Trainer Validation and it's Pitfalls

[tallgeese]

On the heelthor my Control Tactics Cadre's annuaL prep meeting and the useful (and lively) debate that it always generates, I'll throw this question out there.  Particularly to trainers and even more specifically to LE trainers (but please everyone feel free to weigh in).  

Do we, as trainers run the risk of being  victims of our own success when we start selecting skills to teach others?  

For instance, I do BJJ. A lot.  I've used it extensively at work to good results in control and arrest situations.  Therefore, I teach it as part of our program.  

So, at what point does the validation I've done on the art for this specific application stop translating to others?  

Does it even become a detriment? 

I've never entirely bought into the "it's the artist not the art" argument for determining if an art is effective.  Clearly some arts fit certain needs and are more effective in a given set of circumstances than others.  

But how much can proficiency in a given mode of combat throw off our perceptions of validity for a larger group?   

Well, that should be enough to bite off for now.  

[sensei8]

Solid OP!! Great topic, Alex!!

Do we, as trainers run the risk of being victims of our own success when we start selecting skills to teach others?

Yes, we do run the risk of being victims of our own success

While you don't completely buy into the "it's the artist not the art" argument for determining the effectiveness of said MA, it is, imho, just that.

Let's look at BJJ! Is it the style of BJJ's fault or is it the fault of the practitioner why said technique(s) didn't work as well as it did with other BJJ practitioners? If a practitioner of BJJ can't perform a certain BJJ technique as well as you can, then is that the fault of the style: BJJ, in this case? I'd believe faster that the fault lies into the practitioner and NOT BJJ. BJJ is a proven effective means; solid as the day is long!!

If I can execute said technique(s) within the Shindokan syllabus effectively, however, another Shindokan practitioner can't, yet said technique(s) is a proven effective means, then how can that be the fault of the style? I don't think that it is! In that, it's the fault of the practitioner! This could be for myriad of reasons; experience and knowledge might be in the forefront of the many possible reasons.

So, at what point does the validation I've done on the art for this specific application stop translating to others?

When you start believing in your own press over the application!!

So much so that the core of the application starts to waffle away towards impossibilities and unrealistic ends of said applications means. When "you" become more important than the application and/or when "you" become more important than the style and/or when "you" become more important than any other MA practitioner on Earth...that's when any and all translations become muddled and waffled away.

I believe actions like this turn off the most dedicated proponent of said style or of said application or of said methodology/ideology. Keep it real, keep it simple, and keep it effective.

Does it even become a detriment?

Yes it does. Anything that takes the core element away from any said effective application, no matter where it came from, is detrimental to the style and to the practitioner and to the student body.

When the light is shown bright for all practitioners to see clearly without any ambiguity and/or reservation one day, and then over some time, the aforementioned bright light starts to dim, no matter how much; it becomes quite detrimental across the board.

But how much can proficiency in a given mode of combat throw off our perceptions of validity for a larger group?

For the moment, let's forget about the larger group. The style is bigger than the person, however, the person is also bigger than the style, imho. Content and context are important to know which is more important at the right time.

I'd be more worried about the one or the few. Either can infect the larger group so much so that progress is halted, and even more so, digresses starts to settle in, and start becoming cancerous to the student body; something risks being cut-off for the survival of the many.

Yes, the larger group can be infected by the actions and/or the inactions of the one and/or the few practitioners. So, I'd be more careful about the small, because while they be small, they can carry a large impact.

[tallgeese]

I see where your combining from in most instances but let me clarify what I mean by my disagreement with the "artist not the art" argument. I think we too otero throw this out in an effort to validate just about everything and not ruffle feathers. And while your point is correct, it is not the arts fault someone can't apply it, that's failing to look at the larger more situational issue.

For instance, BJJ works well in control and arrest situations where a cop needs to put a resisting bad guy down, take position dominance, and apply handcuffs. All without creating a media firestorm of excessive force claims. Now, let's say you have another officer highly skilled in say Krav who has a killer eye gouge that predicates most if his attacks. Same situation and the second cop eye gouges bad guy to start his control options. There's a problem here.

