviction in what they are learning.
In competetive sparring, it is all about genuine intent.

As for me, I never studied MA's during my time working doors. I started when I was 17, and what I had was common sense, people skills, confidence and an absolute lack of remorse in regards to causing physical discomfort to idiots. The rest I learned from experience.

That experience has taught me that an attacker is as unpredictable as they are predictable. That is something that scenario training, from what i have seen, does not acknowledge, and that your comments in regards the 'set up' of that footage do little to convince me otherwise.

Its all good though, there is room for more than one church in this town

Posted by: Olderman

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/28/09 08:55 AM

So that scenario was in a gym with two people agreeing.
Lets put that in a pub scene in your mans situation that he roll played.
Two guys approaching with bad intentions.
One gets to close.
Bad positioning for the roll player.
He allows himself to be touched.

Drilled split second re-action.
Strike.
Undrilled un thought of split second reaction
Pull away and think about talking down two guys?

While I can see the point of roll playing in the correct environment I doubt if anything will work unless it is drilled. Unless they belong to the small minority.

Posted by: drgndrew

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/29/09 06:36 AM

Quote:

Quote:

A good basic skill set is not required for effective self defence...desired but not required, .

Hi Drew. My brain is a bit fuzzed up but never the less I will attempt to relate what I think.
Last night I trained.
1 mile run.
Weights.
Then off to the heavy bag which is around the corner from the weights/ fitness room.
I am already tired.
On the heavy bag is a trainee boxer.
He says hi and would I hold the bag.
I agree and off he goes. Then he asks about using the lower body in punching.
I try to explain what I do. Then he goes through some techniques and asks me to throw some jabs at him.
The next thing he wants to sparr.

Things I did.
First off I was reluctant.

Used the techniques namely my version of a jab that I had and still do drill and drill.
A technique that I have done that often I will be doing
it just before they lay me to rest.
What did he do.
He countered some of my jabs with techniques he had drilled and learned. So I got popped a few times.
It occurs to me to pull/ snap my jab back and move.
So I do.
Basic techniques.

My next move was to double and triple the jab alternating to the stomach/ head.
The intensity of the sparring moved up.
His reaction was to shut his eyes.
Put his head down and freeze.
We finished with me in close and him taking all kinds of shots.

So today I am tired.
Lessons I have re learned.
(1) Pull my jab back quicker.
(2) keep my hands up
(3) Where did everything I have/learned go??
(4)I was only using what I knew would work for me under pressure. It was like being stuck in being able to only do a very limited number of things.
(5)My mind was on survival mode.

He was feezing when I was connecting with more than one jab.
He was sure of his self untill I connected with my jabs.

Ok lets take the above situation in context. It was not a self-defence situation, it was a sparring session: Two people agreeing to spar (fight), with consent, implied rules and “gentlemanly behaviour”. The lessons you learn are specific to that situation. Yes they can be beneficial for self-defence, and lessons learned during sparring should be kept in mind for other violence. But the point is that it was not a real world situation nor did it resemble it in any way except for the fact that punches were used.

I don’t have a problem with Sparing as a developmental tool, but is does encourage development within the sporting environment. People don’t spar on the street, some times they fight, but that’s not self-defence. Self-defence isn’t fighting with another it is being attacked by another.

This is why I prefer scenario to sparring. Both can be run at the same intensity and the same level of contact. The difference is that one is set in a behavioural environment that is similar to reality the other is a competition.

Different mind set, different emotions, different dynamics. For eg if you and I ( he he ☺ I used proper English) spared I would bet you would wipe the floor with you. But If I attacked you then who knows, you wouldn’t be fighting me the same way in both situations would you. In the earlier situation we agree to start at a chosen time we shape up and spar, within a given assumed set of rules, we both try to win or defeat the other we are not trying intently damage the other.

