A Geoff Thompson article.

This is a recent article by GT. I think it's great, see what you think.

Hope you don't mind me posting it Geoff.


Does Self-defence work?

16/09/2010


Violence in society is pandemic: punch ups, muggings and even fatalities are frighteningly common in a society that is bulging at the waist with unsolicited assaults. Due to astonishing growth-rate of violent crime in Britain, skills in self-defence are almost a pre-requisite if you want to get from the cinema to the Chinese and home again in one piece.
But what is self defence?
And does the martial art that you are taught in the dojo and sold through the magazines really work when the mat is concrete and your opponent does not now the rules?
__________________________________
One of the many things I have learned in my forty years of martial arts training, from working with masters and from following the deity of my own experience hard won is that self defence and martial arts are not the same thing. Sport MA and self defence are not the same thing either. And recreational training – twice a week at the local sports hall – certainly does not constitute a serious investment in real self protection.
When people talk martial art they think that they are automatically talking self defence but they are not. And when they talk self defence they believe that it is synonymous with martial art. Again, it is not. The two are very different, and they should be separated and taught as such.
There is nothing wrong with sport martial art, I love it, I am a big fan. And recreational training is better than no training at all. But if people are ever to survive a violent encounter on the pavement arena, it is imperative that they learn to distinguish between the two.
If you train twice a week in martial arts and think you are a serious player in self defence you’ll be in for a big shock when it kicks off outside the chippy on a Friday night. If your penchant is for sport martial arts (and all that it entails) and you think it automatically translates to the street you too will be in big trouble when the pub-warrior breaks your rules and ****s you while your un-zipped at the communal troth, or turns up for round two at your work or your home with a hammer and a bad intent.
I must stipulate that I am not having a go at traditional arts, at sport or at the recreational player. I have a deep love for MA and for its practitioners but mine is the reality game so I have to honour the truth above all else. And my truth is not based on theory of folk law or how well I can make it happen in the dojo, it is based on vast experience in all things real. I have hurt many people to acquire this information over a long period of time. I am not proud of that. But I do hope that the reader might learn from my knowledge, so that they do not become a victim of violent crime, or the next digit on a home office statistic about unsolicited assault. Because it is not bad technique or even bad teaching that gets people killed in street encounters, it is denial.
People are in denial. With their art, with their ability and with reality its self.
You may well ask, what is the truth?
The truth is that real self defence in its concentrate is not and should not be about a physical response, as I will explain further into the article. When I teach self defence I may flirt around martial technique, and encourage people to invest in a core system, but the bulk of my teaching is in the art of avoidance. And if an encounter does by necessity become physical I teach and I preach the pre-emptive strike (attacking first). It is the only thing that works consistently. All the other stuff that you see, that you are taught or that you imagine might work ‘out there’ probably will not.
Here is my advice for those with an open mind: if it works for you I am delighted, if not don’t complain, I’m not interested - just press delete.

I'm sure you have already seen - and are tired of - the wristlocks and shoulder throws that garnish just about every article and DVD on self-defence. They only work in Bruce Lee films and on police self-defence courses so I'll spare you the embarrassment of a photo-shoot-re-run. If you don't mind I'll stick to the stuff that works when the pavement is your arena, and there are no referees with whistles and bells to stop a point scoring match turning into a blood and snot debacle.
As I said earlier, my premise is basic but empirical (I have as they say, ‘seen the elephant’) and at some point it might prove life saving.

Whilst some situations actually start at a physical response (in which case you either fight like a demon or you get battered), most are preceded by some kind of pre-fight ritual and introductory dialogue; even if it is only the uninspiring 'are you looking at my missus?' The Real art of self-defence is not in bringing the affray to a messy conclusion with a practised right cross, rather it is in spotting the attack ritual in its early stages so that a physical encounter can be avoided.