Now, same arts (examples only) and put it into the context of a 90 pound female being attacked while leaving work after dark. Now, which is more appropriate (note I did not say better)?

To say what people study isn't important just how well they can apply fails to take into account what tat individual will be using their art for. And in this there are clearly better and worse choices.

I was just having a conversation the other day with one of our beware officers who has an extensive backgroynd in TKD. She was lamenting the fact that she had all this skill set, yet it did her next to no good in day to day hand on application. What she's done is not bad, or poor art it's just not suited to her environment.

Look at it from a different perspective. If you were going to fight MMA with the given unified rules would you spend your training camp doing iaido and tai chi or BJJ and MT? It's not that any of those arts are inferior, just that some are more appropriate to the task at hand.

Not all arts are created equal for all tasks. It is the art that matters in a lot of cases.

[sensei8]

Alex,

Great reply!! Thanks for it!!

I was just having a conversation the other day with one of our beware officers who has an extensive backgroynd in TKD. She was lamenting the fact that she had all this skill set, yet it did her next to no good in day to day hand on application. What she's done is not bad, or poor art it's just not suited to her environment.

Do you think that, in the case of LEO's, their applications skill-sets aren't "suited to her environment" because of all the rules, regulations, and the like within said LEO's department??

Rules and regulations and the like can be debilitating right off the bat, imho. Why? Said rules and regulations are there for all concerned; they must be in set and they must be enforced. Everything a LEO does is watched under a microscope for solid reasons.

But, if an LEO used what they were taught to use in their said MA style, they'd run the risk of sharing same said cell with the bad guy they just arrested. A LEO's IA department would at least investigate how said LEO arrested said bad guy after said bad guy filed a official complaint(s) against said arresting LEO.

I'd not possibly be able to separate what I learned from Shindokan in any given situation if I was a LEO, and that's because my actions would be automatic off the billion hours of muscle memory engrained in me. However, I'd be weighted down, I suppose, if I had to fulfill my sworn duties within the policies set forth by said department, as well as within the governing laws of the land.

Look at it from a different perspective. If you were going to fight MMA with the given unified rules would you spend your training camp doing iaido and tai chi or BJJ and MT? It's not that any of those arts are inferior, just that some are more appropriate to the task at hand.

See, that would be the fault of the MMA practitioners fault for spending time doing Iaido and tai chi or BJJ and MT INSTEAD of spending time doing MMA!! The fault here still lies in the hands of the practitioner, and not the MA style, imho!!

Not all arts are created equal for all tasks. It is the art that matters in a lot of cases.

No they're not, and for good reasons! It only, imho, matters when the practitioner chooses the inappropriate style for said situation, hence, it's the practitioner fault and not the fault of the art/style!!

The art/style is just a thing. The practitioner CHOOSES the appropriate thing, and once said thing is chosen, well, the practitioner, and I mean the practitioner better know how to make it effective. Not vise versa!!

[CredoTe]

...

Not all arts are created equal for all tasks. It is the art that matters in a lot of cases.

I think I understand your overall idea.... The right tool for the right job every time, yes? To expand that, not just one right tool, but the right set of tools...

[ShoriKid]

Tallgeese,

I think that sometimes you need to keep in mind the level of skill you (the generic you) have when teaching and training others. When training others, especially in something like an LEO environment, keep in mind the depth of the training they will have when looking at the application of techniques. You for example, specific you this time, have a extensive background in BJJ and are a fairly high level practitioner especially in comparison to most people you will be training. You also maintain a level of physical fitness that most of LEO don't. There are things you can make work, and easily too, that most people cannot.

What you will have to look at are what things work, within your department/jobs rules of engagement, for people with minimum training investment. They also have to work for that 90lbs woman, if she is an officer, and the 220lbs man who's 50 and a little out of shape. That to me, is the prism you have to look at what you teach to others. You also have to have a context of what you are going to be doing. BJJ for police offers a more suitable skill set than Krav in large part due to the rules of engagement, use of force rules, that are in place. A regular joe on the street may be well served by BJJ, but he will have a different goal and rules. He doesn't have back up coming, doesn't have the physical tools available to LEO, but also doesn't have the exact same use of force rules when it comes to self defense. You can't just crack somebody in the face when they come at you. I, on the other hand, could do so more easily without getting into trouble.

