As on operator you have the complex task of deciphering what is real, combat proven, defensive tactics and what is “martial arts” hype. When I say “operator”, I am referring to anyone that has to face the possibility of combat during the daily operations of their profession. Every LEO, Military operator, Security operator, or Corrections Officer is defined in my curriculum as an operator. If you fit into any of these costumes, then this column is directed at you.
So what is “real” and what is “BS”? To start, anything that does not put you at a tactical advantage in your given situation is not viable to you. If a strategy works great in the military field of operations, but is not viable for a police officer to use, due to legal restraints, then that strategy is useless for the officer. It may be as “real” as it gets, but it’s “BS” for an LEO because he can’t use it.
I have been involved in the “martial arts” for over 25 years. I have studied many different systems and experienced many different theories. I have never seen any traditional system that covers every situation a modern operator will face. There are many “modernized” systems that try to incorporate old-world logic into modern combat. That is good in theory, but does not fare well in application. The “new” arts instructors that are out there try, desperately, to mask the eclectic mix of traditional styles that they, barely, understand.
There is one “constant” in this whole hodgepodge of “styles” in circulation. “The human body can only move, or be manipulated, in a finite number of directions.” I don’t care if you are applying Ju Jitsu, Tae Kwon Do, Ju Do, or any other Asian words. An arm will only bend at the elbow in a pronate manner. It will only raise or lower at the shoulder, and it only has strength in certain positions. If you try to circumvent that constant, you will lose.
I have a bone to pick with the ‘martial arts” world. Since the popularity growth of the book, “The Art of War”, by Sun Tsu, everybody that had any type of organized system of strategy referred to themselves as “artists”. I understand that you will have people of higher caliber and talent in any given craft. But the term “art” refers to a craft that has no technical, emotional, or creative boundaries. This does not apply to human combat. The very limits of human anatomy are the limits of the techniques and applications of such techniques.
So what is the scope of human conflict that defines the strategies used for domination and victory? I have experienced a system of principals that cannot and will not change from person to person, weather armed or unarmed, armored or naked. The principals apply to empty hands, bladed weapons, and firearms alike. The Japanese call it “Aiki“. The Chinese call it “Tai Chi“. The westerners , specifically the Native Americans, call it “Harmonious Spirit“. Whatever deep, mystical name you call it, it does have a scientific basis. It is the blending of potential and kinetic energy to manipulate the natural tendency of the human mind and body to follow the path of least resistance. This may be the body attempting to avoid perceived injury, or the mind, mistakenly, telling the body to change it’s position for strategic advantage. To achieve this phenomenon, you must put the opponent in a position of “perceived” dominance or structure that causes them to rely on you for balance.
Now the problem with this strategy is that it is difficult to achieve, takes countless hours of training to be proficient, and does not lend itself to large scale training. Well, until now.
As I have spent my last 15 years training in this system, I have come to the one conclusion that most teachers will not divulge. “The principals can be applied to any human reaction”. As many have discovered, you can teach a person to use their natural, defensive, reaction in an offensive manner. If you take the “principals” not the “techniques” of a blending combat system and apply them to natural defensive postures, you can teach large groups of people in a relatively short amount of time.
One thing that needs to be addressed is the need for the operator to understand the psychology of combat. That is something that is, almost, never addressed in any traditional or modern system. Most instructors avoid the dirty world of realism. It is combat science not martial arts training that our public servants, military operators and personal body guards need to undergo. It needs to be realistic, and unforgiving. Intense, scary and brutal. Because we have all heard the saying, “Train hard, fight easy”. Well, I say “Train smart, fight efficiently”. I will address the physical fitness aspect of training at a later date.
Zach Williamson is a law enforcement officer in Texas and the founder of C.H.A.O.S. Conflict Resolution Systems
0 comments:
Post a Comment