Winning Mindset

[tallgeese]

As a point of discussion, I wanted to talk for a second about mindset and one of the oft quoted mantras of martial arts. It's often said that "no one wins a fight". I would venture a guess that just about all of us have heard it and a majority of us have probably said it as well.

I think we can all agree that fighting should always be a last resort, and avoided at all cost. It's dirty, painful, and potentially fatal. So let's just stipulate that we want to avoid it, but it will sometimes be forced upon us.

That said, once it comes to us, it think that this idea that "no one wins" is a case of higher minded idealism added post fact to combative systems designed to harm another person. Of course someone "wins".

We're not talking about sportive aspects here, but actual win or loss on large canvas of human conflict. Winning means I control the situation, using whatever tactic that calls for. Losing means I don't manage that, and I get controlled to whatever level the bad guy decides is best.

There is a clear distinction. To me, priming students to accept that no one wins is to build into them a survival mindset. They are worried about weathering the storm and getting by. What i want, and want to pass on, is the drive to win.

We do everyone a disservice by this mindset.

Does anyone agree or disagree? Anyone use that saying? And if so, what is the rational? I think it's a good point to discuss.

[Groinstrike]

As a point of discussion, I wanted to talk for a second about mindset and one of the oft quoted mantras of martial arts. It's often said that "no one wins a fight". I would venture a guess that just about all of us have heard it and a majority of us have probably said it as well.

I think we can all agree that fighting should always be a last resort, and avoided at all cost. It's dirty, painful, and potentially fatal. So let's just stipulate that we want to avoid it, but it will sometimes be forced upon us.

That said, once it comes to us, it think that this idea that "no one wins" is a case of higher minded idealism added post fact to combative systems designed to harm another person. Of course someone "wins".

We're not talking about sportive aspects here, but actual win or loss on large canvas of human conflict. Winning means I control the situation, using whatever tactic that calls for. Losing means I don't manage that, and I get controlled to whatever level the bad guy decides is best.

There is a clear distinction. To me, priming students to accept that no one wins is to build into them a survival mindset. They are worried about weathering the storm and getting by. What i want, and want to pass on, is the drive to win.

We do everyone a disservice by this mindset.

Does anyone agree or disagree? Anyone use that saying? And if so, what is the rational? I think it's a good point to discuss.

Combative martial arts should be designed to win, not to "defend" yourself. I word combat means fighting where death is the reward for losing, life the reward for winning.

We find this attitude mainly in military systems and ranks for good reason. But if you find yourself in a situation where you are thinking "fight" but the other guy is thinking "combat", you are in a heap of trouble.

Yes if you are in a fight, you should do everthing possible to win. "Winning" means that you walk away unharmed, or atleast can walk away. If this can be done by shooting a double, holding the guy down until backup arrives, great. If this can only be possible by resorting to deadly, overwhelming force and brutality, so be it.

[ShoriKid]

I don't believe I've ever used the "No one wins a fight" expression as an instructor. I have said that getting in a fight is going to hurt. I think an instructor does a grave disservice to their students if they put them in a mindset that doesn't focus on taking the needed steps to come out on top when they have to use violence.

I'd even disagree with you a little Tallgeese on saying the employing physical violence as a last resort, or that it should be avoided at "all costs". It's very situationaly dependent, but sometimes physical violence should be the first option, as it is the appropriate one and cycling through all the rest can be a fatal mistake. And, to me "at all costs" means that you've already compromised your position enough that you are in a bad way from the start. I don't encourage violence, but I accept it's a fact of life and if we shy away from it when discussing martial arts, we do more harm than good. What I'm thinking is one of those things that takes a bit of time to explain face to face, let along over the net.

