Self-Defense Against a K-9, A Follow Up: Part 1 of 3

A couple of months ago I received a very nice e-mail from Mr. Loren W. Christensen the author of "Karate Vs Canines," an article that appeared in the February 2008 issue of Black Belt Magazine. His e-mail was in response to my comments regarding his article as well as some of my general comments on self-defense against canines.

He was also kind enough to send me a copy of his e-book, which I referred to in my blog essay, "Self-Defense Against A Dog Attack" (http://www.lwcbooks.com/books/ebookdog.html). As I had speculated, his e-book covers the topic more in depth, and is a great supplement for anyone who read his article in Black Belt magazine. I also recommend it as an addition to what I am writing here.

One aspect of the book I really liked was that he discusses the fact many dog attacks are the result of owners who don't properly train, discipline, or understand the canine mind.

I, for one, really have a problem with people who treat their dogs like humans. Worse yet are people who treat their dog like it is an accessory--think various starlets such as Paris Hilton.

Now don't get me wrong, I love my dog, and he is definitely considered one of the family; but he is still a dog. He is an animal. No matter how much I anthropomorphize his behavior, he is not human, and never will be.

Being a pack animal, my dog will try and assert himself as leader--the alpha--if he senses weakness, or my family allows him to do what he wants. That is his nature and I have to respect that. Understanding such differences between our species, and using a dog's innate desire to fit into a pack, is how we humans teach our canine companions to be good doggies.

In addition, no matter how responsible of a dog owner I might be, there is no way I can completely train my dog not to do the things a dog will do. Domesticated though he may be, dogs are still very akin to their wolf brethren and are often driven by primal instincts. All I can really hope to accomplish is to keep behavior as socially acceptable as possible.

No matter how well trained a dog is, how seemingly friendly, dog attacks can and will happen. And when such a situation arises, we humans need to know how to defend ourselves. We also need to know how to stop our dogs when verbal commands fail, and they are in the process of injuring another animal or humans.

As a dog owner I have certainly witnessed aggressive dogs at the park. I've also heard countless stories about dogs killing other dogs, or people getting bitten, in various dog parks in the Bay Area.

Normally these stories focus on an inept dog owner, who lacks the ability to control their dog, or an owner who just doesn't care how their dog behaves. Let's face it, some people should just not be dog owners, especially of specific breeds that tend to be more aggressive.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=hY9EKHAqUUI"
This is a great video of a person who should not be a dog owner, or at least was irresponsible enough not to seek out the proper help to teach her how to stop her dog's aggressive behavior.

However, no matter what the story is, or the circumstances are that led to the dog attack, all of these situations have a common factor. That factor is that most of the humans involved have no idea how to confront the canine(s).

To be sure, two dogs fighting, or an aggressive dog about to attack and bite a person, is intimidating, The potential for getting injured is real, but action is required. And screaming "BAD DOG!" isn't enough.

Initially, when I first discussed this topic, I had no intentions of writing about specific techniques to fend off or stop a dog attack. However, based on the numerous requests from my students and e-mails asking me to do just that, I will. Just remember: I in no way, shape, or form advocate ever hitting/striking a dog, even in training.

Furthermore, this blog will be on the long side, (three parts) since if I'm going to write about this topic I'm going to do it right. This means not only teaching self-defense techniques once an attack has occurred, but also teaching the warning signs and how to prevent them from happening in the first place.

Finally, no dogs, mainly my own, were hurt during any of the photo shoots. Annoyed maybe, confused certainly, but the utmost caution was always used to prevent any distress. And there were always plenty of treats afterwards.

The Protagonist

Let me start this series by introducing the German Shepherd in most of the photos. His name is Taiko, and he happens to be my three-year-old 89lb German Shepherd. Now, Taiko is about as mellow as a dog gets. In fact, he dispels all the myths about the aggressive non-neutered male dog. To be honest, his nature can be kind of embarrassing at times, especially when he gets chased to submission by his nemesis—a 4lb Yorkie named Leo.

Taiko shares a chicken breast with his cat pal, Shinobi.
A dog sharing his dinner with a cat? How much more mellow can you get?

Despite all his mellowness, the potential for Taiko's aggressiveness is always present, and I am fully aware that things can change in an instant. For example, there is another three-year-old German Shepherd in the park who Taiko will attack on sight. And one shouldn't dare to knock on the font door of my house; barking and flashing teeth always greet guests, although, the truth be told, there is nothing behind the façade. Of course, trying to convince others it's all an act isn't always easy. Clearly, Taiko should be nominated for an Oscar.

Keeping Taiko's Dr. Jekyll and potential Mr. Hyde personalities in mind, and the lethal potential he could inflict on man or animal, I'm fully aware that one day I may need to use force to stop Taiko from injuring others. In that case, I want whatever technique I use to be as effective as possible, hopefully without causing Taiko a life long disability, or having to resort to using lethal force. Though if deadly force is necessary, I want the technique to be as quick and painless as possible.

This means that any technique I use must be swift and efficient, and produce sufficient force to stop the altercation. In order to do that, I must train myself to attack the weak points of a dog, or points that evoke an innate response, just as I train myself to attack a human adversary.

More importantly, I must have some understanding about how dogs think, why and how dogs attack, and some of the warning signs that signal a dog attack may be imminent. Trust me, it's a lot easier to stop a dog fight/dog attack from happening, than it is to stop it once it has begun.

When Good Dogs Go Bad

Why a dog becomes hostile and attacks is a hard question to answer since no one really knows how a dog thinks. Many "experts" have many theories, but how a dog processes information and makes decisions is still a mystery.

I used to have a Cocker Spaniel that was deathly afraid of parked motorcycles. Whenever he saw one, he would freeze and then go into attack mode. I have no idea why he acted this way, and no trainer could come up with an explanation. For whatever reason, something about parked motorcycles triggered something primal in his brain, and no amount of corrective training stopped this behavior.
For the most part though, dogs attack to: protect themselves or their pack (including their adopted human family) from real or perceived danger, out of fear, to defend territory, to protect food, for the sake of mating, or to display dominance.

Dogs also attack if they are trained and commanded to do so. But for the most part, this esasy will not be about trained attack dogs. Dealing with a dog is different in that case because if he is trained properly, he will only attack on command, and he will only attack specific targets, usually the arm. In addition, the dog will also immediately stop attacking when ordered to do so. That said, I will admit I've seen a few police K-9's that got carried away.

The triggers that cause a normal dog to attack can vary, and a stimulus that evokes a reaction one day may not evoke the same or any reaction on another day. Using Taiko as an example, the Shepherd he now attacks on sight used to be a playmate, and what changed friends to foes is a mystery to everyone but them.

Unfortunately, for whatever reason, once a dog decides to react in a negative manner, what once was your loving pet can suddenly become Cujo.

My experience was that every dog biting case I was dispatch to as a police officer involved the family pet and a young child , and, if witnesses are to be believed, came without any warning signs. Worse yet, the common sentiment of these owners was that they never thought little "fluffy" could ever act like that.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=OWiyNxS2NuE
Georgia Rice, a 7 year-old, talks about being attacked by a pit-bull.

While witnesses will claim there were no warning signs, the truth of the matter is that most dog attacks occur when people don't pay attention to warning signs, or just don't understand what these warning signs are. This is especially true for little kids, who not only fail to comprehend the warning signs, but also may be seen as subordinates by a dominant-minded canine. In the worst cases, a dog might even see them as prey.

The fact is that 61% of all dog attacks happen in the home or a familiar place, and children 15 years old and under more likely to be the victims by 3 to 1. Children seen in emergency departments were more likely than older persons to be bitten on the face, neck, and head, making their injuries a lot more serious. Statically, dog bites result in approximately 44,000 facial injuries in US hospitals each year. This represents between 0.5% and 1.5% of all emergency room visits.

Determining which breed of dog is more likely to bite, or cause a fatality is simple; you just have to look at the published research. According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), un-neutered male dogs are the most likely to bite. Breeds that bite most often were Pit Bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios, German Shepherds, Huskies, Alaskan Malamutes Dobermen Pinschers, Chows, Great Danes, St. Bernards and Akitas.

As far as fatalities are concerned, according to the Clifton Study, Pit Bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes were responsible for 65% of the canine homicides between 1982 and 2006. This is a startling percentage when one considers the fact that these three breeds do not make up anywhere near that proportion of dogs owned in the US.

Although there are arguments debating the accuracy of the Clifton Study, one should keep in mind that any breed of dog has the potential to bite and/or kill a human, no matter what the usual tempermant or size.

For example, on October 9th 2000, the Los Angeles Times reported a story about an infant girl who was killed by the family's Pomeranian ("Baby Girl Killed by Family Dog," Los Angeles Times, Monday, October 9, 2000, Home Edition, Metro Section, Page B-5).

In this case, the baby's uncle had left the dog and baby alone on a bed. In the time it took the uncle to heat a bottle, the Pomeranian mauled the infant to the point were she died from her wounds shortly thereafter.

Pomeranians weigh between 3-7 pounds, and range in height from 7 to 12 inches. Normally a Pomeranian is not the type of dog one would worry about being a killer. Of course, that's my point. Don't ever assume that just because a dog appears cute and cuddly that it lacks the potential to cause severe injury and/or death.

While pictures of babies with the family dog look cute, babies. Toddlers, and young children should never be left unattended or unsupervised with a dog.

Warning Signs and How To React

The first rule is to never approach an unfamiliar dog. If the dog's owner is present, ask permission before approaching or touching. Sometimes, even a dog you know, and who has always been friendly, can react differently when on leash. It's always better to use caution.

My previous German Shepherd, Jenny, became extremely aggressive when on leash because she felt more inclined to protect who ever was walking her, and because she felt her movements were more restricted. This was especially true when other dogs came too close.

The second rule is to never assume that just because a dog is wagging it's tail it is happy and friendly. A wagging tail can mean many other things, including fear or nervousness. A fearful dog is unpredictable, and can react defensively when approached or confronted by someone or something unfamiliar.

Unless you own the dog, never corner it. And if a dog doesn't want your attention, don't force the issue. There are plenty of other dogs out there that will relish your company.

Lastly, don't think offering a strange dog food will instantly make the two of you friends. Dogs will at times bite the hand that feeds them. In fact, dogs can become quite obnoxious about food matters, and a dog that was begging one moment may become more aggressive in order to get what he wants a moment later.

To determine a dog's real intentions, one must look at his total posture. Are his ears back? Are the dog's "hackles" (the areas over the shoulders and just before the tail) erect? Are his eyes narrow or staring challengingly? Is the dog barking/growling or showing his teeth?

This is a picture of Taiko on alert. Startled by a larger dog leaping from the bushes, his hackles and tail are up, as if to say "I'm a big dog too, approach with caution." One should stop and wait for a dog to change this posture before approaching.

Taiko and his pal Smity appear to display many of the signs of hostility and aggression, but looks are deceiving. They are actually just playing.

While any of the above signs don't necessarily mean the dog is aggressive or has hostile intent, when in doubt, one should assume they are the dog's way of warning you. Walk away slowly, and leave the situation.

Note that I said walk away. Don't ever run. Running can evoke a dog's prey drive, and cause him to chase you down.

If you start to walk away and the dog follows, then stop and remain still. Some trainers refer to this tactic as "becoming a tree." This is a time to try using verbal commands, with the hopes that either something you say triggers a trained response or the dog realizes you are really no threat.

I suggest you use the words "sit" or "down," rather than screaming "bad dog." Speaking firmly can be productive, but remember dogs don't understand human speech; so trying to verbally explain you are not a threat is a waste of energy. This may sound like a no-brainer, but I've seen my share of people—especially dog owners—trying to verbally convince their dog to behave better. For that matter, I've been guilty of that myself from time to time.

I've also heard trainers suggest that when walking away or "becoming a tree" doesn't work, one should climb a tree or jump over a fence. If there happen to be tall climbable trees close enough to get to, go for it; most dogs don't climb well. However, you better climb fairly high and pretty quickly—at least high enough where the dog can't jump and reach you. As for jumping a fence, chances are that if you can jump the fence so can the dog. And he will most probably do it faster and more easily than you.

I'm 6 feet 2 inches tall; the stick in my hand is even higher. Taiko completed this jump from a sitting position without really giving the attempt much effort. Imagine what he could do with some real intention and momentum.

Monkey bars or a slide may offer some protection if there is one near by. I recommend the monkey bars as I've know many dogs who have no problem climbing up to the top of the slide. While neither offers great protection, it will make it harder for the dog to get to you.

If you think a car offers protection, think again. Unless you're inside the car with the doors closed and windows rolled up, a dog can still get to you.

My recommendation is that if you are going to waste your energy trying to physically avoid a dog attack, spend the little time you have finding an object that you can either hit the dog with or place between you and the dog.

Another strategy I've heard some dog trainers suggest is that once you realize the dog attack is imminent, you should drop to the ground and adopt a submissive position. In other words, you should roll yourelves up in a ball, face down, with your legs tucked in and your hands wrapped over the back of the neck. This is similar to th position people are told to assume during a bear attack.

Since I have no first hand knowledge if such a tactic would be effective, and several police canine trainers have laughed at me when I brought it up, I have my doubts that this would work. My suspicion is that it would just place a person in a better position for the dog to attack. However, depending on the dog and his reasons for attacking, who knows. This would never be my first choice, but if all else failed I might try it. At least you can protect your face, groin, and neck this way.

The last tactic I've heard of, which is also debatable, is that when confronted by an aggressive dog, you should try and appear bigger. The theory is that the dog will be intimidated by such a larger adversary and become submissive.

I question this theory for several reasons. First of all, we humans, for the most part, are already larger than most dogs. Additionally, if size mattered to canines, they wouldn't be used in law enforcement work. I, for one, have never seen a trained police K-9 give size a second thought when chasing or taking down a suspect.

Secondly, while two dogs meeting will often "fluff" themselves up to appear bigger, this posturing doesn't always work. Often, two dogs equally trying to inflate their personal stature just leads to further physical forms of dominance/hostility to determine who the real "big" dog is.

Lastly, I've obeserved that size doesn't matter in many situations—like the one that exists between Taiko and his nemesis, Leo. Watching the two of them clearly indicates to me that size among dogs is not as much of an issue as it should be. Leo, a tiny 4lb Yorkie, somehow—through shear moxie—convinced Taiko that he is the dominant male. He must think that he is a great giant of a dog despite all evidence to the contrary.

In reality, Taiko could bite Leo in half without blinking an eye, or crush him with the weight of his paw. Why Taiko seems to accept/tolerate Leo's dominant behavior when he is so much bigger is a mystery. I would like to believe Taiko just has a sense of humor about the situation, but it's more likely that when it comes to dogs, Mark Twain was right: "What counts is not necessarily the size of the dog in the fight - it's the size of the fight in the dog."

Preventing Attacks

The best way to prevent dog attacks is simple. CONTROL YOUR DOG. As easy as that sounds, you would be surprised how many owners don't have control over their dog. You can see this almost every day at the dog park.

You know the humans I'm talking about. They're the ones who call a dog's name twenty times before he responds. And even after the dog does responds, it is still a game of cat and mouse before they catch it.