Hard Target

As a man with a varied and brutal background I can tell you with sincerity and emphasis that violence is not the answer. Reflecting this, my opening advice is to avoid violence whenever and where ever possible. Make yourself a hard target by giving volatile environments a wide birth. James Coburn was succinct when he advised us to 'avoid arseholes and big egos, avoid places where arseholes and big egos hang out'. He could have added 'don't be an arsehole and don't have a big ego yourself'. It helps. The inevitable consequences of toe-to-toe encounters are rarely favourable to either party so around-the-table negotiation should always be exhausted before sending in the troops.

The interview

Pre-fight management is vital if you want to survive an altercation intact; the winner is usually the one who controls the seconds before an affray. Most situations start at conversation range and with some kind of dialogue. If this is mismanaged the situation normally - and quickly - degenerates into a scuffle and then a scrap on the floor amidst chip wrappers and dog-ends. The current crop of defence innovators recommends the floor as the place to be when a fight goes live. In the No-Holds-Barred one-on-one match fight sports arena they'd probably be right, but outside the chippy where the terrain is less predictable and the enemy nearly always has allies, taking the fight to the cobbles is suicidal. It leaves you open to (often fatal) secondary attacks, especially if you're facing more than one opponent.

The fence

If you are approached and the dialogue starts (this is known as the interview), take up a small inconspicuous 45° stance and put up your fence: place your lead hand in that all-important space between you and your antagonist to maintain a safe gap. The fence gives you a degree of control without your aggressor knowing. Placed correctly, your lead hand and reverse hand will block the thoroughfare (without touching) of the attacker's right and left hand. If he moves forward to butt/kick/punch, be prepared to shove him back and/or attack. Try not to touch the assailant with your fence unless you are forced to, as it can trigger aggression and possibly a physical attack.

If you want to stay in one peice, don't let a potential attacker touch you at any time, even if he appears to be friendly. An experienced fighter will feign friendliness, even submission, to make an opening for his attack. Another common ploy is for an attacker to offer a handshake and then head-butt/knife you as soon as the grip is taken. If you fall prey to the verbal opener you will quickly become work experience for a student nurse at the ER, so use your fence to maintain a safe gap until the threat has gone.

Fear

Expect to be scared because, no matter how experienced you are, you will be. If you are not taught about pre-fight, in-fight and post fight fear in your dojo maybe it is time to look for a different teacher. Fear will be present, not matter how capable you are. And if you have not learned to manage massive floods of adrenalin you are un-prepared. Get yourself as close to reality in training as possible, so that you can get used to this often overwhelming feeling (see my DVD Animal Day). Fear is the natural precursor to confrontation. I've worked with some premier league players and privately they all tell the same story; at the point of contact they'd rather be any where in the world than where they are. So don't let self-doubt enter the equation if you feel like crapping your Calvin's because you're not on your own, we all feel fear even if some of us pretend that we don't. Shaking legs, trembling voice and feelings of cowardice are all natural by-products of the adrenal release.

Verbal dissuasion

Try and talk the situation down. Again, the battle will be more with your own ego than it will be with your antagonist. Don't be afraid to admit that you don't want trouble and beat a hasty retreat. Better to follow the Judo adage and walk away with confidence than to end up in an affray that might change the course of your life for the worst.

Posturing

If talking fails to make the grade (and you think it might work) you could try posturing. I made it work for me as an 11 stone novice doorman so you don't have to be big to be effective. Posturing entails making like a woolly mammoth in an attempt to psyche out your antagonist. Create a gap between you and your aggressor by shoving him hard on the chest. Once the gap has been secured go crazy; shout, salivate, spread your arms, bulge your eyes and drop into single syllables. This triggers the opponent's flight response and often scares him into capitulation. As soon as he backs off beat a hasty retreat.
Again this need to be practiced in the dojo. Whilst it might not fit in with your idea of the traditional ethos, it is essential preparation for the contemporary enemy. Posturing is like using your kiaa, but with expletives. If you look back at warfare throughout the ages you will see that everyone from the American Red Indian right thought to the Paras in Northern Ireland used posturing to intimidate the enemy forces.

