|
Thank you to Ger for un-earthing this interesting article by Mick Coup about intimidation by "bad guys" and the format that preparing for a street fight should take... ------------ As I've written previously, in my opinion 'exposure' is the only way to address this issue, and unfortunately the 'bad guys' tend to have more of it than the 'good guys' by virtue of the environment they exist within.
In training I try and hit people on a physical, mental and emotional level wherever possible - I make the sessions physically hard, I demand that people take responsibility for actively learning, and I induce an emotional level of stress as innoculation via various means...
Current educational practice highly emphasises 'positive reinforcement' as the best tool to encourage development - and undoubtedly it is, most of the time...
The problem with this fighting stuff is that when you are knuckle deep with some intent on kicking your head in, nobody rewards you for executing a great technique - there is no positive reinforcement - but you are certainly punished for a bad one. Unfortunately the emphasis on combative training should be based around a 'negative reinforcement' model to be truly effective.
Obviously this has to be conducted with a little intelligence, and it isn't the case of just handing out beatings to emphasise better performance - anything unpleasant - physical exercise for instance - constitutes the required negative reinforcement that will very rapidly raise someone's game.
The 'rules' should be rewritten to a degree so that performing a technique properly isn't overly praised, but treated as simply acceptable, unlike many of the demonstrations described as 'world class' or 'amazing' that showcase nothing more than something executed as it should be, no need for the superlatives at all.
I don't feel the need, or the desire, to reward average, or sub-standard, in order to invite a reciprocal exchange - I'm secure enough about what I do, and how I do it to avoid seeking this, and I don't feel that it does anyone any favours in the long term.
Don't take the above to mean that when I teach beginners I expect perfection, or else. Nothing could be further from the truth and many are surprised at the lack of 'beasting' they receive during initial tuition. Those that turn up simply wanting me to validate them, often don't like what I have to say - it's always objective, I certainly don't let personal issues affect my judgement in such instances - and I have 'lost' students due to this on occasion. I use the term 'lost' loosely here, as I don't really view it as a loss at all - if someone will only train with an instructor that tells him he's good, whatever he does, and won't hear constructive criticism due to ego, then I'm glad I'm not for him!
Back to the question - exposure, on that unpleasant emotional level is what is required. Stop making your training sessions 'nice' if you are training for a real fight - no real fight will ever be nice, not before, during or afterwards, so train for this.
You only get good at what you practice, and I aim to practice everything required for the event, that real fight. I want to bring my training up to the level required, not try to lower the level of the fight to fit in with the training I want to do. It has to be uncomfortable to be of any use, once the basic 'toolbox' has been equipped, seeing as the fight environment is highly uncomfortable. You have to practice being objective in your approach, detached, ruthless even - these traits won't just happen, they have to be sought out and rehearsed. Respect everyone in training, but lose the compassion, for that couple of hours per week all bets are off - practice being that cold-hearted bastard you'll need to be on the day, or what chance will you stand against someone who has been practicing every day of his scumbag life?
Such an approach isn't for everyone, I admit - but neither is surviving a real fight. |