On the other hand, there are those owners who know their dogs have aggression issues, but they let them off leash to run amuck anyway.

For example, one dog at a local park always charges at me whenever it sees me. The owner, while apologetic, excuses the dog's actions by stating that her dog doesn't like men. Fortunately. the dog has never bitten me—so far. But I should never have to face such a confrontation at all, nor would I if the dog were on a leash.

Now don't get me wrong, I do not believe dogs shouldn't be let off leash to run and play. I allow Taiko this freedom every chance I can. In fact, I think it's essential for dogs, and I'm a firm supporter of the local dog groups who want to keep San Francisco from closing the few dog friendly parks that still exist.

However, I also believe people need to be more responsible and that if their dog has a behavioral problem, even a minor one, they should never let them off leash in public. After all, their bad dog's behavior is what gets reported on the news, and that reflects poorly on every other, responsible dog owner.

A worse problem is people who do not properly secure their dog at home. Where I'm from in Louisiana, folks will often just leave them free to roam the front yard. Given the territorial nature of many dogs, that's just asking for problems.

Now, I live in an apartment one story off the ground; so Taiko's chances of escaping and becoming a public nuisance are almost zero. He would basically have to jump off the balcony and survive the fall.

Unfortunately, not every dog faces such obstacles. A majority of dog bite cases that make the news are about dogs that escaped from their homes and raised havoc in their neighborhood.

I'm not advocating that every dog owner who owns a home should have cage like the one pictured above. Nor am I advocating that dogs should be chained to a post.

All I'm suggesting is that every caution should be taken to make sure one's dog can't escape from the home. This means diligently checking that back and front yards have fences, and making sure windows and doors are secure at all times.

Of course, accidents do happen. And when they do learning the following information will be needed.

Basic Methods — Controlling Extreme Bad Behavior / Hostility

This section covers basic dog training methods. These methods are based on natural canine behaviors, which are taught in most dog obedience classes.

These are your first line of defense. They are intended to correct bad behavior before it gets out of hand. For the most part, this section is for the dog's owner, but can be utilized by anyone.

In order to do these techniques properly, one must remember that dogs do not communicate like humans. Besides various vocalizations, dogs use a variety of facial expressions, body language, and even olfactory stimulus to communicate. These are methods humans don't fully understand, and we humans cannot imitate.

When dogs fight, the fights are normally over very quickly. As ferocious as they may appear, they are normally more ritualistic in nature than violent. I'm not saying dogs don't inflict injuries on other dogs, or kill each other, but like most animal species, dogs seem to inherently understand that getting injured is not in their best interest for survival. So dogs rarely engage in prolonged life or death struggles.

According to Nobel Prize winning ethologist Konrad Lorenz, same species aggression in animals is always restrained, involving ritual, bluff, and violence of a non-lethal nature. Additionally, there are often "appeasement gestures" made by the losing animal, so that the winner will not follow through to the kill. Dogs, for instance, will present their bellies to an overwhelming attacker, which is a sign of submission that normally defuses the fury of this aggressor, thus ending the confrontation.

The dog on the ground, belly up, is being submissive. She assumed this posture while playing—most likely indicating things were getting to rough.

Unfortunately we humans don't instinctually know the necessary appeasement postures or non-verbal communication methods to stop a hostile dog from following through with his attack. This means the attack is prolonged and injuries can more severe.

This also means that one's actions when being approached by a dog with hostile intentions can be misinterpreted. What might be taken as a submissive movement or gesture between humans could be seen as a challenge to a dog.

The first, and most common, such type of gesture that comes to mind would be raising the arms forward like one is surrendering. For the human, the hands may raise for several reasons, such as to ward off the dog, or protect the face. Unfortunately the dog may interrupt the forward motion of the arms rising as a threat causing the dog to become even more aggressive and leap into action.

Another common mistake is trying to run away, which I've already mentioned. Not only will this tactic more than likely cause the dog to chase you, there is simply no way you can outrun the dog. Running just affords the dog a chance to attack from behind and knock you over.

Lastly, a major method of communication that should always be avoided is staring down a dog. Staring is considered bad doggy etiquette among canines, and for dogs it is a sign of aggression or hostile intent. In many cases, when a dog is fearful, nervous, or irritated, they will purposefully look away, basically just showing the whites of their eyes.

From the hostile dog's point of view, staring might appear as a challenge, and in their combative state might be just enough to push them over the edge.

Technique #1

This first technique is a classic that is taught at almost every dog obedience school. While not intended as a self-defense technique, it is taught in order to teach a dog not to jump up on someone.

The beauty of this technique is its simplicity. It is nothing more than a knee strike to the dog's chest, delivered at the moment the dog jumps towards you.

The only difference between the version of this technique designed to correct a bad behavior and one used for self-defense is the amount of power used. To make it more effective yet, one could aim for the dog's head/face instead of the chest.

Technique #2

Actually these are three techniques which are taught at most dog obedience schools. They are designed to address bad dog behavior such as aggressive play biting or for those rare times an owner has to reinforce his status as pack leader.

I only recommend them if the dog in question is acting totally unruly and you need to seriously correct his behavior before things get worse. These techniques are really about teaching a dog what is and what is not acceptable behavior, or about correcting serious insubordinate behavior when your dog no longer listens to verbal commands.

Since these techniques are based on behaviors dogs do to each other, one should not practice them on the family pet. They are considered very strict reprimands in canine society, and if done for no reason may stress out your dog, who will more than likely wonder what the hell he did to deserve such treatment—just like Taiko did when we took the below pictures.

Chin Tap — Minor Correction

Alpha dogs nip subordinates under the chin as corrections. You can use this technique by tapping (not striking) the dog under the chin. It should be like a quick "pop." Do not tap the muzzle as this can cause sever injury, or cause a dog to become hand shy.

Of course, in a self-defense situation, you should hit as hard as you can, and don't worry if you hit under the jaw, the muzzle, or the sides. While hitting a dog's skull will most likely hurt your hand more than the dog, his jaws can be injured moderately easily.

Cheek Grab — Moderate Correction

This method employs two corrections at once. The first is the grab and shake. The second is the stare down. It should also be used in conjunction with verbal commands.

Staring in dog society is an aggressive action, and alpha dogs will stare down subordinates to keep them in line. Alpha dogs will also chomp under a subordinate dogs' ears and shake. In dog society, if these corrections are not heeded, it will most likely lead to more serious violence.

While the grab may be useful to fend off a half-hearted attack, I would not recommend the staring for an agressive dog. Since it would be almost impossible for you to hold on to the dog's cheek for any period of time, one would only be placing their face in jeopardy.

In all honesty, this method is much better to use preemptively than once a dog becomes seriously aggressive and intent on biting. However, if the cheek grab is utilized during a self-defense situation, it should be immediately followed-up with a twisting motion designed to force the dog off balance and to the ground.

In a more serious scenario, where a lot of forward momentum is present, the dog should be forcefully pulled downwards towards the ground with the intention of slamming his lower jaw against the ground.

Alpha Roll (Pinning The Dog) — Major Correction

This final method utilizes three corrective measures at once: the stare, the cheek grab, and placing the dog on his back.

It is considered a major correction, since it places a dog in a position that exposes his neck and belly to attack. In dog society this position is considered a sign of submission; you will commonly see puppies and more timid dogs fall into this position when approached by more dominant or self-assured dog.

Lying on the back is also a major appeasement gesture when one dog realizes he has lost an altercation to another dog. He humbles himself so the winner will not go for the kill.

Over the years, I have seen many dominant minded dogs at the police academy and dog obedience school corrected this way. In every case the dog has changed their entire attitude.

Once again, this technique is more useful as a preemptive measure than it is once the dog is fully intent on attacking you or someone else. However, it's one of the best positions to try and do since it will clearly tell the dog you're the alpha—the boss dog&hdash;and he have to heed to your commands.

This is not a technique to try and do half-heartedly. In order to be effective, one will have to use a lot of force and be fully committed to using any means necessary to pin the dog.

An aggressive or headstrong dog will resist you every step of the way. If you fail to fully subjugate the dog, or the dog is extremely intent on exerting his dominance over you, you have now done nothing more than escalated the situation. This mean more serious techniques will now be needed.

Unfortunately, chances are that you will get bitten by a hostile dog when trying to do this technique. Grabbing for the dog's cheeks/head places your hands too close to the dog's mouth to avoid that risk. However, though being bitten will be painful, it can be used to your advantage.

In this example, the dog has already bitten and latched onto the arm. For the most part, the correction is the same as the above, except the arm is left in the mouth to aid in the pin. While painful, this will avoid further injury to other parts of the body. In addition, the arm is forced as far back into the dog's mouth as possible making it harder for the dog to bite down.

If the dog keeps kicking or trying to twist away, I would follow this up by straddling or sitting on top of the dog. For optimal results, try to keep the dog's legs away from your body (opposite of above photo). Dogs do have claws, and while not as sharp as cats', they can cause injuries. If things got really bad I would use my free hand to strike the dog, or my knees to kick the belly/ribs.

I would also suggest only using the stare if the dog settles down and submits once placed in this position. Otherwise, keep your face as far away from the dog's teeth as possible.

End Part 1

The Second Top Ten Principles Of Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei - #7 Coupling Principle

Since I first stated that the techniques taught at my school were based on principles, and that we focus more on understanding the principles that makes things work than the techniques themselves, people have e-mailed me asking me if I could explain these principles in more detail.

Last year I spent several months writing about the “Top Ten Principles of Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei.” Now it is time to cover the next ten most important principles. Of course, one must keep in mind that while these principles are officially less important than first ten, in actuality they are just as important. The truth is that in many cases understanding and executing them properly is essential in order to make the “top ten” fully effective. In other words, they are just another piece of a very complex puzzle illustrating how sceintific martial techniques really are.

Unfortunately, trying to explain many of these principals in writing is very difficult, since many can’t be explained in words alone. However, I will try my best to describe these principles for the “blog” readers, using words, charts and pictures.

Keep in mind though, that in order to sometimes fully understand a principle you have to also understand other principles that relate to it. Most principles aren’t fully useable on their own, and have to be integrated with others.

COUPLING PRINCIPLE

Generally, coupling means a mechanical connection between two things. In physics, two systems are coupled if they mutually interact. There is another definition from computer programming that also seems appropriate to the art I teach: coupling is a linkage between two parts of a program such that if one part of the program is modified, the behavior of the other part may also be affected.

Basically, the coupling principle is the concept that once a connection is made between two or more bodies, whatever action one body makes will have a direct effect on the other bodies.

In other words, one plus one equals one.

For example, the square and circle below represent two individual objects:

If you move the circle, that movement has absolutely no effect on the square:

Now, let's say you drive a stick into both the square and circle so they are connected to each other. They are now “coupled.”

If you push the circle down, the square will move also. In this example, the movement will be in the opposite direction as the objects rotate around their common center of mass.

Because they are “coupled,” whatever movement one object makes will affect the other. This is even more apparent when the connection point is rigid, as it is here. Needless to say, this is a crude example of a much more complex principle; but it explains the science that makes this principle work better than any other I can think of, at least in this format.

Maybe a simpler way of thinking about the “Coupling Principle,” is something many of us do outside the dojo--walking a dog on leash.

When I take my dog for a walk on the street we are “coupled” by his leash. Although there is no direct physical connection between our bodies--my hand is not touching the dog--by moving my end of his six foot leash in the proper direction, I can make my dog go left, right, or forward. Or I can make him stop and sit, down.

I don’t have to use verbal commands. If I adjust the tension on the leash the right way, because of proper training my dog knows what he is suppose to do--unless of course he sees a squirrel or a cat, then I’m on the receiving end of the commands and being dragged down the street.

What’s important to understand with this example is that I’m not using verbal commands.  He is responding to non-verbal communication through our couple. My dog reacts to the movements I make that affect the leash.

In this example, my dog he has been trained to respond a certain way to specific movements. But if I don’t move the leash correctly he gets confused and does not know what to do. My movements must be right to get him to behave the way I desire him to.

This is an important factor to remember because one’s opponent in a fight has received no training at all. This means when you use the “Coupling Principle,” your non-verbal communication--in this case “body language”--has to be specific, otherwise the other person’s body won't know how to respond to your directions.

The basic rule one needs to remember about this principle is that once you’re coupled, any movement, no matter how subtle, has a direct impact on your opponent. Even rotating the head at the wrong moment can move one’s opponent inches off their original position. This is one reason why so many martial art styles emphasize the theory of “no wasted motion.”

Avoiding wasted motion is even more important when practitioners try to execute projections (throws), especially projections that rely on exacting alignments. Sometimes even the slightest, almost imperceptible movement can have drastic consequences.

This of course means that in order to execute the “Coupling” Principle at the higher levels one must learn “cause and effect.” In other words, one must know exactly what wll happen when any given part of the body is moved.

Example: Rear Shoulder Projection

Photo 1 – Two individuals with no connection to each other.

Photo 2 – As the uke (attacker) grabs the tori (defender) they become coupled. Even though the point of contact is small (tip of shoulder) a connection is made and tori can affect the ukes’ centerline.

Photo 3 – The tori lifts his shoulder (the shoulder only) and rotates slightly to the rear by rotating at the waist. Since both subjects are coupled, the lift and rotation pushes the uke off balance to his rear. If done correctly, uke’s hips come forward, creating a hole for the uke to fall into.

Photo 4 – The tori continues his rotation to the rear until the uke is totally off balance.
The shoulder is then quickly dropped straight downward causing the uke to fall into the space that was created during photo #3.

In addition, one must also learn the differences such things as turning the hand versus turning the forearm versus rotating the upper arm can cause. Try it; you’ll be surprised at the results.

Example

Photo 1 – Uke grabs tori by the wrist.

2. Tori rotates his forearm (forearm only) towards the ukes’ arm. Since the tori and uke are coupled at the wrist, the rotation of the forearm causes the uke to come forward and downward. Note how the uke’s wrist has rotated around the forearm. (See below photos.) Also note that nothing has moved from the original position. The only movement was the rotation, everything else remained the same.

Learning all of these intricacies of controlling an opponent through coupling can take years, if not a lifetime to fully master. Add this complexity to the fact that in a real life or death fight numerous movements are taking place within milliseconds, each with the potential to change how one must apply the “coupling principle,” and one can start to see how difficult utilizing this principle actually is.

Fortunately, many of these issues are addressed in the techniques most of us are taught, though one must keep in mind that techniques taught in class often tend to illustrate ideal situations. That’s not a bad thing; it just means it pays to experiment. Nothing beats trial and error.

Oh, and if all of that isn’t difficult enough: how about coupling techniques that involve weaponry? Yes, even that sword on sword blocking action observed in so many styles is a form of coupling, which if the practitioner is skilled enough can be used to create a projection.

Just one more facet to think about.

The Second Top Ten Principles Of Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei - #6 Marriage to Gravity

Since I first stated that the techniques taught at my school were based on principles, and that we focus more on understanding the principles that makes things work than the techniques themselves, people have e-mailed me asking me if I could explain these principles in more detail.

