Fitness and Self Defense

Something I realised a few years back was that, as a man moving into my middle age, I'm more at risk of age related health issues than I am from some random attacker on the street (depending on lifestyle, occupation and where you live).

As such I now take a much more holisitc view of self defence and self protection than I did 10+ years ago. If we agree that looking at home secuirity, travel security etc is part of self protection then I think that an honest appraisal of your lifestyle as whole also qualifies. Risk and harm can come from many different angles and I think fixating on the danger from an attacker is blinkered and short sighted.

If you're carrying 40lbs extra weight, smoke 20 a day and over indulge on the happy juice then I think you have more important things to address, from a self protection point of view, than learning an eye jab or pre-emptive strike.

I think Iain hits a very good middle ground (as far as I can tell). His training is pragmatic and self protection based but he also tackles fitness and a broad approach to training too.

GNARL wrote:

How important do you consider physical fitness as being in terms of self defense?

It has a bearing on the physical side, but it has absolutely no bearing on the more important aspects of personal security. You don’t need to be physically fit to avoid dangerous areas, fit your home with good quality locks and a security system, drive with the car doors locked, keep valuable items hidden, to verbally diffuse a situation, etc.

GNARL wrote:

To what level should one be fit in order to be able to attack, run, grapple, etc?

The word “fit” should be thought of as in “fit for purpose”. The person therefore has a sufficient level of fitness if they can do what is required to keep themselves safe. Self-protection is about helping the majority keep safe. Therefore a person training solely for self-protection does not need the same level of fitness as an elite level athlete. They simply need a level of fitness to enable them to deal with the situation i.e. the fitness needed to deal with 30 seconds of full on activity as opposed to a 12 round bout. The fitter you are the better; but fitness is not a substitute for functional skills and experience.

GNARL wrote:

In your eyes, do self-defense instructors who are obviously overfat and out of shape lose credibility, even if what they teach is of a high standard and quality?

I think that martial arts instructors who are very overweight and yet promote the idea of “self-discipline” lose credibility because they are obviously not leading by example. However, someone teaching pure self-protection – which makes no claim to promote a positive lifestyle or to better the individual – can teach personal security, conflict management, simple physical skills without needing to be in shape. The point is that self-protection methods need to work for the majority who have very little training. Because the majority don’t have high levels of fitness, it could be fine for a self-protection instructor not to be in great shape so long as the material is of good quality.

Taking a wider view, there should be no doubt that fitness is contributory factor and being in good shape will help people deal with a situation and could make you a less attractive target. It’s also worth pointing out that statistically most reading this are far more likely to be die as a result of their lifestyle choices than they are though violent assault. Obesity, heart disease, alcoholism, lung cancer, etc present a greater danger than violence to most. So if we are talking about simply staying alive, then I would say that people should consider health and lifestyle as well as self-protection skills.

The key issues relating to fitness and self-protection would be to separate self-protection from martial arts and fighting (they are not the same and have differing goals), and to understand that only a comparatively small proportion of self-protection is the last resort physical skills. It’s the non-physical areas that are most important and most effective when it comes to true self-protection. Therefore high levels of fitness – while a key part of martial arts and fighting – are useful, but not vital, for self-protection.

All the best,

Iain

Also to my mind a basic level of fitness and functional movement for self protection and self defence should be at such that the person can vault a waist high fence, climb over a 6 foor wall or similar. Preferably after doing Iain's 30 seconds of full on activity. That to me would be basic movements that would help a person escape in an urban environment.

A great man (Geoff Thompson) once said, and I'm paraphrasing, "self protection starts with protection against the self".

So, if you're feeding yourself rubbish food, drinking heavily, smoking etc and not doing a decent level of keeping healthy exercise (both physical and mental), you're not practising good self protection. I agree with him on that wholeheartedly.

I do think you're less likely to be a target if you carry yourself well.  In that sense general fitness helps as you tend to look and act a bit more switched on.  I think I read in one of Geoff's books how a mugger selected his victims and people who looked fit - and therefore more likely to give him a smack in the mouth - were pretty much excluded.

Gary

I once heard that "Self-Protection/Defence" starts with  the Self". This is something that I agree with and in order to protect ourselves from a majority of dangerous things (ie. heart disease, obesity as well as violence), we must look after our bodies (and minds to an extent). So looking from that perspective I would put a healthly lifestyle as a top priority, and that includes being in "good" phsyical shape.