As for the mindset bred by "no one wins a fight" I'm in full agreement, at least I think I am Tallgesse, with what you're saying. I make a firm point to tell my students that if I'm in a fight, I damn well intend to do what it takes to come out on top. And I expect the same out of them. They don't quit and when it's them or the other guy, it ain't gonna be them. Willingness to be aggressive can do a whole lot to over come an opponent. There's plenty of video out there of bigger, stronger and even more skilled people getting beaten by someone who was just flat out more aggressive and willing to carry the fight forward. Drilling the saying "No one wins a fight" to me, gives you a very passive mind set to enter a conflict with. If no one can win, what is the point of doing everything you can to, in effect, "win".

[MasterPain]

I always try to explain that "fighting" is stupid. As far as "defense" I explain, to the best of my ability, Castle Doctrine, Duty to Flee, factors that contribute to the level of force used by a "reasonable person" in a situation, and such.

A big thing for me is the Jungian concept of the Shadow Aspect. It may be a bit archaic, but it's a good working concept. I think it's important to be in touch with and understand the part of the psyche that is capable of violence.

[sensei8]

To borrow from Jim Kelly..."If it comes, I won't even notice it...I'll be to busy looking good." Whether this comes off in a grin-and-giggle way or not, the point is that I don't worry about it, nor do I want to be a proponent of it.

You act like a victim...you'll become a victim. You act like a winner...you'll become a winner. You act like you're going to lose...you'll lose. I believe in my complete totality as a martial arts and the core of that doesn't even come from my parents...no...it comes from my Dai-Soke and what he instilled within me across the board.

I've never, to my memory, sprouted that off to my students and/or the student body and/or to anyone within the Hombu. Try to hurt me...someone's going to lose and I'm going to do everything within me to make sure that the loser of our fight isn't going to be me!!

I understand the political approach and mindset of it, but I don't want to have anything to do with it because it can only invite something bad. I'll let others who are proponents of that mindset believe to present their arguments to/for those who subscribe to that like mindsets.

For me; no thank you.

[Liver Punch]

I think it's important, at a certain point, to have group of people that you know understand the reality of the situation. Once you've established that everyone involved is of sound mind and has no desire to go out and hurt someone, you no longer have to talk about the downside of a fight. At that point it's all "strike first, strike hard, no mercy sir" to help build them into something effective in an actual fight.

I think there's a real distinction between the mindset in which you teach/train based on individual people. There are 10 year old kids who understand appropriate force better than 40 year old police officers. Perhaps instead of separating classes by age and content, we should just separate them by maturity level.

[bushido_man96]

We find this attitude mainly in military systems and ranks for good reason. But if you find yourself in a situation where you are thinking "fight" but the other guy is thinking "combat", you are in a heap of trouble.

This is a very good point. I think Kane and Wilder made a point like that in The Little Black Book of Violence. I think it is seen commonly in bar fights where one guy is basically trying to establish his machoism, and the other guy is thinking live or die. Its also something to consider that may be churning in the other guys brain when things are going to get sticky.

Tallgeese, I think you hit the nail on the head there. When it comes to talking self-defense, it isn't the time to think about idealism and what would happen in the perfect world. "Fight to win" is the perfect mentality for every Martial Arts instructor to teach. Avoidance is always good, too, and should be an important part of training. But once the battle has been joined, its time to talk about winning.

[sensei8]

Champions don't subscribe to a losing mindset for a reason.

[bushido_man96]

Champions don't subscribe to a losing mindset for a reason.

True - its very counter-productive.

I think along with the "no one wins a fight" mindset, we see too much of worrying about not hurting someone too much. When you worry about not hurting someone too much, you can second guess your actions, and it can cost you time and position. I've had this happen to me not long ago, and I won't let it happen that way again. When it comes down to it, your safety is what is paramount.

[sensei8]

Champions don't subscribe to a losing mindset for a reason.

True - its very counter-productive.

I think along with the "no one wins a fight" mindset, we see too much of worrying about not hurting someone too much. When you worry about not hurting someone too much, you can second guess your actions, and it can cost you time and position. I've had this happen to me not long ago, and I won't let it happen that way again. When it comes down to it, your safety is what is paramount.

Solid Post!!