If escape, dissuasion and posturing crack at the spine and if you have honest belief that you are about to be attacked you are left with two choices; hit or be hit. As a realist my duty is not to tell you which to choose, only to offer you the options, and allow you to select for your self.

The pre-emptive strike

If your choice is a physical response, my advice is to be pre-emptive and strike first - very hard - preferably on the jaw (it's a direct link to the brain). The concept of defence at the point of contact is not only unsound it is dangerous and extremely naive. Waiting for someone to attack you is strategic madness because blocks don't work! The Kwai-Chang-Cain theory of block and counter-attack is even more absurd, especially if you are facing more than one opponent. There is no finesse about fighting multiples, they do not line up and attack you one at a time they strike like a swarm of bees and luck is the only thing that'll keep a beat in your heart. If you look at any contemporary CCTV footage of street attacks you will notice the immediate and ferocious nature of this kind of attack. It is merciless and it often leaves people dead.

If you honestly believe that you are about to attacked, hit them before they can hit you. Once you have landed the first strike, run. Many defence gurus advocate a second strike, a finisher. I advise not. Your first strike buys you vital getaway time. If you're dealing with a determined attacker (many are very experienced in the street) and you don't leg it after the first strike, chances are he'll grab you and snap you like a twiglette.
Self-defence is about doing the minimum a situation will allow to ensure your own survival. It's not about defending a corpulent ego or misguided honour.
Having been involved in thousands of live encounters the pre-emptive attack was the only consistently effective technique I could find. As for the current trend in ground fighting, forget it! Grappling is an amazing art, I spent 18 months as a full time player in Neil Adams’ international judo class, and I loved every minute, it became a magnificent back up for me, but a supplementary support system as far as self defence is concerned. It is a match fighting and competition art, not suitable for a concrete mat – and if you face multiple opponents (and cowards always usually come teamed up) and choose to grapple the chances are you have just chosen to lose, and in an arena that is as brutal and explosive as it is unpredictable to lose often means ‘to die.’
My advice is to stay on your feet, hit first, hit as hard as you can, using your fists (or your head). These are (usually) the closest naturally available weapons to the target (your opponents jaw), and offer the safest and most direct route. At this point it would be a great advantage to have a heavy investment in a punching art - preferably western boxing. Most people think they can throw a good punch. From my experience - and certainly under pressure - few can. A great way to learn is to go to a boxing club or do focus pad work with a friend to develop the skills.

If you do employ the pre-emptive attack make sure you know your legal rights (a little more on this later) or you might be in for a double jeopardy when you have to defend them against the second enemy - the law.

You dictate reasonable force; although you may have to defend your interpretation of reasonable in a court of law. If you are so frightened by an assailant that you have to hit him with everything but the girl on your arm, then that is reasonable force. If, however, you knock someone to the ground and then do the fifty-six-move kata on their head, you might well be stretching your luck.
I can't guarantee that you won't end up in the dock, but I feel that it's better to be judged by twelve than carried by six.

Forget the films where the good guy - using empty hands - prevails over the knife-wielding psychopath without ruffling his own hair or popping a shirt button, because on celluloid is the only place it's going to happen. Someone once asked me at a self-defence seminar 'what could you do against a knife?'
'About 50 miles an hour', I replied.
I've faced a few blades and I've been stabbed some in my time and on every occasion I was terrified. If your antagonist is carrying and you have the option, run. Even with 40 years of martial arts training under my belt, it was providence and not skill that kept me alive.

If you are facing a knife, the best-case scenario is that you don't die. If a knife is pulled and running away is not on the option list, throw anything that isn't nailed to the floor at the attacker, and then run. If projection range is lost your only other option is to blitz the attacker with head strikes until he is unable to continue his attack.