If I attacked you I would be the one determining the start time (and the attack would start well before the first strike), I would be determining where and when it starts and I won’t be giving you any sort of warning like shaping up to you, in fact I will be trying to engage your mind and distract you so that my first physical attack will be in and out before you even know what’s happening. On top of this I would have picked you because I already believe I can beet you, or because I have some “advantage” up my sleeve. If you get knocked down I’m not going to wait for you to get back up I’m going to continue to destroy you, I’ll literally kick your head in and stomp on you. I won’t obey the rules you trained under and I won’t care for being a gentleman. I will deliver onto you every bit of hate and disappointment and prove that I’m not weak. You my friend will not be just a fight opponent, you won’t even be seen as a victim in me, you will simply be the personification of everything that is wrong in my life, and for once I’m going to destroy you.

Now I better add a disclaimer that I do not attack people and the above was an example of the difference in BEP of just your opponent between real life self defence and full contact fight training. There is also the difference of your own BEP of the situations BEP and even other people and the environment (ok environment doesn’t have a BEP but rather induces BEPs, for eg a person will have a different BEP at the office compared to a Heavy metal concert etc )

Quote:

So Drew how can anything work unless it is drilled and drilled and put in to the subconscouse mind?. While I would agree there are people who can fight from pure instincts with out much training I doubt if the average person going on seminars will be natural proven street fighters/ brawlers.

Dude we still do pad drills etc remember we are reality based and we know that more power more speed and more practice means better performance.

Scenarios are Drills, we don’t just do one scenario and then say you can now defend yourself, we use scenarios as a means to bridge the gap between training and reality, and we drill scenarios, just like we drill pre-emptive palms (most RSBD don’t punch but that’s personal thing), instead if simply hiting the pad over and over again we may introduce a behavioural aspect to the training like Geoff Thompson’s eg of asking a question to engage the mind just prior to launching your pre-empt. ( “Do you like sherbet” …BOOM!!, “did West win on the weekend…BOOM!!! “Your mums name is Flo isn’t it”… Boom. This provides a better link to real world application then just …Boom! Boom! Boom!

That’s just one eg of modifying the training (in this case pad work) to be more applicable to real world encounters. Of course we also just pound the crap out of the pads/bags it’s a great exercise and feel great.

Quote:

Quote:

this is supported by the thousands of cases of untrained victims fighting off larger, seemingly more able attackers.

I havent got a clue how those people came about.
If a person is aggressive and able and attacks someone who cant fight its going to be a one sided affair.

No, mate, this is incorrect thinking, Ok let me explain. Limiting belief produces limited performance. If you believe you cannot defend yourself against a stronger better skilled opponent then you will not be able to. Under the BEP of sporting competition then this will be the case the better greater skilled man usually wins (but not always). The outcome in sporting arena is determined by skilful victory; it is by definition a test of skill. BEPs of sport are controlled to provide way for skill to be the determinate ( ie BEP is the same or similar for each person).

Now what is the biggest determinate of victory in combat sport, it is often not the superior level of ability but a superior level of spirit ( spirit is a BEP component). It I this kind of spirit Or something similar that enabled untrained weaker people to fight off larger attackers. I’ve actually done a fair bit of personal research into these types of survivor stories (I only wish I still had my notes

) one of the driving forces behind the victims ability to overcome the attacker was shear will. Some of that will came in the form of what I call “Third Party Motivation”. This is when a person is motivated due to the consequences to a third party. For eg the mother suddenly fighting back when her child is in danger, even when already suffering major injuries. Or the old granny fighting off a thief when he tried to take a bracelet made by her grandchild (both of these are actual cases).

The vast majority of these victims were able to successfully defend themselves because of the BEP elements of violence, not physical skill and not by drilling techniques thousands of times. They used natural weapons that they had developed before school age, hitting, scratching, bitting, gouging, screaming etc etc all gross motor all natural. ( by the way these techniques have been constantly in use since first developed so in a sense they are very highly drilled.