However most people who want to learn Self-Protection, would come to the classes to learn "self-defence". I agree with Iain about the majority of self-defence is about awareness, avoidance etc.. But I would say that when it finally comes down to the physical side of things, I believe being able to run (not always fast, but smartly) is a key skill. It may also play a part in last minute avoidance scenarios as well.

I also agree with Gary and the target hardening side of things too and I think it relates to looking after yourself in the first place. If you feel good, this can increase confidence etc...

Also once the fight has begin and the final strike has occured, then being able to flea effectivley can often mean that one must run to safety. Here is a little hierachy I would use to explain my thoughts:

1. Precautionary Measures (Burgular Alarms, Walking in Groups etc..)
2. Awareness (Knowing whats happening around you)
3. Avoidance (removing yourself from a potientally dangerous situation)
4. Escaping (the dangerous situation has occured so its time to flea before it becomes physical)
5. Strike & Go (Pre-Emptive Strike and Flea)

So in my list if for whatever reasons stages 1,2 & 3 fail, I would say being able to escape before striking because of running away can solve the problem (obviously we are in a bad situation if we end up this far into a confrontation).  This is why I see being able to run is a core skill just as if not more important than any physical strikes in self-protection.

I hope it makes some kinds of sense, as I have rambled quite a bit. Very interesting discussion.

On the physical end of things being in shape is very important.  Often I read or hear karate-ka talking about their skill levels and prowess when all they've been punching is air.

If you're not lifting heavy things (weights, dumbells, kettlebells, etc) and you're not hitting something solid i.e. a heavy bag, then you might want to re-evalute your training. You can practice only one kata a week, work on the heavy bag twice a week and lift weights three times a week and develop excellent karate/fighting skills. However, if all you do is practice kata- or hit air as I call it- then you might want to consider yourself more a dancer than a fighter.

Just my opinion, but then again I'mgetting  old and cranky.

Mike

Try this on for size to see what I mean. Grab a heavy object, weight, sandbag, dumbell, etc, and lift it from the floor to over your head three times fast then put it down and strike a heavy bag for one minute as fast and hard as you can. Continue doing so until you can't. I'd say three rounds will be the limit, initally.

I think you need moderation and common sense though.

I see more students injured through their training outside the dojo than ever get injured inside.

Ironic that.

Gary

I am a competitive runner and a martial artist, but I make my living as a carpenter. Yesterday, for instance, I spent my day slogging through mud, hauling pumps and hoses around from place to place trying to remove the water from the building site so I could work. But I digress.

My co-workers think I'm nuts for spending a full day at work, then going home and running 5-10 miles. I probably am, but that's not my point.

I'm simply not as tired as they are at the end of a hard day, because I run.

Any automobile has a "performance envelope." This defines the outer limits of how fast it can go, how fast it can stop, how we it can corner, etc. My Dodge pickup, with its V-8 engine, has a bigger envelope than my Kia Spectra, with its hamster wheel. They both get me from home to work and back again in about the same time, because the performance requirements of that trip fall well within the envelope of both vehicles.

But if I have to tow a trailer, I'm going to need that V-8.

I don't get as tired as my co-workers on a hard day because my fitness envelope is bigger. Since I'm not pushing quite as close to my physical limits, I'm also at less risk of injury.

I think the same can be said when it comes to self-defense. Most of the time, a high level of fitness is not required. But a larger envelope will help one handle the most extreme situations.

Mike

PASmith wrote:

Something I realised a few years back was that, as a man moving into my middle age, I'm more at risk of age related health issues than I am from some random attacker on the street (depending on lifestyle, occupation and where you live).

As such I now take a much more holisitc view of self defence and self protection than I did 10+ years ago. If we agree that looking at home secuirity, travel security etc is part of self protection then I think that an honest appraisal of your lifestyle as whole also qualifies. Risk and harm can come from many different angles and I think fixating on the danger from an attacker is blinkered and short sighted.

If you're carrying 40lbs extra weight, smoke 20 a day and over indulge on the happy juice then I think you have more important things to address, from a self protection point of view, than learning an eye jab or pre-emptive strike.

I think Iain hits a very good middle ground (as far as I can tell). His training is pragmatic and self protection based but he also tackles fitness and a broad approach to training too.

What he said.