The rule of thumb here is that stabbers don't usually show the blade, they just sneak up and insert it when you're not aware. If they do show you the knife they are usually just posturing. Always check the hands of your antagonist - if you can't see the palms, or a hand is concealed, you have to presume they are carrying.

If the attacker does have a weapon and doesn't respond to your verbal dissuasion, your options are two-fold: give them what they ask for (and just hope it's not oral sex) or be prepared to get cut in the affray.

As important as the law may be, contemplating the legal implications of defending your self in the face of ensuing attack would be unwise. It can cause indecision, which usually leads to defeat.
I call the law the second enemy: this is not meant disparagingly, but, having been on the wrong side of it a few times I feel duty bound to highlight the inherent dangers of dealing with - what can be - a sticky judicial system, post-assault.
Many people are convicted for what they say and not what they do. This means you could legally defend yourself and yet still be convicted and sent to jail (do not pass go...) if you don't claim self-defence (correctly) when giving a statement to the police. Many of my friends ended up in prison because they didn't understand the law. Paradoxically many known criminals have avoided prison because they (or certainly their solicitors) did. So, if self-defence is your aim, then an appreciation of this judicial grey area has to be an imperative.
Post-assault, you'll probably be suffering from what is known as adrenal-induced Tachypsychia. This can cause time distortion, time loss, memory distortion and memory loss. You may also feel the innate urge to talk, if only to justify your actions (Logorrhoea). All of the latter affect your ability to make an objective statement if the police become involved. When/if you do make a statement it is hardly likely to be accurate considering these facts. Six months down the line when you end up in court to defend your right to self-defence, everything will hang on your statement. So make sure you're clear about your rights. If you're not clear, insist on waiting until the next day before making a statement or ask to see a duty solicitor (or your own). It's your right. Don't put pen to paper otherwise. A police cell can be a very lonely place when you're not used to it, and the police can often be guilty of rushing, even pressuring you for a quick statement. This pressure can be subtle but effective; being left alone for long periods of time, being told that you might be sent to prison, even the good cop-bad cop routine (yes, honestly). Many a tough guy has turned from hard to lard after a few hours surrounded by those four grey walls. Under these circumstances it's very easy to say things you really don't want to say, just so that you can go home.

If you have to defend your self and you damage your assailant my advice is not to hang around after the dirty deed has been done. This minimises the risk of legal (or other) repercussions. Attack victims (especially those who successfully defended them selves) often feel compelled to stay at the scene of crime post assault. Do your self a favour; make like Houdini and vanish? Your life and your liberty might be at stake. Better still don't be there in the first place, that way you won't have to worry about long months waiting for the court case and the possibility of suffering from a sever loss of liberty.