This research and my findings (which has also been supported by other studies by other people including scientist and instructors) form the basis of my approach to RBSD training. Without going into great detail I first show someone how to use their natural abilities and their natural defence mechanisms. Most of these have been developed over the period of human evolution and even prior to it. With this being the first step I can increase the defensive ability of anyone in a matter of hours using what they already have so they don’t need to develop new techniques to defend themselves. I also introduce then to the BEP component of violence and show them how to apply their natural skills to the BEP of a real world attack. I do not claim that the person will be able to defend himself or herself in every situation nor that they will be at a similar level as a trained person . However they will be far more able and effective in protecting themselves then what they were a few hours before. Don’t worry I do not give them any false illusion.

Next step is to tactically modify the reflexive responses and innate techniques to improve them. Then I introduce other techniques to further improve the student’s ability. I continuously have the student apply the techniques in a behavioural environment, simulating aspects of real life, from the very beginning. This way they use what ever they have effectively in application; even if the technique is [censored] it still can be effective if applied right. It doesn’t matter how they hit as long as they hit.

We then work on developing skill in technique; the student can concentrate on technique because they already have the ability to apply the technique in a real environment. I concentrate more on principles and concepts at first so they can apply what they have (at whatever level they are at) directly to the street. As they develop greater skill and greater techniques these naturally increase the effectiveness of the person.

Quote:

Drilled split second re-action.
Strike.

you can do this with scenario training and have a better chance of not dropping the attractive bartender that entered your space and touched your arm. Split second reaction is good to have knowing when to react is better. Scenario training tries to address this, we also seem to be a little more into the avoiding violence then may MMA guys in the sense that we include de-escalation drills,

Quote:

Undrilled un thought of split second reaction
Pull away and think about talking down two guys?

It’s a tactic that, in my opinion, is every bit as important as split second reaction. I’ve described the strategy earlier (I think, I can’t remember what I’ve typed). But let me say that during the de-escalation phase you are not only trying to talk the guy(s) down, you are also positioning yourself to try to take advantage of the environment, you are setting him up both in position and in BEP advantage to yourself, you are not only de-esculating you are taking control of the situation and that is when you have the upper hand the other fella just doesn’t see it.

Quote:

While I can see the point of roll playing in the correct environment I doubt if anything will work unless it is drilled. Unless they belong to the small minority.

I covered that above.

I honestly which I could run a seminar for you guys to actually show what I’m trying to say. but being 15000 km’s away and doubting anyone will be paying to host a no-name it probably want be happening anytime soon.

It’s not that I disagree; I just think there are things that can be done differently to produce better results for particular (and differing) goals. TMA, MMA and RBSD can be interlocked like jigsaw matts and just like jigsaw matts the integration of them provides better overall coverage. I actually offer a seminar called “Dojo to Street” bridging course that shows how to incorporate RBSD type training into traditional or Sporting MA training.

Learning RBSD allows the student to concentrate on the finer points of MA

Posted by: Triddle

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/29/09 07:45 AM

Drew, your points are interesting, but I can't claim to understand the idea of RBSD very well. I mean, to me its a lot more about developing attitude than techniques, which I can see is what your trying to do with this and that's a good thing. I just don't know how well it could work.

Personally I consider my fighting attitude mediocre at best, I think that if I need to fight I can, and that I can get an advantage in some situations (ie hit first when the time is right

). The reason I have this is entirely practical though, my 'situational training' was highschool, its when I go to the pub, its walking home at night. Its from either getting into fights or avoiding getting into fights in actual reality. My 'training' is completley different, and only half as useful, but much more easy to come by. I can go out and train technique and spar regularly, fights happen only as often as I can't avoid them. Its for that reason that I like the idea of RBSD, but I doubt its real practicality, without taking it to the level where you have members of your club go jump eachother I can't see how you can simulate it.

But as I said, I'm not real learned on the subject, I'd have to experience it to really know. If you ever come to tassie and are in the mood, I'd be glad to see your point in a practical sense.