Last year I spent several months writing about the “Top Ten Principles of Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei.” Now it is time to cover the next ten most important principles. Of course, one must keep in mind that while these principles are officially less important than first ten, in actuality they are just as important. The truth is that in many cases understanding and executing them properly is essential in order to make the “top ten” fully effective. In other words, they are just another piece of a very complex puzzle illustrating how sceintific martial techniques really are.

Unfortunately, trying to explain many of these principals in writing is very difficult, since many can’t be explained in words alone. However, I will try my best to describe these principles for the “blog” readers, using words, charts and pictures.

Keep in mind though, that in order to sometimes fully understand a principle you have to also understand other principles that relate to it. Most principles aren’t fully useable on their own, and have to be integrated with others.

MARRIAGE TO GRAVITY

When I started training with Yachigusa Sensei, 30 plus years ago, he would yell at me all the time about my posture. I was always either too slouchy or too rigid, too soft, or too hard. I leaned too much this way or that way. It seemed no matter what I did, or how hard I tried, my posture was never good enough.

Yachigusa Sensei would yell, he would scream, and he would even forcibly move me into the proper position--and I mean forcibly, with whatever he happened to have in his hands at the time, which was often a wooden cane.

Unfortunately for me no matter what he did to correct my posture during my first years, none of it seemed to work, at least from his perspective.

Now, I don’t know if my problems with posture were due to my age, the fact I didn’t understand Japanese and he spoke terrible English, my poor coordination, or if Yachigusa Sensei expected instant perfection; but things must have really gotten bad because the next thing I knew I was doing all my solo techniques with a book balanced on my head.

If you’ve never tried this, it can become quite frustrating very quickly-especially if there are consequences when the book falls. These consequences were usually harsh and unpleasant. However, balancing a book on your head is a great training tool, and after several long months of “book learning” the frequency of posture related yelling decreased.

I had slowly, unwittingly, been introduced to the principle of “Marriage to Gravity.”

After my teacher’s death, I started to attend various seminars where numerous Aikido, Jujutsu, and Judo practitioners often accused me of being extremely rigid. In other words they couldn’t capture my center, displace me, or project me. Of course, instead of examining their technical ability, they just assumed I was countering them. In a way they were partially right, but I didn’t do it intentionally. Without even realizing it, I had learned to spontaneously apply the principle of “Marriage to Gravity.”

I guess all of Yachigusa Sensei’s lambasting paid off.

Over the years I have heard this principle described in numerous ways, ranging the gamut from the supernatural to the scientific. Its been called things such as sticking, grounding, rooting, sinking, and even body dropping.

It is clear that this principle is done in numerous martial art styles, and from my experience every teacher who tries to explain it does so in a distinct, often stylistic manner. Unfortunately, these stylistic approaches often perpetuate myths and tricks over true technique.

This is a trick often used to show one’s ability to “root.”
I won't explain here how it is done, but it has to do with physics, not Chi.
My student had five minutes of instruction before he posed for the photo, and was able to do the technique fairly well. With some practice he could fool a lot of people with his “mystical powers.”

Another famous trick to show one’s rooting ability.
Once again it’s all about physics, not Chi.
This technique is a little harder to learn than the one above.

Often the ancient mystical explanations for this principle, especially those propagated in Chinese arts, are exquisite and definitely appeal to many people’s desire to transcend normality via some ancient “secret.”

However, as much as I can respect these peoples’ desires and beliefs, I’ll forgo the usual metaphysical explanation--which normally relates to externalizing ones’ Chi and projecting said energy into he ground thus rooting a person to the earth--for something a little more tangible.

Basically, the principle of “Marriage to Gravity” refers to a postural alignment that unifies one with their centerline. It is nothing more than having the skill to align the feet and torso in a manner were force is transferred efficiently into the ground, allowing for maximum balance and stability.

Yes, you guessed it…. It’s all related to posture.

A major difference between the principle of Marriage to Gravity,” and methods often referred to as “Rooting,” is that “Marriage to Gravity” is not static. The principle applies to both bodies at rest, and bodies moving at full speed. Though I’ll be the first to admit, one is easier to do than the other.

To be honest teaching this principle is not easy. It takes a lot of time, and one on one interaction. Having taught for over fifteen years now, I can clearly see how frustrating it must have been for Yachigusa Sensei to teach me this, especially with the language barrier between us.

I know I’ve experienced times where students have simply driven me crazy, and I’ve felt I must be explaining things in some foreign language they can’t comprehend. While I’ve never resorted to striking any of them, (okay, one or two), many have endured the ancient “Yachigusa Ryu Book” method of training.

Unfortunately, I can’t think of any way to teach this principle in this medium. Like I said, it takes a lot of one on one interaction to get people to do it right. Even practicing this principle in front of a mirror is inadvisable since moving the head to see oneself can often change alignments.

While I can’t teach this principle in writing, I can give some anatomical background, guidelines, and a few things for readers to try.

1. Basic Posture Rules

Standing – Normal Posture

1. Always hold your head straight with your chin in. The head should never tilt in any direction.
   
2. Keep your shoulder blades back.
   
3. Keep your knees straight.
   
4. Tuck your stomach in but do not tilt your pelvis forward.
   
5. The arches of your feet should always be supported.

Martial Posture

1. Always hold your head straight with your chin in. The head should never tilt in any direction. The head only moves split seconds before any turning action.
   
2. Keep your shoulder blades back, yet relaxed.
   
3. Keep your knees straight. Straight does not mean locked-out. There should actually be some give, an almost sinking sensation towards the ground. Just make sure your knee never ever passes the toes when moving; that puts a lot of strain in your knees.
   
4. Tuck your stomach in but do not tilt your pelvis forward. Hips and waist should always be over the weight bearing foot.
   
5. The arches of your feet should always be supported. One method I employ which is related to the principle of Marriage to Gravity, is placing my weight on three points of each foot. These points are the base of the big toe, the inner part of the ball of the foot, and the inside side of the heal portion of the foot. I then think about pushing the ground with these three points, concentrating my focus on the ball of the foot area.

At first, when this is done correctly one should feel their thigh muscles doing a substantial amount of work to maintain stability. That feeling should go away with training. However once this is learned, one’s stability should feel stronger.

Another benefit with this type of stance is that one will be able to execute stronger and faster turning motions. This has to do with the nature of the stance itself, which controls the action of the thigh muscles, which in turn control the upper torso.

A point to remember is that the thigh muscles don’t really have the ability to rotate without moving a least one foot. If you don’t believe that try executing a proper round kick without shifting the foot.

2. Balance

Balance is something we humans use all the time, but literally take for granted until we lose it. After all, good balance is necessary in order to independently perform acts of daily living and to avoid constantly falling down and injuring ourselves.

The definition of “balance,” is "the ability to maintain and control the position and motion of the total center of body mass relative to the base of support."

Sound familiar?

It should. However, in martial arts, this is often described more metaphysically. From a martial arts perspective, this center of mass is normally located three finger widths down from the belly button, and referred to as the tanden in Japanese and dantian in Chinese, and is the equivalent to the Hara of Buddhism.

This point is regarded as the spiritual center of man, where all psychic and physical forces are centered. The Hara is the point where “Chi” (life energy) is located--“Chi” being the essential energy to perform martial art techniques quickly and efficiently.

The importantce of the human balance system is that it helps your body maintain equilibrium on an automatic basis. Keep in mind that the human frame is inherently unstable since 2/3 of our mass is located 2/3 of our body height above the ground. Even the normal act of walking is a constant state of falling and regaining balance.

In order to maintain balance the “Human Balance System” consists of three parts. They are:

• Vestibular System (inner ear) – This is the most important element of human balance. The main function of the vestibular system is maintaining balance (posture and equilibrium) by monitoring the motion of the head and stabilizing the eyes relative to the surround environment.
  
  Within the inner ear are three canals that contain a gel-like liquid called endolymph and tiny hair cells. When both inner ears are working properly they give the brain information through the central nervous system about linear and angular positions of the body with respect to gravity.
  
  
  
  
  
• Visual system (depth, velocity, and motion perception) – Input from the eyes sends the brain information about the position of the body relative to other objects, their depth, velocity and motion. In addition, the eyes work in conjunction with the ears to maintain balance, as well as maintain clear vision during movements. The inner ear continuously sends impulses that adjust your eyes in coordination to the smallest movement of the body.
  


• Somatic Sensory or Somatosensory System) – This system provides the brain with two valuable pieces of internal and external spatial information that helps maintain balance. These two systems are called, proprioception and exteroception.
  
  • Proprioception – Propriceptors are internal sensors in the body that give the central nervous system information about the movement of body parts in relation to other parts of the body. With out such a system it would be impossible to put food in your mouth without visually watching your hand move from the plate to your mouth.
    
  • Exteroception - Exteroceptors are pressure sensors located in your feet and hands that provide external spatial information about the topography of the ground or support surface.

Evaluating Your Balance

This is a basic test to see what your current state of balance is. Start by standing upright, arms to your side. Now while looking forward raise one foot up without touching the supporting leg. Hold this position for as long as you can without tilting or losing stability. Failure occurs when your upper body starts tilting, your foot drops, your raised foot touches supporting leg, you hop, or your drop your foot to the ground.

Now repeat this test with your eyes closed. To make this test a little more complicated, try extending your arms to the side and touching your nose with your index finger--sort of like the field sobriety tests police officers give to see if you’re driving under the influence.

The importance of this simple exercise is manifold. First of all, being on one leg is less stable than two, thus requiring precise body mechanics to remain upright without tilting or swaying. Secondly, one must learn to properly align the base foot in order to press against the ground and provide the strength to remain stable (the Marriage to Gravity element). Lastly, a clear focus and concentration is required to maintain control over the body, and its natural instinct to fall over.

Remember the movie “The Karate Kid?”
Well Mr. Miyagi had a reason to make Daniel-san do that silly crane stance.
It was all about improving Daniel-san’s balance.

3. Stance (Static Posture)

Any stance refers to a method of “placement.” “Placement” is an orientation based on the flex of the feet, knees and hips, as well as associated body weight distribution. A simple rule to follow is that one should always point their hips and waist in the same direction as the toes of their weight-bearing leg.

This rule is simple to test. Start by assuming a long stance, a common stance found in many martial art styles where 40% of the weight is on the back leg and 60% is on the front leg.

Once in long-stance rotate your hips and waist in the direction of your back leg. How stable do you feel? If you think you have sufficient stability, try having someone push you backwards. Do not have them push hard, just enough to see if you lose stability.

Now do another long-stance, and this time rotate your hips and waist over the front leg. How stable do you feel? You should be able to feel a difference. Once again after you feel you are stable, have someone push you with the same power as before. There should be a major difference in how quickly and easily you can be pushed off balance.

Now try this same test with other postures (stances) for your particular style. You should get the same results.

4. Movement / Force

The first guideline has to do with body mechanics. Body mechanics are essentially posture in motion used to gain power. The purpose of utilizing proper body mechanics is to maximize applicable forces by taking advantage of the principles of physics as it relates to the structure of the human body.

When I teach my students I look for specific things. I look to see what muscles they utilize to accomplish a particular movement. Are they tense, or are they too relaxed? Is their weight distributed correctly, allowing for ease of movement? I check to see what muscles are utilized, over utilized, or under utilized.

In order to use the “Marriage to Gravity” principle when moving, one must first learn to use it statically. The next step is to learn to move one step at a time, utilizing the static form between each step. This progression is continued until the practitioner can make a series of movements and instantly stop with out having to make any adjustments in their posture. It can be a tedious process.

Of course, it is essential when learning this that one pays careful attention to their movements, and learns to feel how their body shifts. Maintaining complete control of ones body’s movements is also essential since one must learn override their body’s natural instincts. This means training the body to do what you want it to do, not what it wants to do, or what feels the most comfortable.

Remember we humans are basically lazy creatures and if given the choice are bodies will normally do what’s easiest. This means our bodies slouch rather than stand erect. We sit instead of stand. We walk instead of run. You get the idea.

Keep in mind that fighting is motion, and that having the ability to maintain one’s body mechanics is essential. Without proper body mechanics, it is impossible to deliver full force strikes, project one’s opponents, and maintain stability against the incoming force from one’s attacker.

Hopefully, the above four items aid anyone in examining this topic further. For the most part all of the components are fairly basic. The difficulty is putting them all together. But nothing worth doing is ever easy.

Just keep in mind that the basic tenet of the principle “Marriage to Gravity,” is to instill proper body posture. With proper body posture martial techniques can be executed with more power and speed. A martial arts practitioner is more stable making them harder to unbalance and project. Most of all overall effectiveness and efficiency are greatly increased.

Learning this principle is not easy, but it worth all of the effort.

K-9 Self-Defense

In the February 2008 issue of Black Belt Magazine there is an article titled, “Karate Vs Canines,” written by Loren W. Christensen. I’m sure many readers, such as I, initially chuckled at the thought of such an article, but this is a topic rarely discussed and worth reading about.

My initial reaction to this article was based more on the title itself, and the image it evokes of a karate-ka sparring with a dog. Fortunately, this article is a serious presentation on the topic, and offers the reader some actual techniques intended to teach people how to defend against/survive a dog attack. While Mr. Christensen’s article is only six photo-heavy pages of basic information, I believe the article is worth reading, especially for someone without any knowledge on the topic.

It’s is especially worth reading when one considers the following statistics:

1. There are currently 74.8 million dogs in the USA.
2. A survey by the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta concluded that dogs bite nearly 2% of the U.S. population, which equals more than 4.7 million people annually.
   • 61% of bites occur around the home (reported cases)
   • 77% of bites involve a family member or family friend (reported cases)
3. Almost 800,000 bites per year -- one out of every 6 -- are serious enough to require medical attention.
4. Between 2001 and 2006, 144 deaths were attributed to dog attacks (National Canine Research Foundation).

Mr. Christensen’s article is fairly basic, something unfortunately prevalent with articles throughout the pages of Black Belt Magazine. I am sure that he has a far greater knowledge of the subject since he claims to have been a US Army Dog handler for 14 months, and I would have to believe he learned a lot more about dog attacks and how to protect himself from them. After all, it’s not unusual for a K-9 handler to be bitten by their own dog--something Mr. Christensen readily admits happened to him--other service dogs, or the random civilian canine they are requested to deal with due to their supposed expertise with canines.

In addition, my assertion that Mr. Christensen’s article provides only basic information is based on my limited exposure to police canines and police canine training (about a year). One of the first things I was taught was how to deal with an aggressive dog. Information I know was not covered in Mr. Christensen’s article. Furthermore, I was also given several long safety lectures, with specific self-defense methods, before donning the padded suit one wears when they help train attack dogs. I’ll be the first to state that these methods are almost impossible to execute during a dog attack, though they are effective in theory.

The dog attacks I experienced were extremely brutal and swift. All I ever saw were charging teeth, and the dogs (German Shepherds, Bouvier Des Flanders, and Belgian Malinois) hit with so much force that there was no way to maintain my balance and/or counter their attack with any sufficient force. Add the pain factor of the jaw pressure, and the fact that the dog is constantly moving in ways people don’t, and the whole ordeal is quite dumbfounding.