In conclusion

Be honest about your ability and your standard. If you are not as good, or as fit, or as tempered or as experienced as you should be, make the investment and place yourself before teachers of proven experience. Either that or be honest with yourself and your students about your ability, your knowledge and your lineage. There is great freedom in brevity. It doesn’t matter if a technique or an art (or an exponent for that mater) might not work in the street, who really cares at the end of the day, as long as you stipulate that in your manifesto. There is nothing nicer than doing ‘art’ simply for arts sake. If you kid yourself that you are better able than you actually are it might get you killed. When a live situation places your belief under scrutiny and you can’t make your martial art work at the most vital time, it might get your wife or your family killed.
Be honest with yourself about what a real attack actually is: it is terrifying and violent, it is explosive, it is unpredictable, it is savage and it does not abide by any rules. Often it follows you home or it turns up at your place of work and gets really personal. If you underestimate it, real violence can shatter you. Too many people in the martial arts grossly underestimate it. I speak to folk all the time who have stayed so long is safe systems that they have sanitised reality, they have stripped away all the limb-trembling uncertainty and the depressive terror that a real fight brings, and they teach defence techniques like dance moves, as though applying them for real is a walk in the park. A walk in the park it is not.
If you are teaching it as a self defence you have an obligation, an obligation, to qualify the potency of everything you sell as self defence, because someone’s life may one day rely on it.
Train in martial art and love what you do, partake in the sport, it is a great pastime and a solid discipline, but above all esle ‘know’ what you do, know its weaknesses and know its strengths, understand where it is lacking and fill the gaps. All you need to do here is be brutally frank with yourself and with your art. This is the age of CCTV, we have all seen numerous real street encounter on film, or outside the pub. Be honest: how would your art and you ability fit into those scenarios?
I watched a ferocious gang fight in a pub when I was fifteen years old and a purple belt in karate and I knew, I just innately knew that my art, my ability and my preparation at that time would not survive an encounter like that. It simply would not fit into it. And because I could be honest with myself I was able to change the way I trained. I still practiced traditional martial art because I loved what it gave me, I still dabbled in the sport (even though I was not very good at it) because it offered challenge, but I separated the self defence element, I isolated it, placed it in its own box and practised it as a different art.
And self defence definitely is a different art.
Once you are able to strip the wheat from the chaff and master the physical elements of self defence things get really exciting, then you can start to look at bigger game, the art of fighting without fighting, where you dissolve threat at the level of thought….
But that is another article for another day.

 

A good article but I think he overstates the prevelance of violence in Britain today.
I'm not saying it's not there...clearly it is.
But I don't think you need to be as afraid of it as Geoff implies there.

 

I don't have time to read it all now (I'm sure it's excellent). But you may want to state were it was originally published, especially if you are worried about Mr Thompson taking offence.

 

I thought this was a very good article.

I'm not sure where you are coming from PASmith as I haven't spotted any real statement of the prevalence of violence. Reported Violent Crime overall is on the decrease in England and Wales, however media reporting of violent crime is at an all time high because they know it fascinates and horrifies people.

Sadly certain types of crime, such as knife crime, is on the increase (in England and Wales).

 

Where I'm coming from John is countering this...

That makes Britain sound like downtown Jo'burg, Rio or Bogota and that's just not the case. Do people realy get into a fight almost everytime they go to the cinema or the chinese? Really? Is Coventry really that bad? I'd suggest with Geoff's money he moves to where I live. It's much nicer.

As you say..."Reported Violent Crime overall is on the decrease in England and Wales, however media reporting of violent crime is at an all time high because they know it fascinates and horrifies people".
Geoff's opening salvo has more to do with, and in some ways perpetuates, the media representation of violence than the reality IMHO (individual experiences and lifestyles notwithstanding).

For most people in the western world their chances of being injured or killed by the hand of another human are at an all time historical low and I think that needs bearing in mind.

And a personal view, I try and promote whenever we discuss "self defence", is how much people that are training for health and enjoyment are doing for their self defence.
Given that health problems due to inactivity, obesity and a sedentary lifestyle are far more likely to negatively effect a person that an attack by a stranger (again individual experiences and lifestyles notwithstanding).

 

Additionally...I see two points being pertinent here.
One is how prevelant violence is in society. We can all agree that any violence is too much and it does seem horribly casual these days but as discussed the perception of violence doesn't reflect the reality.
The second point is how best to prepare for that violence. I would never suppose to counter anything Geoff T says about point two. I clearly can't.
I'm merely talking about point 1.

 

I think it all depends upon what you describe as frighteningly common!

I always say to people in my school seminars that alcohol and driving and crossing the street (and any combination thereof) are more dangerous than violent crime, but that doesn't lessen the need for taking appropriate steps. For example few people would discount the need for fire alarm drills in schools, but there are more serious violent incidents in schools across England and Wales per year than there are fires during the school day.

Sex crimes have gone up over the last two years, but the BCS think that this may be due to better police reporting procedures rather than an actual increase in crime.