Posted by: drgndrew

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 01/29/09 08:57 PM

G'day Triddle

Your right no replication will ever be at the same level as actual experience.

Quite often this is used as an argument against RBSD scenario training. and they are right. but this type of training is still the closest we can come to actual reality.

Training for any endeavor cannot provide the experience of participating in the actual endeavor. The only thing that is real is that which is real.

Now there are plenty of studies that support the notion that imagining doing something contributes significantly to the ability to perform that something in reality. This is one of the reasons MMA training does prove to be effective on the street, simply put the training is extrapolated to apply beyond the Mat to the street. I have never denied that TMA or MMA can be effectively used on the street, I only argue that RBSD provides a more direct, path. after all Our training is more closely related to the arena we are training for (ie real life). because we include the behaviour (etc) aspects of real life violence then the gap we have to imagine or extrapolate across is considerably less.

RBSD doesn't take there approach just to be different to what else in on offer. It is firmly based and supported by learning theory. you see material will be recalled better (ie quicker, more completely and accurately) when it is learned under similar conditions too which it will be recalled.

the conditions under which it is recalled is different for RBSD then for MMA (for eg). for RBSD the conditions are being attacked in your real world, for MMA it is fighting another person for victory.

I do not claim that RBSD training is going to produce a better MMA fighter, the training is directed towards different arenas and different outcomes. Yet How often do you hear MMA practitioners claim that MMA training prepares you just as well as RBSD training for the real world.

The theories and empirical evidence tells us differently.

Posted by: Olderman

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 02/03/09 01:57 PM

Quote:

The only thing that is real is that which is real.

So I assume the next best thing will be as close to reality as can be got.

Quote:

Now there are plenty of studies that support the notion that imagining doing something contributes significantly to the ability to perform that something in reality.

This is one of the reasons MMA training does prove to be effective on the street, simply put the training is extrapolated to apply beyond the Mat to the street. I have never denied that TMA or MMA can be effectively used on the street, I only argue that RBSD provides a more direct, path. after all Our training is more closely related to the arena we are training for (ie real life). because we include the behaviour (etc) aspects of real life violence then the gap we have to imagine or extrapolate across is considerably less.

RBSD doesn't take there approach just to be different to what else in on offer. It is firmly based and supported by learning theory. you see material will be recalled better (ie quicker, more completely and accurately) when it is learned under similar conditions too which it will be recalled.

the conditions under which it is recalled is different for RBSD then for MMA (for eg). for RBSD the conditions are being attacked in your real world, for MMA it is fighting another person for victory.

I do not claim that RBSD training is going to produce a better MMA fighter, the training is directed towards different arenas and different outcomes. Yet How often do you hear MMA practitioners claim that MMA training prepares you just as well as RBSD training for the real world.

The theories and empirical evidence tells us differently.

I think;
If it S/D in a pub/ night club than the training should take place in a pub/ night club environment.
If it is on the street then the training should take place on a street environment e.g outside on a hardened surface.
That is something I have been doing in the cold.
Although not running I have taken to doing pad work/ partner work outside.
Forget lower body take downs and some of the stuff that is taught on a nice warm floor/ mat.
Ever tried rolling about or throwing strikes on a hard surface with bricks and dirt present?
I had forgotten what it was like.

The things/ ground etc are going to be used a weapons.

So if anything is reality based then I think reality is what it should be.

Street S/D takes place on the street.

Alternative method of training.

Drill basics in a nice warm dojo/ training hall /mat area.
When the basics are ok then sparring/ live grappling.
Beyond that reality is going to be subject to where the reality is meant to be.
While in a way I can see the point of natural techniques that in some cases aren't drilled you have to admit that they will be very, very basic and easy countered by someone who has taken things further.