Fortunately the dogs I worked with were all highly trained, and only attacked specific body parts (normally the forearm), which made protecting one's other body parts easier. That is, I didn’t have to worry about being bitten in the face, neck, or other more damageable parts of the body, which is a real concern when being attacked by an aggressive canine intent on hurting you.

The canine attacks I experienced were extremely controlled drills, but they clearly illustrated the lethal potential a dog could inflict if a dog had the intent to hurt someone. Unlike many humans, when these dogs attacked, they were rarely distracted by any actions one made to fend them off, and their intent to bite and pull their opponent to the ground never wavered. The attack was straight on, full force, unrelenting, with no remorse.

The truth is, once the dog was done and had been commanded to stop, they pranced off wagging their tail like nothing out of the ordinary ever took place. In fact they looked pretty proud of themselves.

The police force was not my first exposure to K-9 self-defense either. My first
K-9 self-defense came, from my uncle who used to raise hunting dogs (Bluetick Coonhounds). My uncle needed these skills since he was often dealing with the “pack mentality.” He was fully aware that if one dog attacked the others would join in.

Since being attacked by the pack would most likely be deadly, he knew several places to hit a dog that would instantly incapacitate them. I’m not proud to admit it, but I’ve tried a few of them--light force only--and they work. Just ask any of the three German Shepherds that I’ve owned.

Of course at this point, I most likely find myself in the same situation Mr. Christensen found himself in. That position being that if we share such techniques publicly every dog lover and/or animal rights activist will be up in arms and condemning us for doing so.

For now. I don’t feel the desire or necessity to share such information publicly, so I’ll close this blog entry by referring to an e-book Mr. Christensen offers for sale on the Internet; “Self-Defense Against A Dog Attack,” by Loren W. Christensen at http://www.lwcbooks.com/books/ebookdog.html While I have not read this book so cannot endorse its contents, hopefully the information contained in it will be a little more in depth.

* * *

Loren Christensen, is a 42-year veteran of the martial arts. He has learned the hard way that real fights are far more explosive and violent than karate sparring matches, a lesson proven over and over during his 25-year career as a police officer in Portland, Oregon and a military policeman in Saigon, Vietnam . He has earned a total of 10 black belts – seven in karate, two in jujitsu and one in arnis – and penned 34 books, 6 DVDs and dozens of magazine articles on the topics of the martial arts, street gangs, police-involved shootings, exercise, prostitution and various street subcultures.

In The Company of “Thieves”

“Talent borrows, Genius Steals”

Unknown

Several months ago I was publicly accused of “stealing” martial art techniques/concepts from Don Angier. Per the “Martial Arts Police, Koryu Division,” my case is still pending, though they did as much as they could to convict me in the court of public appeal.

Clearly, old news is old news. But ever since these public accusations were made, I been considering things in the light of the old Biblical proverb which states, “Let he who's without sin cast the first stone.”

What I mean by that is that almost every martial artist before me, most of my contemporaries, and yes even those that made accusations against me are all guilty of such a crime to some extent or another. We all are the sum of many parts. We all take bits and pieces away from the various teachers we have had the ability to train with. Whether that training was long term, or just a few seminars doesn’t matter.

Now, I’m a firm believer that no one individual, no matter how gifted, knows everything. Because I believe this so strongly, I have taken every opportunity to expose myself to numerous martial art systems and teachers. I have especially tried find teachers who have the ability to make me understand the art that I do better, and make me an overall better teacher and practitioner.

But back to my point.
.

A Chain of Yoshidas

Since I’ve been accused of “stealing principles” from Don Angier, I'd like to use the same absurd logic to see whom else I’ve stolen from. While we are at it, let's go another step and see whom they "stole" their knowledge from.

Let's start with Don Angier.

Now, I have already stated numerous times how big an influence Mr. Angier has had on me, and what I do as a martial artist. I’ve clearly admitted to adopting a lot of his terminology, and adjusting/correcting some of my techniques based on his corrections. Maybe too much in some people’s opinions. However, that is not a crime that is called “good judgment.” His skills and knowledge is clearly superior to mine.

But where did Mr. Angier get his information.

While I don’t have specific details about his life and training, according to his very own autobiography he writes:

“Bill (William Hepler) worked graveyard shift at the main Los Angeles Post Office. For almost nine years he came into the dojo three hours before class. Together we worked on categorizing the basics of the art and how to make them as precise as possible. We worked out pragmatic counters to all of the forms and counters to the counters. It was only with his help that I was able to systematize the art and start listing its scientific principles.”

“My Career in Yanagi-ryu Aiki Jiu Jitsu” by Don Angier

Mr. Angier further states:

“Slowly, he (Ark-Yuey Wong) began showing me some of his skills. It would be very easy to underestimate this mild-looking, elderly man. He was indeed a wonderful man and artist, and I must admit that some of the things he showed me helped me understand my own art more fully.”

“My Career in Yanagi-ryu Aiki Jiu Jitsu” by Don Angier

Now it’s my understanding, and forgive me if I am wrong, that Mr. Angier also studied martial arts with other instructors in Japan and Los Angeles. If this is true, and his own statements about his life are factual (which I’m sure they are), then Mr. Angier’s art is a sum of various sources. He did not get all of the art he now teaches, or at least all the insights into that art, from one source. In fact he clearly states, “We worked out pragmatic counters to all of the forms and counters to the counters. It was only with his help that I was able to systematize the art and start listing its scientific principles,” which shows a progression and departure from what he was originally taught.

Like many of us, Mr. Angier sought out others who could help him better understand the core information he had. As I have, he used the information he gathered to make himself better.

However, I don’t hear anyone accusing him of thievery. I don’t see anyone questioning where he obtained the sum of his knowledge. But maybe he is just an exception, or perhaps he is just above reproach.

Of course, Mr. Angier’s approach to improving himself via other sources isn’t unique, even within the particular martial art style he teaches. Yoshida Kotaro (1883-1966), the father of Mr. Angier’s teacher, Yoshida Kenji (1903-1954), was skilled in more than one style of martial arts. Not only did he teach Daito Ryu to the public, he was also known to have denso (transmission scrolls) in several different arts. He possessed technical skills in Kito Ryu Jujutsu and Onno-ha Itto Ryu Kenjutsu, which I’ve read were evident in his public teachings.

I have no idea if any one can say with any certainty what influences one martial arts style had upon any other for Yoshida Koatro, but his history shows a certain level of cross training and exploration. Clearly, he saw the value of training with various other instructors, who must have had something worthy to offer him.

Since Yoshida Kotaro took the time and effort to train with others, I think it would be very hard to believe that he didn’t embrace and incorporate new methodologies or concepts he felt were more effective and efficient than what he previously possessed.

Nor would it be beyond the realm of possibility that over the years he incorporated other methodologies into his core base as his abilities and comprehension of scientific principles improved.

However, I’m sure there is no one out there that would accuse Yoshida Kotaro of theft. Nor in my opinion should they.

Small Circles

So how about all the insights I gained from training with Wally Jay.

Prof. Jay was never my instructor, but I did attend numerous seminars he gave. I also have his books, and a video, which I’ve read and watched countless times.

I’m no Small-Circle Jujutsu expert, but I believe I understand the concepts Prof. Jay taught. I know for certain I employ some of them when doing certain techniques.

In many cases, the information Prof. Jay taught at these seminars helped to clarify things I already knew. Sometimes I was shown a subtlety that just made old techniques even more effective. In other cases I disagreed with his assertions, and although I will admit he is more of an expert than me, I never did techniques again after learning them at a seminar.

Basically, I thank Prof. Jay for enhancing what I already knew. I also thank him for exposing me to techniques and concepts that with practice and some trail and error eventually added new dimensions to old forms.

Most of all, I thank Prof. Jay for adding to my martial arts lexicon, and giving me the tools to break down and explain various techniques to my students in a much more concise manner.

The funny thing is that while Wally Jay is credited with developing “Small Circle Jujutsu,” his creation was nothing new or revolutionary. It was based on the martial arts he had learned from others, as well as his own research/trail and error. He may be the person responsible for propagating “small circle” methodology in modern times, but he didn’t create it all on his own.

This is not my just opinion, either. In the article “The Founder of Small Circle Ju Jitsu,” Michael Belzer states:

“In 1962 Jay attracted the attention of a 22-year old martial artist from Seattle named Bruce Lee. Lee was amazed how someone with little formal training in judo could go on to produce champions. However. from the many long hours that Lee spent at Jay's dojo (training hall) with friend Jimmy Lee, the legendary martial artist saw the value of Jay's broad background in the fighting arts. Jay had adopted various techniques from boxing, wrestling, judo, kung fu, weightlifting and jujitsu, and brought them together in what he called his Small Circle Theory Jujitsu. Like Jay and his innovative instructors before him, Bruce Lee knew that talent, technique, and style knew no traditional boundaries and that excellence carried no single banner or flag. The three martial artists spent many long hours exchanging theories, fighting principles, and techniques, and over the following years, a strong bond of trust and friendship developed. As their reputations grew, they remained friends, and while Bruce Lee went on to take Hollywood, Hong Kong, and the martial arts world by storm, Wally Jay established the ten principles that would set his mark in the world of jujitsu.”

“The Founder of Small Circle Ju Jitsu” by Michael Belzer

Now, following the arguments the "Martial Arts Police" made in their allegations, it must be true that Prof. Jay was also a thief. After all, it's clear that many concepts he taught and incorporated into his “small circle system” came from other sources.

In fact, I would argue that he is a better thief than I am, since he profited from what he “stole” more than I ever have, or will.

But maybe Prof. Jay is too famous to be publicly accused of “stealing.” Maybe, what he taught has been so widely accepted as being something he “created,” he is above incrimination.

So let's move on.

Janet Gee

Another instructor I’ve gained valuable insights from is Sifu Janet Gee, Yang Style Tai Chi Chuan/Choy Li Fut. Once again, she has never been my instructor, but I’ve attended several seminars she has taught, and had the opportunity to talk with her several times about martial arts in general.

There is no question that her approach to martial arts is very different from mine. Yet as different as things may appear on the surface, the science that makes the techniques she teaches work is the same.

What I like most about Sifu Gee’s teaching method is her no nonsense approach when explaining the way things work. She also has a great talent for breaking down techniques and demonstrating the different nuances that can cause different results.

While I may lack the physical skills (speed and definitely the flexibility) to be able to do her martial art in the manner she can, I still always gain valuable insights on how things need to be done in order to be effective.

More importantly, she has definitely taught me to approach and examine things in a different manner, and to think outside of the box.

I’ve never been privy to Sifu Gee’s training history, but according to her bio, she started training in the martial arts in 1971. Her principle styles have been Choy Li Fut Kung Fu and Tai Chi Chuan, but over the years she has also studied Aikido, Tae Kwan Do, Jujitsu, Kempo Karate, Indonesian martial arts, and Judo.

Is there anyone out there who doubts the fact that Sifu Gee incorporates concepts, principles, and techniques from numerous sources when she teaches? Of course she does. She studied other arts to improve her skills, and now passes on her combined knowledge to those fortunate enough to train with her.

Furthermore, Sifu Gee states that she has incorporated elements of the “Alexander Technique,” (a method that develops sophisticated conscious coordination designed to improve ease and freedom of movement as well as teach practitioners how to use appropriate amounts of energy for a particular activity), into her martial arts teaching. Now I’ll admit, I don’t know a lot about the “Alexander Technique,” but last time I checked, it's not even a martial art.

But wait, wouldn’t all this cross training and incorporating new ideas make her a thief too? After all, she is combining and propagating information derived from other individuals. I mean, is she doing anything more or less than I’ve been accused of?

Vital Point

Another instructor who has had a direct impact on the way I teach is Prof. Rick Clark, Ao Denkou Kai. Like the other instructors I’ve listed already, Prof. Clark has never been my instructor, but I’ve attended several of his seminars and have hosted him to teach in the Bay Area several times.

While his knowledge of vital point striking is superior to mine, we often exchange concepts and principles. I would like to think I’ve offered him several ideas to contemplate and explore. At least, that is what he has told me several times.

Prof. Clark’s main contribution to my art was exposing me to the upper level of vital point usage, without wasting my time teaching me all the metaphysical mumbo-jumbo many instructors like to perpetuate.

More importantly, Prof. Clark clarified many of the things my teacher Hiroshi Yachigusa taught me, by explaining them to me in simple to understand English. Since there was nothing lost in translation, I have a better understanding of the material now. Nuances which I may have missed because of language barriers, or the poor comprehension skills of youth, were finally pointed out to me. As a result I’m more effective and efficient when performing techniques.

Prof. Clark also helped me a lot with terminology. Because of this, I am able to discuss vital point striking more professionally, and to a general audience.

Of course, even with all the help Prof. Clark has given me over the years, I now have to say he to is a thief. I mean, he originally trained in Korean systems and judo/jujutsu, and then Arnis. He even admits that what he teaches now is an accumulation of the knowledge he has gained over many years, from many sources.

Yes, it’s true that Prof. Clark has done an awful lot of research on his own, but not everything he teaches was self-taught. Not every principle, or scientific method he employs and teaches is his original work. It is an ACCUMULATION of many things, from many sources.

Once a Thief

Lets face it, I could keep going on and on, naming and discussing numerous teachers I’ve had the great fortune to train with in the last 35 years. There are many instructors who have had a long lasting impression on me, and on the methodologies I now employ. No matter who I would name, no matter what style they taught, they can all be accused of “stealing” information and/or techniques from someone else.

They can all be accused of “stealing,” because they are all individuals who cross-trained, searched out, or researched the martial arts in order to improve what they already knew. They all incorporated knew information they discovered to improve their skills, fill gaps in their primary training, or make themselves more efficient.

Basically they’ve all done what I’ve done.

Yes, I admit I was taught a lot of things by a lot of people, but I didn’t “steal” anything. If anything I took what I was shown, examined it, studied it, tried to figure out how it did or did not relate to what I already knew, and after trail and error either incorporated this information or discarded it.

Furthermore, I didn’t “steal” anything because the information I was given was shared with countless others in public forums. People present were under no restrictions, secret blood oaths, or threats not to disseminate what they were told.

The fact that I elected to share such information in a public forum, on this weblog, while others either do not share or do so more privately, isn’t my concern. Nor is it something I should be condemned for.

To accuse me of “stealing,” is ludicrous. If I am guilty, than so is everyone else past and present because since very ancient times no one has come with an original thought or method in regards to fighting methodologies (except perhaps firearms).

Sure things are explained and presented differently, depending on the style, but we martial artists all do the same things. THERE ARE NO SECRETS, AND SCIENCE IS SCIENCE.

Hiroshi Yachigusa taught me a lot, but he didn’t know everything, nor did he claim to. Looking back, I feel Hiroshi Yachigusa tried his best to teach me what he knew, but because of my age and maturity at the time, and the language barrier between us, that information wasn’t as thorough as it could have been.

I realized this long ago. As result, I have made it my business to seek out and train with others no matter what their rank, affiliation, or martial style. As a result I’m not a parrot who repeats the mantra of one sole individual, no matter how much respect I may have for them.

