"Advanced" self-defense...

[bushido_man96]

In watching one of the videos posted on a thread, the instructor started by stating that they were demonstrating "advanced" self-defense techniques. I don't like the use of the term "advanced" so much in regards to self-defense. What exactly would "advanced" entail? Is there anything that you can't learn self-defense to early on? I don't like to think so.

I like to think that you have self-defense; no titles or otherwise. I think that if an instructor has a good system of concepts and strategies, then those things will reach across the board for most, if not all, self-defense scenarios. Just my take, though.

Thoughts?

[JusticeZero]

To me, it means "You need to already understand the mechanics behind the components of this technique already, or else the explanation will be impractically unwieldy to teach."

[joesteph]

A number of jumping kicks are referred to under an "advanced" heading, but sometimes I've wondered if what's called an advanced technique in self-defense is simply that there's more that can be done, so volume (or video) 2 is available now, and it consists of lesser-used moves that only a practitioner dedicated to the art would know about.

A contrast to this might be shown in these two YouTube videos:

Forget the title, I just call it a Double Punch:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fiXiXCKYn8&feature=related

This would be the Double Punch with Follow-Ups:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qnyz9JQ2OEo&NR=1

The first video is short, basic, to-the-point. The second video is still not what I'd call advanced up to 1:20, and then, at least for me, it would be considered advanced because it gets complex. At that point, it assumes you know more than one way to fight, or have achieved the dexterity to fight in such a manner. (It's also "overkill," which may be another example of "advanced.")

[isshinryu5toforever]

I'd say advanced self-defense falls mainly into the two areas discussed here: overkill (many techniques), or techniques that require a prior knowledge of body mechanics or motions.

Another set of techniques I've seen labeled as advanced are wrist locks and take downs when they aren't generally considered part of your art. IE in Taekwondo and karate, there are locks and take downs present in techniques, even in forms, but most people don't really get into them. Some instructors do, and they label them advanced techniques.

[joesteph]

IE in Taekwondo and karate, there are locks and take downs present in techniques, even in forms, but most people don't really get into them. Some instructors do, and they label them advanced techniques.

I think you're right, Isshinryu, and while, say, a jumping side kick may be considered "advanced" over a regular one, how often is the martial sacrificed for the sport aspect, so that "advanced" is applied only to the latter?

I wonder how many people who practice "low block" never see it as a groin strike, or even a wicked application against a shirt grab, as shown in this half-minute video:

(I can't remember if I'd found this on my own, or I saw it posted on this or another martial arts web board/forum.)

[bushido_man96]

To me, it means "You need to already understand the mechanics behind the components of this technique already, or else the explanation will be impractically unwieldy to teach."

Does that really connotate "advanced," though? In my mind, not really.

Even in the videos that Joe posted, I don't think that those techniques are that complicated. At any rate, how much time would you have to spend learning the "double punch" before you went on to adding the "collapsing" elbow? Not much. That could be done in the first 15 minutes of class, easily, I think. The footwork isn't complex, even with the follow-ups.

I do think that there are some basics concepts behind body movement involved in learning self-defense techniques. But in the end, the wrist only moves 4 ways; forward, back, and a bit to each side. There's a bit of angle in there, but that's the meat of it. So, there are only so many ways to manipulate the wrist. Once one starts to tag something as "advanced" self-defense, I think it comes at the risk of adding flair or flash to the technique that is not needed, and loading too much fine motor skill into a technique that hopefully pops out in a situation where adrenaline has numbed those fine motor skills considerably.

[JusticeZero]

Well, I usually use an 'advanced' label for techniques that are based out of things like a transition through plantar bananeira, as many beginning students are not even able to reach that stance in a stable manner, let alone be able to control their fall out of it in a precise way.

An alternate way to see it is "If you want to practice this with someone, your partner needs to be pretty darned good at escaping so they don't get maimed."

[shujika]

I prefer to completely avoid the term (“advanced”) when discussing techniques. In the system I teach, all ranks will work on the same techniques (together). The more advanced ranks, will only receive a more “detailed” explanation (and possibly “variations” of the initial technique, but it is still the "same" technique). In general, we prefer that the (newer) student, concentrate on the basic technique motion, “then” work with the variations. We don't consider anything “advanced”, simply “more” knowledgeable about “details” of the technique.

[bushido_man96]

I don't mind the term "variation" at all. I think that what it boils down to is having an effective concept that can adapt to a myriad of situations: thus, the variations.