So all in all I think things are back to basic training with lots of reps.
Yes I can see the use of the behavior part of the training.
I myself sometimes forget what people can really be like namely because of age etc I don't frequent places where such situations take place.
I observe them being done by other people at a distance sometimes but tend to avoid such things.

Posted by: Kimo2007

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 02/03/09 03:07 PM

Quote:

I only argue that RBSD provides a more direct, path. after all Our training is more closely related to the arena we are training for (ie real life). because we include the behaviour (etc) aspects of real life violence then the gap we have to imagine or extrapolate across is considerably less.

See this makes the assumption that others don't train in street defense, and for me that just isn't the case it was a big part of my training, maybe your point holds for TMA on the whole, but I can't speak to that.

It also assumes that RBSD, knows something that others don't know. It comes off a bit arrogant to me. I see RBSD as simply a portion of training, an application. I also take issue with the idea of direct path, rings of shortcut to me. I see martial arts as a life long endevor and am turned off by anyone who looks to collapse the time of study, I think it leads people to believe they are capable of things they are not.

The old saying is Martial Arts is like boiling water, as soon as you remove the heat it begins to cool. The whole concept of RSBD seems to imply you learn it, and your done. And even if that is not they way it is, in practice that what I have seen, low time in training and high turnover. At least in TMA it's usually understood it will take years to become any good (and that would be because it does).

Are there things you can learn quickly and become better quickly, sure there are, but only very basic things and general awareness.

You mentioned earlier that most instructors are MA's from different disciplines, well that's great and true in my experience, but they are not giving that full background the the students they are teaching now are they? So how are the students supposed to attain the same level of skill?

One last thing you mentioned, when in the moment muscle memory tends to degrade. Couldn't be more untrue, skill and execution might degrade, you may only perform at a percentage of your ability when under a no stress situation, but the muscle memory will take over, good or bad. Tons of documentation on this, ever hear about the trainer who disarmed an attacker with a knife, and then handed the knife right back to the guy? Why? Because over the years of training others, he always handed the knife back to the student to demonstrate again. You see the same thing in combat, soldiers under fire will do everything they way they trained when it comes to certain types of moves, if they always drilled with the safety on, they will forget to take it off when under stress, because of muscle memory.

Street violence is unpredictable, and I think RBSD is on the right track in terms of getting people into the right mindset, but they need to lose all that quick learn microwave teaching stuff, there are no shortcuts in anything worth learning.

Posted by: drgndrew

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 02/04/09 06:33 AM

Quote:

I think;
If it S/D in a pub/ night club than the training should take place in a pub/ night club environment.
If it is on the street then the training should take place on a street environment e.g outside on a hardened surface.

I 100% agree mate, but it simply is not practical or possible to be able to do that for every training session. Can you imagine the cost of hiring a bar for a couple of hours, it's good to hire them (when you can) and run seminars specifically addressing pub environments. but not for a regular training class.

The problem with training scenarios in the street is that it almost always attracts the attention of the local police. nothing wrong with this it's just that it wastes their time and some municipal counsels frown upon it.

It is a good idea to training in the exact environment and conditions that you are training for. It's just not practical to do it all the time, but fortunately we do have an imagination and we can closely replicate the behavioural aspect even if we have to use a bit of imagination to put us in the location.

Quote:

That is something I have been doing in the cold.
Although not running I have taken to doing pad work/ partner work outside.

This is a great idea, we do this occasionally. Even the Tradition arts do this sometimes, though they usually use it as a spirit development exercise rather then an acclimatisation to alternate environments (eg training in the snow). so do Sporting MAs though they usually to it to increase the intensity of the training (eg beach training dune running)

As you probably have noticed the environment does have an impact on the training, both physically (terrain/ground surface) and psychologically

Quote:

Forget lower body take downs and some of the stuff that is taught on a nice warm floor/ mat.
Ever tried rolling about or throwing strikes on a hard surface with bricks and dirt present?
I had forgotten what it was like.

The things/ ground etc are going to be used a weapons.

