6 posts / 0 new
Last post
Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture
"Why So Much Self-Defence Training Is Off The Rails" by Marc MacYoung

A fantastic article from Marc MacYoung! Everyone needs to read this:

http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/SelfDefense-Wrong.htm

Marc is an extremely knowledgeable and experienced guy. Also, a great communicator too and it’s rare you get such a potent mix.

There’s lots in this piece that mirrors many of the discussions here. You need to read it!

All the best,

Iain

PS Selected quotes to encourage you to read the full thing:

Let me start by saying most self-defense training is as screwed up as a soup sandwich. There's good training out there, but there's way more bad. You need to know that to be an informed consumer.

Most so-called 'self-defense' training falls down in one or more of these categories:

   1) Knowledge of how crime and violence happen

   2) Understanding what self-defense is

   3) Understanding strengths/limits and applicability of 'techniques'

   4) Ability to perform under stress

   5) Planning for consequences

   6) Agendas other than personal defense

   7) Marketing/selling something else as self-defense.

 …..

The goals of fighting are completely different than self-defense. 

As such the strategies, tactics and decisions are different. Radically different. Typically fighting is to win. You participate and stay engaged until that goal is achieved. Oh, and while we're on the subject, did you know self-defense is legal, but fighting is illegal? That's how different it is.

…..

When it comes to self-defense techniques the filters are slightly different. They are:

1) Does the move have required mechanics to work?

2) Does it work against a larger/stronger/non-cooperative person?

3) How specialized/over-generalized is it?

4) What is the context for its use?

5) What are the legal restrictions on its use?

…..

Realistically you don't have to be paranoid or devote your life to training to handle being jumped by 27 ninja. But you do need to do a risk analysis of your life and cover those bases.

…..

Remember: Train for what happens most and you'll be able to handle most of what happens. And that includes knowing when it's time to turn and walk away so nothing happens.

TW Smith
TW Smith's picture

Wow, impressive article, could serve as outline in the development of 'what to do' and 'not to do' in a personal self-protection program. 

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

TW Smith wrote:
Wow, impressive article, could serve as outline in the development of 'what to do' and 'not to do' in a personal self-protection program.

Agreed! Marc is a great writer who knows about violence to a level most, thankfully, can’t comprehend. The downside is that I sometimes feel he is preaching to the converted as the wider martial arts wold chugs along making the same mistakes it always did. There’s so much great information in that article that people really need to take on board.

All the best,

Iain

Paul_D
Paul_D's picture

Very interesting, as to be expected.  It raised a point which I had not given much thought to before, in regard to sport fighting/training being sold as SD, specifically whe he talks about things working against much larger stronger opponents.  As sport fighting has with divisions and so is rarely tested against significantly larger/stronger opponents.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Paul_D wrote:
It raised a point which I had not given much thought to before, in regard to sport fighting/training being sold as SD …

A very important point and one that’s well worth drawing out. That failure to differentiate between contexts is a huge issue. Most marital artists don’t recognise it as an issue.  And even when such discussions are had around the topic, it’s most often done is an unproductive “tribal” “better vs worse” way.

The bottom line is that a fighting methodology is what will be most effective in a fighting context. And a self-defence methodology is what is needed for self-defence. We should not use the effectiveness of fighting method for fighting as an indication of how suitable it is for self-defence (sadly all too common). Tactically and legally there will be all kinds of problems if we don’t get this vital difference.

One thing we can all do to help limit this confusion is strike “street fighting” from our lexicon; especially when used as a synonym for “self-defence”. When I hear people use the term it is normally by those who think – very, very wrongly – that self-defence is nothing but a “fight in the street”.

As Marc says in the article, “The goals of fighting are completely different than self-defense. As such the strategies, tactics and decisions are different. Radically different. Typically fighting is to win. You participate and stay engaged until that goal is achieved. Oh, and while we're on the subject, did you know self-defense is legal, but fighting is illegal? That's how different it is.”

All the best,

Iain

PS An article of mine on this topic: https://www.iainabernethy.co.uk/article/problems-street-fighting

Ian H
Ian H's picture

Iain Abernethy wrote:

Marc is a great writer who knows about violence to a level most, thankfully, can’t comprehend. The downside is that I sometimes feel he is preaching to the converted as the wider martial arts wold chugs along making the same mistakes it always did. There’s so much great information in that article that people really need to take on board.

All the best,

Iain

I love Marc's website ... so many rabbit holes to go down ... click on one of any number of hotlinks and go to another page of wit and wisdom ... hours of fun!