From BCS:

Note the highest risk group is 16 - 24 with a 31.9 risk of being a victim of crime as a while. The % risk for that age group, male, is 13.4%. The overall generic percentage risk of being a victim of violent crime is 1.574%. Overall violent crime is apparently back to 1981 recorded levels.

From a personal perspective I would regard any % chance of being a victim of violent crime that was higher than 1% indicates that violence is too widespread. Since violence can cause more violence, it could also be described as infectious (though obviously not in the strictly medical sense). As a result I would regard the description of violence as pandemic to be pretty accurate rather than hyperbole.

 

skills in self-defence are almost a pre-requisite if you want to get from the cinema to the Chinese and home again in one piece

OK if I rewrite this with a few words being substituted if might illustrate what I mean.

skills in avoiding crocodiles are almost a pre-requisite if you want to get from the cinema to the Chinese and home again in one piece.

That to me means that there is quite a high (higher than the figures you've quoted John) probability of being attacked by a crocodile when you go for some prawn crackers.
For such a high risk there'd have to be more crocodiles on the street than there are dogs or cars.
And I just don't think violent is that prevelant.

Your point about fire drills, crossing the street, alcohol etc is a damn good one.
Everyone should look at "risk" (as an abstract concept) in their lives and take appropriate action depending on their desires to stay safe from harm (some people embrace danger...as is their right).

It's a bugbear of mine that many RBSD instructors (not you John!) seem to fixate on stranger danger (or harm coming from other humans) to the exclusion of other, often more pertinent, risks.

Believe me...I'm not belittling the danger from violent idiots. Merely trying to get it into perspective with our lives as whole.

 

Fair point. I personally think that percentage is high.

With regard to 'stranger danger' you are on the money in more than one important respect - most sex crimes are committed by people known and trusted by the victim or their family. But you're also right with regard to relative dangers.

 

Great conversation boys. I agree with both of you here. i think Geoff overstates the prevalance of violence. Not only in the UK but it is also the case in the US, violent crime across the board is also down (http://http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offenses/violent_crime/index.html - FBIs recent 2009 stats).

I do think he talks it up but at the same, everything he teaches in regards to countering violence is bang on the money. So I listen to what he says.

And jwt, it is not only sex crime victims that are at risk from people they know, but also in just over half of all assault cases from what I have found http://www.lowtechcombat.com/2010/03/real-case-studies-highlight-most.html

And agreed, general bad health will kill many so called martial artists instructors well before an attacker will...

 

Absolutely. Mr Thompson is an inspiration. I just had a tiny issue with his opening statement.
I can remember many years ago going to a TKD competition.
A mate said someone called "Geoff Thompson was doing a seminar at the same venue on the same day.
"Jeff who?" I said.
It was maybe on the cusp of him bringing out "Watch my back" and being in Combat a lot so was only just becoming a name.
Poked my head through the door, didn't look like much was going on and went back to flicking my legs at people's heads (I think I won that day!). Wasn't until a few months later I realised I'd have been better off seeing what he was showing.

I see this as yet another reason for a broad spectrum of martial arts. There's a fair chance you could spend all your life preparing for the attacker that never comes. All the while *perhaps* missing out on the side benefits of fitness and self improvement.

 

It's his latest must read article on his website. And i'm not worried he's a very nice man I just didn't have the time to let him know I was posting it on here.

 

Good article

One thing I completely agree with is striking first. Defense is a reaction and offense is an action. A reaction is always slower than an action, therefore you cannot rely on the chance of being able to block or evade an attack in time.

Here's a good video that my sensei recommended
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6CdH6xHcgo&feature=player_embedded"]YouTube - Blauer - Flinch & 1st two secs of a fight[/ame]

 

An excellent video. Tony Blauer really knows what he is talking about (in this video and in others); he manages to put across his knowledge in a way that doesn't replace what you already know, but enhances it. Very nice!

 

Good vid. Im a big fan of all of Tony's stuff. Important to know.