Yep, thats why it is important to not become to comfortable on the mat if your also training for Self defence. It's a good idea to have a separate street toolbox (along with your usual MMA or TMA toolbox) chances are they will share many tools but the SD toolbox for eg would contain techniques appropriate for the street and the conditions it may contain "illegal" techniques that would not be included in you MMA toolbox.

It sounds like a lot of effort but it isn't really it's actually quite an easy way of ensuring a seperation exist between street, sporting and TMA. (remember I don't adhere to the rule of either or, all three compliment each other. I just put RBSD as the first priority.

Quote:

So if anything is reality based then I think reality is what it should be.

Street S/D takes place on the street.

Agreed but it is based on reality, it's not actually reality, but a method of preparation for it. just like university isn't actually the profession. Ideally you practice in the exact spot and under the exact conditions that you are going to be attacked, the problem is we don't select those things the attacker does and it is impossible to replicate every possible environment and condition.

we can only train for the the situations likely to occur BASED on what happens in reality AND based on the reality of the individual.

Quote:

Alternative method of training.

Drill basics in a nice warm dojo/ training hall /mat area.
When the basics are ok then sparring/ live grappling.
Beyond that reality is going to be subject to where the reality is meant to be.

Not just where but also how, why, when, who, what. Including the different BEP for each

Quote:

While in a way I can see the point of natural techniques that in some cases aren't drilled you have to admit that they will be very, very basic and easy countered by someone who has taken things further.

Yes and no, using a behavioural delivery system does make a big difference. for eg, delivering an aggressive strike combo from a submissive posture. This tactic uses incongruent body language and verbal (opposite Behaviour) to
deliver a more effective strike. The human mind works off reference and logical patterns it will regularly complete a pattern prior to it's completion, if that pattern suddenly changes then the person must readjust. This is a blink in time where the attacker is vulnerable, a simple straight forward and natural technique will have a significantly greater chance of success.

please don't think I rely purely on the Pre-school developed techniques. these are just the first techniques used so that the individual will gain the fastest increase in SD ability in the shortest time. After this I do introduce "techniques" which can be applied directly and instantly to the behavioural tactics and concepts.

Quote:

So all in all I think things are back to basic training with lots of reps.

I don't disagree, I just recommend throwing in the Behavioural aspect as well.

Quote:

Yes I can see the use of the behavior part of the training.
I myself sometimes forget what people can really be like namely because of age etc I don't frequent places where such situations take place.

Those sort of places aren't the only times you need to be able to defend yourself. Usually when people say street the pup fight scenario springs to mind, and yes it is a common environment for violence. by not not frequenting these places you reduce the chance of facing violence considerably.

But we have to remember that violence can and does happen anywhere. the workplace, at home, on the sporting field, at school, in shopping centers, car parks, parks, beaches and the list goes on. It can happen anywhere. When ever I refer to street all I mean is not in the training place, I'm not literally (or solely) referring to the street or pavement

Quote:

I observe them being done by other people at a distance sometimes but tend to avoid such things.

sounds like a good tactic to me.

I 'm not here to try to convert other practicing Martial artist to RBSD, My believe is that a class dedicated purely to RBSD is better for the average, beginner student who is looking for self defence. I do believe that aspects of RBSD training can be incorporated into Sporting and TMA training, to provide an even better link to real world self defence, but I'm not trying to convince MA'ists to give up their current system and take up RBSD. for eg the scenario training can very easily be incorporated into any other method of training. I honestly believe a unity in all MA. whether sports based Traditional based or reality based. each have something to offer, and these things don't have to interfere with the others.

Well Thats My thoughts anyway.

Posted by: drgndrew

Re: Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors - 02/04/09 08:48 AM

G'day Kimo

Quote:

Quote:

I only argue that RBSD provides a more direct, path. after all Our training is more closely related to the arena we are training for (ie real life). because we include the behaviour (etc) aspects of real life violence then the gap we have to imagine or extrapolate across is considerably less.