Nor am I the type of person who isn’t willing to change/alter techniques within the martial system I was taught. If I discover a better, more effective method I will adopt it. Fortunately, this is something Yachigusa Sensei would have approved of, he always felt that the essence of his art that was more important than any of the techniques themselves.

So if the above behavior constitutes “stealing” like I’ve been accused of, I’m guilty. Guilty as Hell!! But though I’m admitting my “guilt,” I’m not doing anything that centuries and centuries of martial artists of the past didn’t do.

Clearly, martial artists such as Musashi, Mitose, Ueshiba, Kano, Funakoshi, Chow, Parker, and even Bruce Lee also sought out better ways to improve their abilities, from any source available to them. They too incorporated and embraced new knowledge. And eventually, they taught their accumulated knowledge to others. Often they did this without giving credit to their various sources.

Their direct students continued these progressions, as did future generations of students after them. To make the claim that your style of martial arts has gone unchanged for centuries is ridiculous. Every instructor, no matter how traditional, makes changes or omissions, based on their ability and comprehension. That’s the human factor.

To make the claim that your system, style, or teacher has exclusive rights to some technical information is insanity. Is anyone so delusional to really believe their way is the best, absolute method, and that their aren’t others doing the same things elsewhere? How conceited, arrogant, and self-righteous can someone be?

To those individuals who accused me of theft, and those that thought there was merit to their accusations, I say you should examine what you do, and really explore how “pure and untainted” your martial art style is. I’m sure you’ll discover that your teacher… Ahem… “Stole” things too.

Maybe worse yet, you’ll discover that you are also the sum of many parts. Perhaps you will find that consciously or unconsciously, you’re as big, or even a bigger thief than I. At least I publicly admit what I do.

Coda:

Just in case you didn’t get it--if one of the instructors I’ve named above happens to be your teacher, and you now find yourself fuming that I had the audacity to accuse them of being a thief, you missed the point. None of the above, including myself, “STOLE” anything. That’s the absurdity of the whole accusation, since we are all the sum of many parts.

The fact is I have nothing but the utmost respect for the instructors I’ve listed above.

No angry E-mails please.

Who Says Women Can’t Fight

When I started teaching fifteen years ago, my school was mainly comprised of teenage girls. In fact, six of my very first seven students were female, (see blog essay “A Brief School History Part 1 – The First Seven,” June 2006).

Since one of my main training partners when I was a student myself was a woman (my teacher’s daughter), I had no reservations about teaching these young ladies. I certainly did not have any concerns about whether women belonged in the martial arts or not. The fact is, I welcomed the opportunity to teach them, especially because I feel women have more of a need to learn life-protection skills than most men do.

Over the years, I’ve read numerous articles debating whether women belong in the martial arts, whether they can compete with men, and the pros and cons of men training with women. I assume that those that believe women have no place training in the martial arts don’t realize that there have been many notable women warriors throughout history. Even the creation of the art of Wing Chun is credited to a woman named Yim Wing Chun (Beautiful Springtime).

I, for one, have never understood these debates. So when I teach women, I teach them exactly like I teach the men. I give them no preferential treatment, and I expect them to perform techniques just like the men do. No “Dojo Bunnies” are allowed.

While the argument that men are physically stronger on average is true, my experience has shown me that women compensate by becoming more technically oriented. This doesn’t mean that any woman could go toe to toe with any man in a fight, but it doesn’t mean they don’t have a chance either. All factors being equal, I don’t see why a woman can't beat a man.

In fact, I know a few women martial artists I wouldn’t want to fight with, and that I would be extremely happy to see coming to my aid in a real a street fight. To be perfectly honest, I was once saved from being thrown off the top of a water tower by my female police partner: she grabbed the suspect’s testicles and pinned him to the ground without ever losing her grip. Now that is technique over brawn. I bet the bad guy is still singing soprano to this day.

Well, for anyone who thinks women can’t fight, or shouldn’t be martial artists, I'm posting this video clip featuring Mixed Martial Arts fighter Satoko Shinashi.

This is one tuff looking little powerhouse. That’s not a sexist statement either. Satoko Shinashi is 4-11 and about 105 pounds. That’s pretty tiny. However, though small in stature this Sambo/Jujutsu stylist has amassed quite a fighting record.

Bronze Medal – 2000 World Sambo Championships (-48kg)

Silver Medal – 2001 Asia Sambo Championship

Gold Medal – All Japan Brazilian Jujutsu Championships

MMA record – 13-1-1

Semi-professional MMA record – 11-0-0

What’s really impressive in this video happens during the last few second, when she makes a much larger male opponent tap out by using an arm bar. It’s clearly a David versus Goliath match, and while I haven’t been able to find out why the fight took place or what specific rules they fought under, it shows a woman can, at times, beat a man.

Now, I’m not saying that Satoko Shinashi is the best woman fighter out there. I’m certain there are plenty of others. What I liked about the video is her technical ability, and the power she demonstrates executing her techniques. Clearly, she is a martial artist.

Certainly, this video shows that women can fight, and I’m sure as female MMA matches gain more acceptance, it wont be long until we witness a number of cross-gender fights.

The Secret: "WILL and SUFFERING"

A couple of years ago, I had a student who had waited almost 50 years to start taking martial arts classes. While he knew his age would be a factor, he stated he was prepared to endure whatever it took to learn to be a good martial artist.

During my initial phone conversation with this gentleman, I also knew his age was a factor. But anyone willing to drive over an hour to train with me (that's an hour in each direction) deserves a chance, and clearly shows a willingness, if not an eagerness, to learn.

Initially, things went well; I started him off with a program to increase his level of fitness, while instilling some strong fundamentals. I purposely limited what I would exposed him to; after all, the older you are the longer it takes to heal if you get hurt. Even minor bumps and bruises feel more severe as one gets older. I know that first hand, and I'm only 45.

Of course, every now and then I would push him. I would do techniques I knew he wasn't ready for and didn't have the technical capability to execute properly. I didn't do this to make him feel bad or inadequate. I did it simply to expose him to different techniques, and to show him how important mastering the fundamentals were before moving on. I wanted to show him how the fundamentals form the core, the foundation, of all techniques that follow.

As time moved on, I could see he was getting more and more impatient, and bored, of doing the basics. While I fully understood his position, all I could do was try to keep up his morale, while reminding him over and over again about the importance of mastering basic body movement.

Unfortunately, this issue grew and grew; I could see his frustration building. Things finally reached a point where all he could keep asking me was "how could I do things so much better than him?" "Why could the senior students do things so much better than him?" "What was he doing wrong?"

Well, the simple answer would have been that I've been doing this for over 30 years. However, the answer I gave him was more honest, "practice." Practice, practice, and more practice. It requires many hours, weeks, and years spent doing repetition after boring, sometimes painstaking, repetition. My ability to do what I do took a lot of will, a desire not to settle for mediocrity, and a whole lot of suffering--not to mention sacrifice.

Of course, this is not the answer he wanted to hear. He wanted to know the "SECRET."

Secret, what secret? There is no secret. There are no shortcuts. I tried to tell him that he had waited 50 years to start practicing, so he shouldn't be in a rush now.

As you may have guessed, this answer didn't appease him. Eventually the long drive, and lack of perceived progress, discouraged him from continuing training with me. In a way, it was too bad, because he was making a lot more progress than he realized; and if he had focused more on the material than his desire to learn "the secrets," he would have progressed even faster.

* * *

Now, this story is nothing remarkable, and I'm sure every teacher has encountered such a student from time to time. We've all met people who have the desire to achieve something, but do not have the internal fortitude, "the heart," to do what is necessary to accomplish such a goal. This is especially true when it is a goal that requires a great deal of dedication and hard work, coupled with physical hardship.

The importance of this story is that it can be used to teach future students. It's a good story to tell new students when they are facing the same circumstances. Such was the case recently, which of course leads to the main point of this essay.

In this case however, the student wasn't asking for secrets, or looking for shortcuts. He simply wanted to know how to motivate himself to persevere thorough the arduous, often tedious, training regiment he was facing.

It's a good question, and though I tried my best to answer, I don't think I really connected with him. Fortunately, I have some excellent students who often have the ability to express things in a manner that I lack. Many times we may be saying the same exact things, but somebody needs to hear it in a different way. Such was the case this particular day.

Basically, the conversation centered on two aspects of training which are often overlooked: the Will and Suffering.

* * *

Now, I could go on and write a long, wordy essay about this, but fortunately, I was given a link to an article that explains this better than I ever could. Though it was written in regards to mountain climbing, it is applicable to almost any endeavor, and the parallels to martial arts should be clear enough.

The article is titled, "Will and Suffering," and was written by Mark Twight. It can be accessed by going to: http://www.gymjones.com/knowledge.php?id=23

Anyone who is a regular reader on this blog knows I'm not in the habit of linking to someone else's web page, but in this instance it's warranted. I fully agree with what Mr. Twight writes.

One must have the will, the desire to accomplish something. They must have the will to put in the required hours, seek out the proper instruction, and endure the obstacles that may slow down their progress.

They must be willing to suffer. Not just physically, but also socially. If one's goal is to be a professional fighter and they have a choice to train or go to a party, the training has to come first. It's a no-brainier, but it is a sacrifice few are willing to make.

The truth of the matter is that a lot of people have will, especially in the initial phase of starting a new endeavor. Unfortunately, few have the will to suffer in order to achieve their goals.

Let's face it; few people have the patience and/or internal fortitude to complete anything they start. Furthermore, in a day where we are exposed to so many opportunities it's very hard for people to hold an interest in any one thing for very long.

Unfortunately, those that give up when the going gets tough, or when they become frustrated, never learn a very valuable lesson. The real "secret" of success.

* * *

During last night's practice, I asked a new student who has had trouble learning to execute a forward roll she had been practicing. She smiled and answered yes, and proudly stated that she had finally figured out how to do a forward roll.

Sure enough, she executed a forward roll, and then another one. They weren't picture perfect, but her improvement was a major accomplishment for her. At least this time she did not hit her head, slam her shoulder, or make that awful thudding sound.

However, she was still unsatisfied with her progress, and complained about her lack of ability.

"Baby steps," I told her, "you learn by taking baby steps." There was no response, but she nodded in acceptance, as if there was no other way.

Did she have the Will? Clearly, her effort, her determination to learn to roll shows she did. Did she suffer? You bet, and she has the bruises to prove it.

The real question is, did she gain some insight, some introspection, about what she is capable of? I believe so, and that is the most valuable lesson one can gain from any endeavor--when they don't quit, or take shortcuts to achieve their goals.

By having the will--the drive to succeed especially during adversity--and the willingness to suffer in order to achieve said goals, one develops a sense of self, a sense of self-worth, and the knowledge they can in fact accomplish their goals. That is the most valuable lesson one can ever learn, and something money can't buy.

[see also: Patience and Repitition and The Secret ]

---------------

Mark F. Twight is the founder of Gym Jones, a private invitation only facility. He rose to prominence in the world Alpine mountaineering community in the late 80's, and recently was credited with training the cast of the movie "300."

The Second Top Ten Principles Of Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei - #5 Push When Pulled/ Pull When Pushed, Enter When Pulled/ Turn When Pushed

Since I first stated that the techniques taught at my school were based on principles, and that we focus more on understanding the principles that makes things work than the techniques themselves, people have e-mailed me asking me if I could explain these principles in more detail.

Last year I spent several months writing about the “Top Ten Principles of Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei.” Now it is time to cover the next ten most important principles. Of course, one must keep in mind that while these principles are officially less important than first ten, in actuality they are just as important. The truth is that in many cases understanding and executing them properly is essential in order to make the “top ten” fully effective. In other words, they are just another piece of a very complex puzzle illustrating how sceintific martial techniques really are.

Unfortunately, trying to explain many of these principals in writing is very difficult, since many can’t be explained in words alone. However, I will try my best to describe these principles for the “blog” readers, using words, charts and pictures.

Keep in mind though, that in order to sometimes fully understand a principle you have to also understand other principles that relate to it. Most principles aren’t fully useable on their own, and have to be integrated with others.

Push When Pulled/ Pull When Pushed, Enter When Pulled/ Turn When Pushed

“Softness triumphs over hardness, feebleness over strength. What is more malleable is always superior over that which is immoveable. This is the principle of controlling things by going along with them, of mastery through adaptation.”

Laozi (Lao-tzu) Taoist Philosopher

Clearly, these four principles are not unique to the Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei system. In fact these four principles are utilized in numerous martial art systems, and they form the foundation of the techniques utilized in the arts of Judo and Aikido.

The same can be said for the system I teach, though these principles are often only associated to methods of projecting one's opponent. When it comes to striking, or the use of weaponry, we often do the opposite. For example, when an attacker punches or cuts at us with a sword (a forward push like motion), we will enter. Of course, this is done for specific strategic reasons I wont go into here.

For the most part though, we utilize these four principles in the same manner as the other styles listed above, simply because they are the best method to instill and teach practitioners the proper way to react to specific forces that can occur when one is attacked.

Basically, these four principles teach the concept of embracing and accepting an attacker’s energy to use it against them. Instead of opposing the attacker’s force (their “flow of energy”), one increases it by entering, or extends it by pulling away. By doing so, the attacker’s balance and focus is disrupted making follow-up attacks almost impossible to achieve.

Many years ago during a seminar with Don Angier, he made the statement that “every fight is a contest to control the centerline.” At first, this statement didn’t completely resonate in my brain, but with further explanation on his part, and some introspection I believe I have a better grasp on what he meant. (Although putting it into actual application is another thing.)

Furthermore, I’ve come to discover that when I employ any of the above four principles, I am in fact controlling the centerline. By moving with the force of my opponent, I prevent him from placing himself where he intended to be. This makes it hard for him to properly step and/or maintain his equilibrium. I have taken him off the centerline; and because I have accomplished that, he is in a weakened state. He is in a state where I can now launch my counter attack with relative safety

Since there is so much information on these four principles on the Internet I don’t feel the necessity to explain them any further. Furthermore, the principles themselves are pretty self-descriptive.

All one has to remember is that these four principles are intended to teach a martial arts practitioner how to react and move when facing force. Instead of moving in the opposite direction--the ways our bodies are hardwired to behave--one must allow themselves to flow with it.

The Second Top Ten Principles Of Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei - #4 Giving An Out

Since I first stated that the techniques taught at my school were based on principles, and that we focus more on understanding the principles that makes things work than the techniques themselves, people have e-mailed me asking me if I could explain these principles in more detail.

Last year I spent several months writing about the “Top Ten Principles of Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei.” Now it is time to cover the next ten most important principles. Of course, one must keep in mind that while these principles are officially less important than first ten, in actuality they are just as important. The truth is that in many cases understanding and executing them properly is essential in order to make the “top ten” fully effective. In other words, they are just another piece of a very complex puzzle illustrating how sceintific martial techniques really are.

Unfortunately, trying to explain many of these principals in writing is very difficult, since many can’t be explained in words alone. However, I will try my best to describe these principles for the “blog” readers, using words, charts and pictures.

Keep in mind though, that in order to sometimes fully understand a principle you have to also understand other principles that relate to it. Most principles aren’t fully useable on their own, and have to be integrated with others.