So I guess there is a two layer filter to pass things through. Individual capability, and environment where the skill will be employed. Just because I can make it work, doesn't mean other people can. Just because I can do something, does mean it is legal for me to do it.

[bushido_man96]

Rules and regulations and the like can be debilitating right off the bat, imho. Why? Said rules and regulations are there for all concerned; they must be in set and they must be enforced. Everything a LEO does is watched under a microscope for solid reasons.

This is the problem when it comes to teaching combat systems to an LEO. We have so many rules put to us, and the bad guy has none. I can't just punch a guy in the face because he is pulling his hands away from me as I affect an arrest. Actions like that are what start the media firestorms that Alex mentions we want to avoid.

What I do like about BJJ applications in the LEO setting is that once you get a lock set in, you get to decide how much damage is done, based off the actions/reactions of the person you are trying to take into custody.

Now, Alex, I think I can help you answer your question here a bit:

Do we, as trainers run the risk of being victims of our own success when we start selecting skills to teach others?

I can kind of relate to you here, but I am the opposite of you in experience in BJJ: very little; in fact, one could say, next to none. The only real BJJ training I have had has been with the GRACIE course, twice now. Aside from that, a bit of no-gi DT related rolling we do in the Defensive Tactics club. But what I have seen is what I've been able to teach in my sessions with the department has been picked up pretty well by those that have come to the training. Thankfully, there hasn't been a lot of chances available for it to be applied in the work environment, but I trust that I more reps are put in, they will be able to apply it when necessary.

I think the key to avoiding "your own press," to use Bob's wordage, is to remember that we can't teach them everything we know and use on a daily basis. We have to stick to the simpler stuff so they don't start getting confused about what they should do. I hope our officers never have to grapple a BJJ black belt taking them into custody for some reason. But, I tell them times like that are why we have other force options, too.

Now, to add to the discussion here, I've got lots of years in TKD, and some ample years in Combat Hapkido. During my time in TKD, very little joint manipulation has been focused on; certainly not enough to become proficient in it. So, other than my leg kicks, and using some of my knowledge for apply leverage and adding some power in using my hips, all my punching and kicking really doesn't get applied in the work environment, unless the level of force goes way high, to the bodily harm or great bodily harm stages. If I restrain a guy with a knife in one hand, and have another free, I'm pretty sure I can justify punching the face multiple times if I need to. But until it reaches a point like that or similar, I really can't dig into my TKD tool bag.

My Combat Hapkido has more options available to me, with the joint manipulation and locking. However, I've found by and large, that once you get someone by the wrist, and they start resisting, you've got a tiger by the tail. It doesn't look like an Aikido demo from there. I'd prefer to get control of the whole arm instead of the wrist, or move into a body lock instead of holding onto a flailing wrist.

Its here, I think, when someone gets really good at joint locking a non-resisting partner, who doesn't follow up a technique, that one can begin to buy their own hype.

On the other end of the spectrum, I know a TKD instructor who I had a discussion with about BJJ being used in the LEO environment, and how foolish it is to be rolling around on the ground with a suspect (which isn't the point of BJJ in the LEO environment, but I'm not sure I got my point across). He believed in the merits of what he taught, but not in those of the BJJ, which he has little experience in.

In the end, some people will fall victim to this. Others, who choose to look into other methods and systems, will probably have a more open mind to different methods, and consider and review them for the use of their own training.

I hope that helps out, and wasn't just a ramble....

ShoriKid, you've got a pretty good grasp there, too. Good post.

[ps1]

I feel this is a great conversation.

I will speak to BJJ only. I would not teach ANYTHING, you havn't used in your real world experience. I can imagine this is fairly limited.

So maybe a simple takedown, positional control and how you get the arm into a position to cuff.