See this makes the assumption that others don't train in street defense, and for me that just isn't the case it was a big part of my training, maybe your point holds for TMA on the whole, but I can't speak to that.

I am talking generally Mate, I believe or wish to imply that all clubs (or styles) are the same. My personal experience in TMA is one that has a very significant Street element in it's curriculum. there will always be exceptions to the rule.

I my self may be a bit guilty of talking about My person approach to RBSD as being the general norm, I'm sure there are plenty of RBSD clubs out there that are nothing like what I consider to be RBSD.

Quote:

It also assumes that RBSD, knows something that others don't know. It comes off a bit arrogant to me.

it might come off as arrogant, but frankly RBSD does provide for things that MOST other sporting and TMA do not or even acknowledge. Personally I find it more arrogant that sporting systems refuse to believe there is a better way to prepare for real world violence when the their sole purpose is to produce competition fighters. You don't here RBSD guys constantly claiming that they would wipe the floor with an MMA practitioner or a kick boxer in a sporting event do you. it's not arrogance to point out a deficit in preparation for a specific aspect, it is arrogant however to claim superiority in an arena that is not their focus or that is not specifically trained for. No?

Hey I'm not saying that every MMA'st is like this but arrogance is using success in one arena to prove superiority in another and frankly this is more common in MMA then the reverse in RBSD

If you want to train for a one on one, no holds barred full contact fight then I will send you to an MMA gym and you will be better prepared for that event. But if you want real life self protection skills that takes into account ALL the element of real world violence then I will recommend RBSD. if you want to develop yourself in character and mind, body. and you want more then just a sport or a self defence system then I will hook you up with the local TMA that best suits your requirements.

Quote:

I see RBSD as simply a portion of training, an application. I also take issue with the idea of direct path, rings of shortcut to me. I see martial arts as a life long endevor and am turned off by anyone who looks to collapse the time of study, I think it leads people to believe they are capable of things they are not.

I have similar views, believe it or not. the difference is that my approach first shows someone how to apply what they have, in the behavioural setting of real world violence, I then move on to improve the skills. I do not believe that a person should train for three years before they are considered effective, I produce effectiveness first and then work at improving it.

I have never claimed that RBSD is better then any martial arts over the long run. it is the beginning stages that differs in my approach.

Instead of teaching a technique and have the person drill it over and over and then learn how to apply it in a real energy situation, I do it the other way around, they may only at first be apple to apply the untrained natural weapons to a real energy attack, then we learn new techniques and drill them, this way when they learn they can apply it straight away. RBSD provide the means to defend yourself first up and then helps you build the tools. where as TMA tend to build the tools and then introduce the means to apply them, Sporting MMA is quicker then TMA as it tends to teach the tool and application pretty close together but the arena is specific to competition and fighting there is no or little behavioural aspect other then the physical skill set.

As for it being a shortcut well I guess it is compared to the alternatives, but it isn't cutting corners it is simply specialised training to produce specialised results. MMA produces fighters more quickly then TMA, but no-one is claiming it to be a short cut., MMA achieves this by specialised training for specific outcomes.

Quote:

The old saying is Martial Arts is like boiling water, as soon as you remove the heat it begins to cool. The whole concept of RSBD seems to imply you learn it, and your done. And even if that is not they way it is, in practice that what I have seen, low time in training and high turnover. At least in TMA it's usually understood it will take years to become any good (and that would be because it does).

Well you can boil water by applying direct heat, by fire or resistance of electricity, One is more efficient at boiling the water, you can also boil water but pressure and by the agitation of it's molecules via electro magnetic waves. You can add stuff to water to make it boil at a lower temperature and or even a higher temperature.

The boiling water shouldn't be the focus, the reason why you want the water to boil should, that in turn will to a large degree determine how to boil the water.