GIVING AN OUT

“Giving an Out,” is another one of those multifaceted principles, used in a variety of forms. Basically, “Giving an Out,” refers to a method where the practitioner creates an artificial route of escape/retreat for the aggressor when applying a technique.

I call it an “artificial route” since the route is pre-determined and dictated by the practitioner. It’s a route intended to place the aggressor in a specific place, or state, so follow-up techniques can be easily employed.

These “outs” are based on science, especially the knowledge of physiology. For the most part they are based on innate reactions to specific stimuli and utilize the subconscious, hardwired, reactions of the nervous system.

Many of the best examples for clearly illustrating the principle of “Giving an Out,” are pain compliance techniques. A pain compliance technique is normally executed by applying a specific painful stimulus to a particular point on the body. This stimulus invokes an innate response via the reflex arch, and the body reacts is a predictable repeatable manner.

The technique is predictable and repeatable because it capitalizes on the innate physiology of the human body. Since it is predictable and repeatable, it’s an example of the principle of “Giving an Out;” If one knows how the reflex arch operates, and what stimulus invokes what reactions, one can use these reflexes to their advantage and direct an opponent's body in specific directions.

While I have already written in detail about the reflex arch in my essay titled, “Pain and Pain Withdrawal Reflexes” and “The Top Ten Principles Of Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei - #3 Reflex Action,” I think it’s important enough to once again explain in order to fully understand the principle of “Giving an Out.”

Example

A common technique used in numerous martial art systems, which utilizes the reflex arch, and the principle of “Giving an Out,” is Gokyu (5th Immobilization). This technique is nothing more than an arm bar, which is accomplished by applying pressure directly above the elbow, at a point where numerous receptors are located; one in particular is called the Golgi tendon organ.

This technique works because when muscles contract, they produce tension at the point where the muscle is connected to the tendon. The Golgi tendon organ is located at such a point. The function of Golgi tendon organ is to register changes in tension, and the rate of these changes. When properly stimulated, such as by downward pressure that exceeds a certain threshold, the Golgi tendon organ sends signals to the spine, which triggers the stretch reflex (lengthening reaction). This inhibits the muscles from contracting, causing them to relax.


However, because of the position of the arm in the technique, the arm cannot relax fully; the only way the body can neutralize the threat is by falling forward or downward--the direction away from the point of the threatening stimulus. That’s the “Out.”

Because the basic function of the Golgi tendon organ is to help protect the muscles, tendons, and ligaments from injury, and because the reaction is innate, Gokyu and other similar techniques are highly repeatable.

Done properly, these techniques can work every time, even if one’s uke is aware of what is about to happen and tries to counter the technique. The important factor is that the stimulus has to be applied properly so that the body’s (spinal cord's) command to fall will override their conscious will (brain) not to fall.

The Reflex Arch

If you read the above example carefully you will notice I said the Golgi tendon sends signals to the spinal cord, and not the brain. In actuality, signals are sent to both, but the spinal cord is responsible for the response.

With this in mind let’s break down the above technique and see what is actually occurring.
.
Initially, the attacker felt a stimulus of pain in his arm that was intended to make them believe their tendons were in danger of ripping/tearing. Reacting to the stimulus in the arm, messages were transmitted to the brain and spinal column. Milliseconds before this information ever reached the brain, the spinal column respond and caused two reactions; the arm went limp, and the person fell to his knees.

Milliseconds later, the brain received the same information as the spinal cord. This information was analyzed, and appropriate responses were signaled back to the source of the stimulus. Of course, by this time, the perceived threat was over.

It is important to fully understand that the initial responses occurred prior to the brain processing the information. Even though both processes take place within milliseconds of each other, if the body had waited for the brain to signal a response it could have been too late, and the arm could have been damaged.

This fact is important because the body [spinal cord] reacts without “consciously” processing what is really occurring. This allows the defender to use their opponent's innate body responses against himself. The defender causes a reaction their opponent can't control, and in many cases isn't even aware they are making. By the time their brain realizes what is going on it's too late.

When applying a technique such as Gokyu, the defender’s goal is to create an artificial stimulus that the tendons are about to be severely damaged. In actuality, the arm is never in such extreme danger of being injured. If the brain had been responsible for providing a response it would have realized no real danger existed, and there would be no reason that the at the arm would have to go limp, or the person should collapse to their knees.

This change in responses would definitely have major consequences. Since the brain is aware that no real danger exists, it would allow the attacker to react differently, possibly affording him a chance to escape and/or counter attack.

Other Ways

Of course pain compliance techniques are just one example of the principle of “Giving an Out.” Other methods are more subtle, and are often used to project an opponent. This is a little harder to explain in writing, but suffice it to say that most systems which teach projection (throwing) techniques utilize this method to one degree or another.

However, the group I’ve found that utilizes a lot of the principle of “Giving an Out”--without most likely even realizing that they are--are practitioners of Judo and Wrestling. Grapplers, who have the ability to direct their opponent’s actions, will create intentional gaps of attack or escape, or will pretend to attack one limb while actually focusing on another. In this way, they fully utilize this principle.

Clearly, the principle of “Giving an Out,” is a method to subconsciously manipulate the actions of one’s opponent. In many instances, this action is direct cause and effect (reflex arch), while in others the action is almost imperceptible and psychological.

In either case, this principle is extremely effective, and those that learn to utilize the various methods to apply it will discover a new dimension to what they already do.

The Second Top Ten Principles Of Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei - #3 Angle of Efficiency

Since I first stated that the techniques taught at my school were based on principles, and that we focus more on understanding the principles that makes things work than the techniques themselves, people have e-mailed me asking me if I could explain these principles in more detail.

Last year I spent several months writing about the “Top Ten Principles of Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei.” Now it is time to cover the next ten most important principles. Of course, one must keep in mind that while these principles are officially less important than first ten, in actuality they are just as important. The truth is that in many cases understanding and executing them properly is essential in order to make the “top ten” fully effective. In other words, they are just another piece of a very complex puzzle illustrating how sceintific martial techniques really are.

Unfortunately, trying to explain many of these principals in writing is very difficult, since many can’t be explained in words alone. However, I will try my best to describe these principles for the “blog” readers, using words, charts and pictures.

Keep in mind though, that in order to sometimes fully understand a principle you have to also understand other principles that relate to it. Most principles aren’t fully useable on their own, and have to be integrated with others.

ANGLE OF EFFICIENCY

This principle is pretty much self-descriptive. Employing “Angle of Efficiency” is literally learning to use the proper angles in order to be more efficient, in both offense and defense. This principle basically refers to utilizing the old maxim that, “less is more.”

The American Kenpo dictionary defines “Angle of Efficiency,” as:

“Refers to (1) the positioning of your feet and/or body whereby the alternatives in terms of weapon availability are increased proportionately; (2) the positioning of one's body to make a particular attack more operative or effective.”

This is a good definition, but it's too limited. The principle as employed in the art I teach encompasses a lot more. The main difference being that we don’t restrict the principle to just striking or blocking.

In the art I teach, the principle of “Angle of Efficiency” is applied to all aspects of combat. This means knowing everything from the proper angles to attack joints, to the proper angles that will align a body to set up projections (throws).

However, all applications of this principle share one thing in common. These angles of efficiency are all based on the fact that martial art techniques are founded on specific mathematical formulas and geometry. Such formulas that can be diagramed and calculated to show specific body geometry, anatomical strengths and weaknesses, torques, points of balance, and stress points that help a martial artist be energy efficient (in terms of useful work per quantity of effort).

Unfortunately, attempting to describe every angle of efficiency possible, in every combat situation possible, would take too long. That would be something worthy of a book. It is also something one has to experience first-hand in order to fully comprehend and appreciate the nuisances.

My best advice for people, who wish to really learn to be more efficient in their fighting forms, is:

1. Study anatomy, physics, and physiology. This means more than just a cursory glance at the material.
2. Trial and error practice. Play around with techniques you know and see if changing an angle makes things work better or not.
3. Ask your instructor specific questions relating to the application of techniques. (Note: some instructors are more open to such questions than others.) However, never settle for an answer that doesn’t make sense.
4. If you’re learning a technique and you scratch your head in disbelief, or mutter the phrase you would never do that in “real life,” examine the technique in greater detail. Maybe a small change in angles will make the technique more effective, or at least justify the time it takes to learn it.
5. Search out and read texts that are well researched--texts where the author has really studied the material they are discussing, and in which they display a very good understanding of the actual sciences that make them work. (Keep in mind that just because someone is labeled an expert or a master doesn’t mean they know a lot or have the ability to articulate what they do know.)
   For starters I recommend:
   • “Practical Chin Na A Detailed Analysis of the Art of Seizing and Locking,” by Zhao Da Yuan ISBN#1-883175-02-X
   • “The Secrets of Judo A Text For Instructors and Students,” by Jiichi Watanabe and Lindy Avakian ISBN#0-8048-1631-X
   • “Total Aikido The Master Course,” by Gozo Shioda ISBN#4-7700-2058-9
6. The most important factor of all…. Practice, practice, practice!

The Second Top Ten Principles Of Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei - #2 Angle of Cancellation

Since I first stated that the techniques taught at my school were based on principles, and that we focus more on understanding the principles that makes things work than the techniques themselves, people have e-mailed me asking me if I could explain these principles in more detail.

Last year I spent several months writing about the “Top Ten Principles of Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei.” Now it is time to cover the next ten most important principles. Of course, one must keep in mind that while these principles are officially less important than first ten, in actuality they are just as important. The truth is that in many cases understanding and executing them properly is essential in order to make the “top ten” fully effective. In other words, they are just another piece of a very complex puzzle illustrating how sceintific martial techniques really are.

Unfortunately, trying to explain many of these principals in writing is very difficult, since many can’t be explained in words alone. However, I will try my best to describe these principles for the “blog” readers, using words, charts and pictures.

Keep in mind though, that in order to sometimes fully understand a principle you have to also understand other principles that relate to it. Most principles aren’t fully useable on their own, and have to be integrated with others.

ANGLE OF CANCELLATION

The simple definition of this principle is: a “controlled” angle that places one’s opponent in a position that minimizes or even nullifies their ability to attack with weapons (hands, feet, etc.), use force, or launch a counter attack.

This “controlled” angle can be created in various ways. One can directly meet the force head-on, collide with the force at a point away from the apex, intercept/deflect the force, ride the force, elongate the force, or any combination of the above.

In a broader definition, "Angle of Cancellation" can also relate to kuzushi (breaking balance). In this case, "Angle of Cancellation" refers to the geometric angle one needs to apply in order to disrupt the opponent’s equilibrium and place them in a state where they cannot maintain or regain their stability/balance.

Basically, the principle of “Angle of Cancellation” is geometry combined with laws of physics. It is based on the presumption that all martial art techniques can be diagramed on graph paper and mathematically calculated.

Fortunately for those of us who lack mathematical skills to figure these calculations on their own, these formulas have been tried and tested throughout the ages via trail and error--trial and error that can’t be duplicated in the modern age.

The Second Top Ten Principles of Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugeu - #1 Clocking The Room

Since I first stated that the techniques taught at my school were based on principles, and that we focus more on understanding the principles that makes things work than the techniques themselves, people have e-mailed me asking me if I could explain these principles in more detail.

Last year I spent several months writing about the “Top Ten Principles of Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei.” Now it is time to cover the next ten most important principles. Of course, one must keep in mind that while these principles are officially less important than first ten, in actuality they are just as important. The truth is that in many cases understanding and executing them properly is essential in order to make the “top ten” fully effective. In other words, they are just another piece of a very complex puzzle illustrating how sceintific martial techniques really are.

Unfortunately, trying to explain many of these principals in writing is very difficult, since many can’t be explained in words alone. However, I will try my best to describe these principles for the “blog” readers, using words, charts and pictures.

Keep in mind though, that in order to sometimes fully understand a principle you have to also understand other principles that relate to it. Most principles aren’t fully useable on their own, and have to be integrated with others.

Clocking The Room

The principle of “Clocking the Room” is an easy concept to understand, but very hard to apply in real life, especially under stressful conditions. While it’s a principle discussed in numerous martial art styles, few practitioners ever try to develop the skill to its full potential.

In the Budo arts the principle of “Clocking the Room,” is often referred to as Metsuke, (Seeing Eye / Mind’s Eye), or more specifically "Enzan-no-metsuke" (Gazing at a Distant Mountain), an expression referring to a specific method of looking at one’s entire surroundings instead of focusing on just one aspect of it.

Essentially, the principle of “Clocking the Room” teaches and instills a method of “relaxed vision,” where the practitioner learns to rely on their peripheral vision instead of their centralized vision. Of course, in order to understand this fully one must first understand how our eyes work.

Lets start off with the presupposition that over 85% of the information relayed to the brain comes via the eyes, 9% via the ears, and 4% via the other senses. Let's also presuppose that the eyes can be fooled, or tricked into believing things that aren’t really true.

Take for example the below picture. Which line is longer? Measure them and find out.

Okay that example was simple, but how about the below illustration? What do you see?

Do you see a fish on a plate, or the head of a woman?

Clearly, these examples are intended to fool you. However, visual miscues often happen due to natural physical reactions, especially when one is under stress. One of the most common forms of a visual miscue is called “Tunnel Vision.”

“Tunnel Vision,” is a term that basically refers to s a state where one’s visual field is severely constricted, or to be more precise, “Tunnel Vision” is a state where one suffers a loss of peripheral vision resulting in a constricted circular tunnel-like field of vision.

For example, as a police officer I can’t tell you how many times I came across victims who could clearly describe the weapon they were threatened with, but couldn’t even start to describe the person wielding it. They focused so much on the wepom that was all they saw. In addition one would be surprised how often descriptions of these weapons are distorted. What often turns out to be a small pocket knife, is often perceived as a machete or a sword.

While "Tunnel Vision" can be caused by a variety of reasons (drugs, alcohol, glaucoma, etc), it is most often associated with extreme fear, distress, or intense physical fighting. Because of these common associations, learning a skill such as “Clocking the Room” is an absolute necessity to be an effective martial artist. Nothing is worse than reacting to a visual miscue, espicialy in a life or death situation.

At this point, and without trying to get two scientific, one has to understand how vision works, and the two components that make up the visual system.

Human eyes basically work in the same manner as a camera. The front parts of the eye (cornea, pupil, and lens) are clear and like a camera’s lenses allow light to enter to the back of the retina, which is like the film. When the focused light reaches the retina, a picture is taken and messages are sent to the brain through the optic nerve.

The retina has two parts, the peripheral retina and the macula. The macula is very small and located near the optic nerve. The macula is specialized for high acuity vision. This is often referred to as “Central Vision.”

The large area that surrounds the macula and makes up 95% of the retina is called the peripheral retina. The peripheral retina gives us vision to the side of the head, which is called “Peripheral Vision.”

Although central and peripheral vision are both components of the visual system, peripheral vision is a subconscious function, independent of central vision, whose primary responsibility is to orient an individual to one’s environment. That is to say, one could utilize central vision by reading, (a conscious action) while simultaneously obtaining sufficient cues with their peripheral vision to walk (a subconscious function).