Once the water is boiling you do not need to apply as much heat to restart the boil (compared to starting with cold water.)

But you are spot on you do have to continue to add heat to the water to continue (or maintain pressure). RBSD doesn't promise a one stop fix, at least I don't and nor do the systems I've studied. I can see how your perception can come about. but we are realists and we know that you need to regularly reinforce learning in order for you to recall it easier. We never really forget but practice does enable better recall.

when a student gets to the stage of effectiveness this is a good time to introduce them to MMA, MMA training enables you to maintain the boil if you like because of the behavioural encoding of the RBSD training recall becomes easier under real life attack situations. Those natural type , gross motor, easy to learn techniques do not need to be reinforced as much as newly learned techniques, but I still encourage regular updating to grease the groove.

also to be effective in self defence doesn't need as much reinforcement as being effective in MMA, the different behavioural aspects enable this.

As for High turnover It isn't any greater then any TMA system. For me this is even more reason to provide effective skills as quickly as possible, this way if the person does give up early at least they have something to use.

Quote:

Are there things you can learn quickly and become better quickly, sure there are, but only very basic things and general awareness.

you only need very basic things to defend yourself, and these basic things being easy to learn mean they are more readily recalled.

Quote:

You mentioned earlier that most instructors are MA's from different disciplines, well that's great and true in my experience, but they are not giving that full background the the students they are teaching now are they? So how are the students supposed to attain the same level of skill?

Well it comes down to specialisation again. They only teach them the stuff needed for the goals not everything they learn, they chip are the unnecessary to provide the core. This is what MMA has done with TMA.

We also have to define skill it is they are aiming for if it is the skill the instructors have as a martial artist then they will have to train the arts they trained in, if it is for pure self defence then they only need to train those aspects of the TMAs that contribute to effective self defence in the real world.

we have to remember that RBSD is still fairly young the founders of the movement are still actively teaching, these are the guys that saw a deficit in TMA and sporting MA's and researched a better way for real world self defence. they do not teach there original systems (well some do but not as RBSD) they teach aspects of them that are relevant to RBSD.

Quote:

One last thing you mentioned, when in the moment muscle memory tends to degrade. Couldn't be more untrue, skill and execution might degrade, you may only perform at a percentage of your ability when under a no stress situation, but the muscle memory will take over, good or bad. Tons of documentation on this, ever hear about the trainer who disarmed an attacker with a knife, and then handed the knife right back to the guy? Why? Because over the years of training others, he always handed the knife back to the student to demonstrate again. You see the same thing in combat, soldiers under fire will do everything they way they trained when it comes to certain types of moves, if they always drilled with the safety on, they will forget to take it off when under stress, because of muscle memory.

Highly trained skills, trained under the influence of the conditions of combat can become gross motor like, it is true that these do not deteriorate as much as as skills learned under "normal" conditions. Thats because they have been embedded under high stress conditions. in a sense they become natural under those conditions. if they are trained with out the stress they will deteriorate just like any other learned skill. for eg you don't need to think about how to tie your laces, It's a skill that has been practiced and reinforced very regularly. how ever under acute stress you will have great difficulty tying your laces. Why because you have not learned to tie your shoes under extreme stress.

BTW the story about the instructor handing the knife back is a myth

Quote:

Street violence is unpredictable, and I think RBSD is on the right track in terms of getting people into the right mindset, but they need to lose all that quick learn microwave teaching stuff, there are no shortcuts in anything worth learning.

Again it's not a short cut it is specialised specific training. specialised training for a specific outcome will produce effective performance in that outcome quicker then general or non specialised training.

this is what I recommend to students

Learn RBSD first then move on to either MMA or TMA depending on your preferences. by doing RBSD first the student earns confidence and a effective knowledge of and effectiveness in self protection and is now free to explore the many other aspects of the Martial arts whether sporting traditional or both.

It doesn't have to be either-or

Top Ten Aussie (RBSD) Instructors