Obviously, there is no argument that central vision is better suited for detailed vision. However, peripheral vision is better for detecting motion and is relatively strong in low light or the dark, when the lack of color cues and lighting make cone cells (receptors found in the macula) less useful. This feature of peripheral vision makes understanding and utilizing peripheral vision in combat a lot more important for reacting and avoiding attacks.

Central Vision

Central vision (Foveal vision) is the normal mode of vision during daylight conditions and can basically be described as straight-ahead vision, about 0 – 15 degrees from center.

Central vision is the work of the macula, which is a small area in the center of the retina that contains a high density of color-sensitive receptors known as cones. These cones are nerves cells that are sensitive to light, fine detail, and color. They are primarily responsible for object recognition, reading, watching TV, driving, and other activities where vision is of primary importance, (surgery for example).

In other words, central vision is sort of like seeing the world in high definition. However, because of its limited field a lot of surrounding information goes unnoticed.

In addition, the neural pathways associated with using central vision are associated with the arousal of the Sympathetic nervous system (fight or flight, and stress), which is in contrast to peripheral vision that is linked with the Parasympatheic nervous system (relaxation and calmness).

Peripheral Vision

Peripheral vision is the part of vision that occurs outside the center of our gaze. It accounts for 80% of the information that helps guide us through space. This region contains a mixture of cones and rods and does not provide as high a resolution as does the fovea.

The most important difference between central vision and peripheral vision is that peripheral vision emphasizes movement rather than form. Objects are less focused.

For example, as we walk, objects in our direction of motion seem to expand slowly from the center of view, while objects beside us (those in the peripheral field) pass us quickly. This rapid movement is difficult for a precise visual system to track accurately, and in order to make sense of the information gathered in the peripheral field, comparisons are made based on differences in movement.

These comparisons are then merged forming a conceptual picture of the world around us, based on clear concepts and memories of what we would see if we choose to look directly in that direction. In other words, a lot of peripheral vision is not truly visual but actually more conceptual.

The result of combining all of this with the information processed by central vision is that the mind creates a unified visual experience. Thus we have the ability to see the world all around us.

Clearly, using peripheral vision for the martial artists has benefits, since martial arts practitioners are taught to react to movement. One can’t block a punch or evade a kick if they don’t see it coming--or if they see it coming to late.

In addition, if one were to use only central vision to fight their opponent, they would not have the ability to see other potential threats since all their attention is fixed at one point. This is why topics about awareness of one’s surroundings are so often discussed in self-defense.

Another point, which is often not mentioned or discussed, is that using peripheral vision allows the martial arts practitioner to move their head less. That might not sound very important but it is. While many Karate practitioners are taught that the head always leads the body when doing kata, moving the head in a real fight can be hazardous.

First of all, many people aim for the head when striking. Just watch a real fight--like many of those posted on Youtube.com or any professional mixed martial arts match. If the head moves, that movement can be tracked.

This is especially true when applying evasion techniques or soft, “no-touch,” blocks.

Example:

This technique is one method taught to evade a midline attack or downward cut to the head. It is basically nothing more than a cross-step to the side. However, the lower torso does all the motion, and the head and shoulders remain fixed. By only moving the lower torso the evasion is almost impossible to perceive. Further more, since the upper torso remains fixed, there is no stimulus for reactive tracking from the aggressor.

The second reason why not moving the head is important is because things can remain in sharper focus if your head and eyes do not move. A lot of the flitching one witnesses in a martial arts class is not attributable to fear; it is simply a result of the eyes trying to maintain and/or focus on a fast moving object.

An example that illustrates this best, and that most of us have witnessed first hand, is when a fly buzzes around our head. As the fly approaches our face we pull our head back and away. Clearly, a fly is no threat, but the initial movement is often picked up peripherally and the head adjusts to focus on what the incoming object is. Since the fly is moving forward towards the face, the head moves back and away in direct relation to the speed of the incoming object in order to initially focus on the object and then to maintain focus. Basically, we flinch to focus.

The last reason why moving the head can be hazardous is because when one moves their head they also tend to move their body. That may not sound like much of an issue, but small movements of the torso can certainly change the effectiveness of a technique, especially a technique that relies on proper body alignment to be optimal.

Torso movement can also affect balance, which can be used against you offensively.

If these reasons are not enough to instill the benefits of using peripheral vision, maybe the fact that learning to rely on peripheral vision helps one relax during a stressful situation will. Clearly, a more relaxed demeanor allows a person to better actualize and respond to specific actions in a productive manner.

In addition, a relaxed demeanor, an almost lackadaisical gaze at one’s opponent, can have clear psychological advantages. Outwardly displaying a presence of indifference, even boredom at the events taking place, can either make one’s opponent become over confident or extremely weary. In either case, the attacker either does too much or to little, creating an advantageous situation for the defender.

To learn to access and optimize peripheral vision takes a lot of practice. One should start by looking a point directly in front of you, and without moving your head, or eyes, relax and let your vision spread out as wide as it can to both sides.

A drill we employ at the school to work on peripheral vision takes three students. One student stands in the middle and the other two stand approximately an arms length away on each side.

Once the center student relaxes his gaze he is asked if he can see the two other students. If the answer is yes, both of the other students take one step to the rear. If the student in the center still has some awareness of their location, the process is repeated until both students disappear completely.

Of course in order to do this drill properly, the center student cannot search (look for) the other two. The center student must maintain his head position as well as his relaxed state. The center student must always look forward, though focused on no particular object.

The advanced form of this drill starts off in the same manner. However, once the students on each side disappear from view things change. These students then take one more step to the rear at a 45-degree angle. After that they either throw an object at the student in the center or advance towards them in order to attack him.

The object here is to teach the person in the center to pick up the threatening movement peripherally and react properly to it. It sounds easy, but its not. Often the body wants to move in the wrong direction or hesitates while trying to completely process what it going on.

Over time, and with proper practice, one can increase their ability to pick things up peripherally. Sometimes the results can be dramatic. Of course along with learning how to pick things up visually comes a new heightened sense of awareness, precise coordinated body movement, and an increase in reaction time (less hesitation).

Experts

“Don't be buffaloed by experts and elites.
Experts often possess more data than judgment.
Elites can become so inbred that they produce hemophiliacs who bleed to death as soon as they are nicked by the real world.”

Collin Powell

“The difference between school and life?
In school, you're taught a lesson and then given a test.
In life, you're given a test that teaches you a lesson.”

Tom Bodett

In this day of the Internet, where so many claim to be an expert on any given topic discussed in many forums, I really wonder just what the word “expert” means. I questioned this even more during times when a self-professed “expert” states something as fact, when there is a clear preponderance of evidence to suggest the contrary.

You know what I mean, don’t you?

You know the guy, the expert who claims adamantly that his way is the only way, but offers no evidence to support his claims. Or the expert who spouts off statistics, but never mentions what study or organization gathered these statistics. Or wose yet someone who perpetuates a common belief/myth (such as that Karate is from Japan) as fact though evidence suggests a totally different conclusion (like Karate actually originated in Okinawa).

Another factor I question about expertise is what qualifications must one have in order to be a true expert in any field. Can a person be a real expert in raising children if they have never had any? Is an expert on Western Medicine qualified to give expert opinion regarding whether Traditional Chinese Medicine (acupuncture) works or not? Can someone truly be an expert on race relations if they’ve never felt racial oppression or prejudice?

I guess what I’m really asking is at what point does one go from expressing a personal belief to an informed opinion to that of the expert?

Unfortunately, the dictionary definition of the word “expert” isn’t enough to satisfy my curiosity. Basically all the dictionary explanation states is:

“1. A person with a high degree of skill in or knowledge of a certain subject. 2. Having or demonstrating great skill, dexterity, or knowledge as the result of experience or training.”

American Heritage Dictionary

Undoubtedly, there are real experts who willingly share their knowledge on the Internet. However, more often that not, I believe many individuals who profess to be experts really aren’t. I believe this because of several factors, the main one being how bent out of shape these self-professed experts get when you ask them for their qualifications, or present them with a fact that goes against their stated position.

In my opinion, I often doubt many of them have any actual professional experience in the topic they are discussing. I suspect that, like myself, they often speak mainly from what they’ve read, what they’ve learned from discussing the topic with others, and what’s been presented on TV.

Now, I’m not saying some of these individuals may not have some personal working experience on the topics they discuss. Take, for example, a person who has done Karate for ten years. He clearly has experience. However, though he may have experience, his knowledge may be only limited to what his instructor has exposed him to, or material related to his particular style. When that individual discuses Karate with others, his experience is limited to one facet of a larger collective, and I don’t believe that qualifies to talk about Karate in general, especially as an expert.

Of course, I also question if personal experience alone is enough to make someone an expert on any topic. I wonder this because I’ve met a lot of self-taught individuals who clearly exhibit expertise in their field. Instead of formal training/study they honed their craft by trail and error, and while they might not do things according to the book, their results are the same.

This of course leads to the question about how much formal education coupled with real world experience one needs to become an expert. That’s a little harder for me to determine, since there are numerous variables to consider. Such as:

1. Length of study
2. Real world application of studied material
3. Years of experience
4. Advanced study / Continued education
5. Length of time since experiences were last applied

Take myself for example. I like to consider myself as educated, well-read, semi articulate, with varied interests. I like reading and studying all sorts of topics, and my mind is often full of trivial/useless facts and statistics I’m just dying to find a use for. I also like debating issues, and finding facts to support my position.

When I write an essay, I don’t just write what ever comes out of my head at the moment I actually do a lot of serious research on the topic. I do that because I’ll be the first to admit I don’t know everything. The last thing I want to do is write something that others will read which is total nonsense, or utterly untrue. I also spend a lot of time researching my topics because in all honesty I often prefer the research phase to the actual work involved to put all my research together and write the essay.

In my professional life I’ve been a peace officer (15 years), an investigator for the county court (almost 7 years), building manager (over 10 years), and martial arts teacher (going on my 15th year). During these professions I have had to study a lot, pass many exams, and have done a lot of learning the hard way: trial and error.

I have also had to testify in court several times, for various reasons related to my jobs. PPer the Superior Court of San Francisco and San Mateo County it's on record that I’m an “expert” on determining if people are under the influence or a controlled substance, and how the body will react during a fight and to various strikes to specific targets. It has also been stipulated that I am knowledgeable enough to give “expert opinion” on the fighting arts in general, police procedure, nightclub security, and tenant right issues.

Now I’m not bragging, I about to make several points.


Point #1 -

I haven’t been a peace officer in almost 14 years so my “working” knowledge of police procedures is antiquated. Numerous changes have certainly occurred since I retired.

In addition, my knowledge was only related to local departments, and police procedures in New York may be very different than those of San Francisco, or agencies in San Mateo County, California.

Furthermore, even though I may read up on the topic and try to stay informed, is it fair to still consider myself an expert on police procedures now.

Clearly, I know more than the average person, but where does one draw the line between knowledgeable and expertise.


Point #2 -

The same is true for dealing with suspects that are under the influence of a controlled substance. I can’t even remember the last time I used that skill, or made an arrest based on my training. I believe I could still make an informed guess, but I wouldn’t lay my reputation as an expert on that assumption.

Once again while I may keep myself updated on new methods, the signs and symptoms of drug interactions within the body, and other facts related top the topic, with out putting this information into practical daily use what level of “expert” am I.


Point #3 -

As an investigator I spent a lot of time investigating homicides. I could certainly teach someone how to do the job, but I’m no expert on every facet of homicide investigation.

I may know how to collect evidence, but I’d be lost trying to process/test it. I may understand the motives that drove a particular suspect to commit murder, but I have no formal training in the psychology of killers.

Once again I may have more experience than the average person, but am I an expert on every facet of homicide investigations? Am I an expert on Homicide investigations? According to the dictionary definition I am.

My point with all of these examples is just because I’ve had experience in something and maybe even continued to keep myself abreast of new information, procedural changes, and other related information still doesn’t mean I’m an expert. Things change, old theories are replaced by new theories, and what once may have been considered science fiction (traveling to the moon) may be science fact today.

I mean how many five year old kids of my generation ever imagined there would be home computers, cell phones, or Nintendo Wii.

All that my experiences mean is that I may have a better understanding of the material compared to someone who has never been a police officer, done investigations, or been exposed to the things I’ve been exposed too.

The question shouldn’t be if I’m an expert on any topic, but if I am more credible when I discuss a point based on my life experience?

I, for one, place more weight and credibility on one’s experiences than those who just learn things from a book or TV. While some may disagree with that belief, the fact of the matter is there is a big difference between the way things are taught, and the way things actually get done in real life.

My older son is facing such a case scenario. Currently he is in Paramedic school, where they teach him things according to a certain set criteria. Everything has to be done in a specific progression from “A” to “Z.” In order to pass exams students are not allowed to deviant from strict structured protocols.

However, when my son takes ride-a-longs with the local paramedics they do things quite differently than what he is taught at paramedic school. Sure they have certain procedures to follow, but they don’t follow a set progression of questions and tasks. In other words they take short cuts, adjust to the situation, and do things in ways that if attempted by a paramedic student would cause them to be flunked.

Real world experience has taught these working paramedics that not everything case can be “handle by the book,” and at times in order to save someone one must think outside the box.

This of course leads me to another issue regarding expertise. Is someone who studies a subject, learns proper text book procedures, passes exams, and is able to spout facts and statistics more of an expert than someone with real world skills who applies this knowledge on a daily basis?

I mean who would you rather have working on you in an emergency, the A+ student paramedic graduate, or the guy who has been a paramedic for several years? Or to put it another way, the novice with no experience, or the veteran who knows what has to be done and can make adjustments as needed.

Further more, when does one become an expert? Is it a within 6 months of starting a job and applying that knowledge, after a year, or after 10 years?

The problem with the word, “expert,” is that it is subjective. Its one of those words that gets thrown around a lot, and few people who claim to be one are ever asked to put up or shut up.

Now don’t get me wrong. Like I said, there are real experts who offer their opinion on the Internet, and they have a lot of valuable information to share. The only problem is, one has to wade through a lot of misinformation/half-truths to find the factual stuff.

Basically, I try and live by the adage; don’t believe everything you hear or read. Learn to be selective, and learn to examine where the source of the information comes from.

I’ve also learned that just because someone claims to be an expert, maybe even is an legitimate expert on a topic, doesn’t always mean they are right. Human frailty being what it is, even real experts are often prejudicial and one sided. As Thomas Sowell stated, “For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert; but for every fact there is not necessarily an equal and opposite fact.”

Lastly, and maybe most importantly, I’ve also learned that when ever discussing something on the Internet, no matter how much I may feel I know on the subject, or how many actual facts I may possess to support my position, it is always safer to express myself as if were only an opinion. Let others take it as fact if they elect to do so.

Chimps With Spears

Chimps with spears! Oh my! What’s next; chimps on horseback using guns? Those damn dirty apes!

For those of you who missed the news reports last week, chimpanzees in Fongoli, Senegal have been observed making and using spears to hunt other primates.

Researchers observed female and adolescent chimpanzees actually select certain sticks, strip them of heir leaves, break them to a certain length, and then chew the ends to make them sharp. They then used these primitive spears to hunt by stabbing the ends into holes where they believe prey was hiding.

(A photo of an actual chimpanzee spear (Journal Current Biology))

To clarify, these chimps were observed using these spears to “actually forcibly stab into holes.” This is a very different behavior than poking or probing for food, which chimps had already been known to do.

In fact, one chimp was actually observed killing a bush-baby (a type of lemur, see below photo) by stabbing it with its spear.

The importance of this discovery, which was funded by the National Geographic Soceity and reported by Iowa State Assistant Professor of Anthropolgy Jill Prutez and graduate student Paco Bertolani of the University of Cambridge in England, is that this is the first time a non-himan species was observed habitually using tools for the specific act of hunting.

More importantly, this discovery has anthropologists such as Ms. Prutez believing that this behavior, which is believed to be a direct result of the unusual harsh living conditions these particular chimpanzees face, may exhibit similarities to early hominids and the way they used tools six million years ago.

Video:Chimps Make and Use "Spears" to Hunt

Interestingly, this behavior of making and using spears seems limited to female and adolescent chimpanzees. So far, only one adult male has been observed hunting in this particular manner. Per Ms. Prutez:

“The observation that individuals hunting with tools include females and immature chimpanzees suggests that we should rethink traditional explanations for the evolution of such behavior in our own lineage.”

I find that assertion intriguing, albeit impossible to ever prove. However, before we start re-writing history books, it should be noted that these researchers also believe the reason female and adolescent chimps are using these spears is because of their weaker and smaller stature compared to full-grown males they have to compete with. Certainly, the use of a spear would be a great equalizer, and by using weaponry female and adolescent chimps would not have to rely on their strength alone to catch and kill prey.

Naturally, a discovery like this, and it’s apparent link to females of the species, has led some researchers, such as Dr. William McGrew of Cambridge University to make an even more extreme assertion about gender roles in evolution. Based on the fact that female chimps primarily use tools for collecting plants and invertebrate foods, and now have been observed using spear like weapons to hunt, it may be likely that the origins of human technology started with females.

While I have absolutely no problem agreeing with the assertion that a female chimp wielding a spear could actually compete with her male counter-part, I’m not ready to jump on the bandwagon with those researchers that say we may need to reexamine our evolutionary history based on this discovery. That’s not because I disagree with the notion that there could have, or ever were spear wielding female hunters in our prehistoric past either. My opinion is simply based on the numerous anthropologic studies, which have shown that in most primitive cultures work related to obtaining food is clearly divided; women for the most part gather food and tend crops, while men hunt.

However, how specific gender roles were in prehistoric times is unknown, and it is very possible females took a more active role in hunting and tool development. I mean why not. Female predators hunt for themselves, and man is a predatory species.

[Comment: Some research indicates that the hunting vs. gathering male/female division of labor only occured in our "modern" human species and might have been one of the reasons we out-competed Neanderthals. So perhaps in such earlier human species (and the "missing links" between us and earlier apes) such a thesis would make more sense. --Spencer]

As Pruetz states:

"It's classic in primates that when there is a new innovation, particularly in terms of tool use, the younger generations pick it up very quickly. The last ones to pick up are adults, mainly the males."

Needless to say, if one believes Ms Pruetz’s statement is true, and this is just the start of a new behavior, maybe within a generation or two all Fongoli chimpanzees will be wielding spears.

Wouldn’t that be something, and what would it lead to next?

If chimpanzees do start wielding spears, does that mean they will start hunting bigger and bigger game, and that over time their brains will evolve making them even more human than they appear to be now?

Maybe researchers are right, and it's true that we humans our watching our evolution repeat itself.

Clearly, evidence exists that we are genetically similar to chimpanzees, and one study has gone so far as to state that it may have been possible that chimps and early humans even mated and gave birth to hybrid species.

In other reports such as “Chimps Learned Tool Use Long Ago Without Human Help” by Heather Whipps (Special to LiveScience posted: 12 February 2007 http://www.livescience.com/animalworld/070212_chimp_tools.html) clearly asserts that chimpanzees learned to make tools on their own volition some 4,300 years ago. An assertion that shows a parallel intelligence to humans, and contradicts the belief that chimpanzees are just imitating behaviors they witnessed humans doing.

(Close-up of a so-called 'chimpanzee stone hammer' under excavation. Credit: University of Calgary)

Of course, more research needs to be done, and one must keep in mind that reports linking primate behavior to those of are early hominid ancestors is nothing new. More importantly, one must remember that these reports are not limited to chimpanzees either.

Back in September of 2005, a report titled “Gorillas Photographed Using Tools” by Bjorn Carey (LiveScience Staff Writer posted: 29 September 2005 http://www.livescience.com/animalworld/050929_gorilla_tools.html) also made comparisons between gorillas using tools to measure water depth and as a support device/bridge to that of our human ancestors.

As Leah waded into the pool, she frequently used the branch in her righthand to test the pool’s depth. Credit: Thomas Breuer/WCS/PLoS Biology	Efi using a branch for support as she searches for herbs. Credit: Thomas Breuer/WCS/PLoS Biology

Now before anyone gets worried that we humans are soon going to face an army of “evolved” spear wielding chimpanzees, it should be noted that similar behavior has been observed before, in areas such as Gombe, Tanzania. Per Ian Gilby, who studies chimpanzee hunting at Harvard University, chimpanzees are frequently observed sticking sticks into holes of trees to make the holes bigger so they can reach in and get honey and small birds. However, Mr. Gilby, also stated that if the chimpanzees from Senegal are actually “sharpening” the ends of their sticks that would indeed be a new, never before seen behavior.

What Mr. Gilby is basically stating is the same question many researchers have; is this behavior really new or just behavior already observed countless times? I guess the answer to that question will depend on the results of further investigation, and more first hand accounts of this behavior by different researchers.

In the meantime, while waiting for further evidence to support either conclusion, I don’t find it that hard to believe that some chimpanzees are using spears to hunt. Chimpanzees often display an intellectual capacity and complexity we humans tend to overlook. I think people really don’t want to think about how closely our two species are really related.

As someone who enjoys studying anthropology, and has spent years researching the roots of martial arts, I find the correlation of this discovery to that of early man very interesting and something I will certainly follow as more reports are published.

However, as interesting as the above report was, what intrigued me the most about this discovery was another report I read during the same week that is in direct contrast to this story of “chimp evolution” (so to speak). That story was a report recently issued indicating that the average US high school graduate can’t read or do arithmetic at even a basic level.

This “dumbing down,” or dare I say apparent signs of intellectual de-evolution among American youths, makes me really wonder if the writers of the movie, The Planet of the Apes,” were onto something.

I means if chimps are getting smarter and becoming more like us…. Well you get the idea.

No-Touch Knockouts – Why do I care?

For those that are regular readers, and for those that have stumbled onto this blog and have read a few of my previous posts regarding the no-touch knockout controversy, one may wonder why I care.

I ask myself that very question all the time. I mean why does it bug me so much? Why can’t I just overlook the nonsense, and just forget about it? WHY!?

Well the answer isn’t because I’m such a fine upstanding citizen or that I want to see truth and justice prevail. It’s not because I think my purpose in life is to expose fraud and corruption where and when I can. And its not because I receive accolades from my martial art contemporaries, martial art students, fellow workers, family, or friends because I’m willing to fight the good fight. To be honest most don’t care.

No, the reason is more personal; I simply take offense to the idea, and feel this affects the credibility of the martial arts in general. Clearly with the current state of martial arts, where schools exist that churn out black belts like McDonalds sells burgers, we in the industry don’t need this.

The last thing we martial artists need are people discrediting what we do, and giving the public further ammunition to ridicule what we do. Hollywood has done enough of that already, by highlighting the flash and the fluff, as well as the mystical more-than-real world fighting techniques that work.

I learned a long time ago that credibility is everything, and one’s reputation is all one will ever truly possess in this lifetime.

Now some will laugh at the above, once again questioning the legitimacy regarding the history of my school. However, I’m the first to admit that what little information I’ve pieced together has enough holes to leave room for lots of speculation and suspicion.

I for one would carefully scrutinize someone else with the same story as mine. However, I would never be flipped enough to call them an outright fraud in public forums as others have done to me. Without meeting the person, seeing their skills first hand I wouldn’t be comfortable or feel justified making any assertions.

Anyone who knows me will tell you I’m the first to stringently question the information my teacher gave me, but it’s all I’ve got to work with. I’m also the first to say there is absolutely no proof to verify anything. I’m not trying to deceive anyone by saying there is. I tell people what I do and do not know and let each individual believe what they want.

With that said, back to my point.

As any student of mine will tell you, I’m a big proponent of vital point striking. I believe understanding the various methods of applying vital point striking and other elements of Kyusho Jutsu is extremely important in maximizing the efficiency of ones martial art techniques.

My honest opinion is that you can’t call yourself a martial artist if you have no concept of them, or at the very least some basic tools to utilize them. All real authentic martial arts attack weak points of the body, and that is all the art of vital point striking is about.

I also realize that relying on vital points alone in a real fight is ludicrous. It’s borderline suicide. The art of vital point striking is nothing more than an enhancement system to viable techniques. The art of vital point striking is sort of like adding the whipped cream to the milkshake. You don’t need the whipped cream to make the milkshake taste good, but you want it anyway. It’s that little extra zing that makes the milkshake so much better.

So what is the connection between the art of vital pint striking and no-touch knockouts? The answer is simple; most proponents of no-touch knockouts are also proponents, even major figures—dare I say modern day pioneers—in the art and dissemination of vital point striking.

Given the fact that many people already questioned the validity of vital point striking as they presented it, and believe these proponents were frauds regarding that topic, imagine what they must think now.

Clearly, there is more proof to substantiate that vital points exit. Just spend a few minutes at a vital point class/seminar and your opinion regarding their existence will quickly change (note I didn’t say one’s opinion on their application in a real fight would; that requires a little more time).

My problem, the reason I’m so adamant regarding the topic of no-touch knockouts and extolling the insanity of this belief, is that those who perpetuate martial art myths such as this discredit all the real hard working martial artist who spend numerous years enduring physical hardship to hone their craft.

The martial arts are nothing mysterious or supernatural. They are all based on applied sciences. They were all tested and refined during a time when warriors actually utilized these skills.

To make martial arts something they are not, to take these skills and try to place them in a position akin to supernatural powers is just wrong. It’s a lie. It’s dishonest.

I can’t tolerate dishonesty, and I guess in the end that’s what really bothers me about this topic the most. Clearly, it’s the reason I can’t put this topic to rest.

Lastly, I dislike having to dispel preconceived notions potential students bring into my school. Explaining to someone that their belief, that what they’re searching for, does not, nor ever did exist is just not good for business.

No one likes or respects somebody who “bursts their bubble.”

Interesting Question – No Touch Knockouts Versus No-Touch Healing

"The problem here is a very practical one. Research costs money, and the skilled practitioners of these methods (Therapeutic Touch) are busy working as doctors, not as researchers to a high enough level of competency in these methods for the research to be effective. Yet if some enterprising body were to give sympathetic and careful attention to our claims, then I feel we would discover that we have an undreamed of tool available to us which I'm sure can be further extended and refined."

Anthony Scott-Morley, D.Sc., Ph.D., M.D. (alt. med), of Dorset, England

Recently there has been an interesting discussion on one of the martial arts forums asking why a person who believes that some people have the power to do no-touch healing would dismiss another's ability to do no-touch knockouts.

In other words, if one believes people can heal others by externalizing their energy (call it Chi, Ki, or whatever) from a distance, why can’t that same form of externalized energy be used in combat and to knock people out?

Good question.

Now, I never considered this debate before, and call me a hard-ass, but I think both issues are nonsense. However, though I may tout the hard-line, I can see why people would have more faith and belief in no-touch healing than no-touch knockouts. In fact, there may even be some validity to their argument—possibly, but only the argument.

Now before you think I’m going soft and that I’m flip-flopping on my position, I am not. I still hold, and well forever hold until proven wrong, the position that neither method has any actual validity, and that there is absolutely no scientific information to indicate either works.

With that said though, I’m also aware of the “healing properties” of human touch and positive human interaction.

Of course I want to make the distinction clear. I believe touch, actual physical contact, can be therapeutic. In fact, I believe that touch is essential to the health and welfare of all human beings.

I also believe positive interaction among two or more individuals can also have many healing qualities. I mean, group therapy and “Twelve Step” programs are based on this belief. Clearly, if peer pressure can be blamed for causing one to engage in negative behavior, why can’t positive compassionate interaction help someone feel better about themselves and aid in their recovery?

Arguably, I guess the proponents of no touch healing can argue they provided the same benefits as group therapy, but on a on-to-one basis. Clearly, no-touch healing provides a healthy constructive interaction between practitioner and patient. Furthermore, treatment is designed to instill faith that one will get better and will feel better. This connection between mind and body has definite merit, and a positive outlook can do wonders when it comes to healing oneself.

With that said however, I don’t believe touch has the power to cure all ills. As therapeutic as touch may be, I don’t believe it can cure diseases such as cancer, like some proponents would suggest. Touch certainly can aid a person during their recovery, even ease their suffering, but it can’t cure them.

(For more information on the healing benefits of touch and studies relating to touch and healing I suggest going to Healing Touch International, Inc)

Of course this blog entry isn’t about actual touching to heal a person, it’s about no-touch healing.

I’m sure based on my opinion regarding the benefits of hands-on healing no one will be surprised when I say no-touch healing is a load of baloney. At least,it is in the way it is packaged and sold to the public. Sorry if being blatant offends someone, but its true. Quote all the studies you want, none of them prove its existence or even the possibility that there is some scientific evidence to support the faith people have in it.

Now, I’m not denying some people have benefited from such a treatment, but all that proves is the amazing power of the mind.

I forget which war this took place in, but a group of injured soldiers were once given sugar pills to relieve their pain instead of regular pain killers. Of course these soldiers weren’t told the pills were made of sugar. They were informed that these pills were the strongest pain reliever ever made, stronger than even morphine. Even so the pills had absolutely no medicinal properties a majority of the soldiers felt a reduction in their pain.

Now, we all know sugar won't decrease pain, and those soldiers that felt relief shouldn’t have felt any changes. However, they did. It worked because they believed what the doctors were telling them and had faith in the pills they were ingesting. Clearly, it was a case of mind over matter.

The same placebo effect can be account for many of the wonderful results attributed to no-touch healing. As Albert Schweitzer stated, “The greatest discovery of any generation is that human beings can alter their lives by altering the attitudes of their minds."

Now to be perfectly honest, I’m not very knowledgeable when it comes to the various forms of no-touch/faith healing methodologies that are out there. Basically, many of them sound the same to me, and most deal with spirituality more than science. Of course this link to spirituality isn’t such a surprise.

Many individuals believe in the power of prayer, and that God can heal them. In many cases, even when faced with eminent death, their spirituality is unwavering. I knew such an individual once who instead of taking the antibiotics his doctors prescribed waited for God to cure him. He prayed and his fellow Jehovahs prayed with him. They held hands to share energy, and although he got worse and worse, his faith remained absolute. The end result was that he died from an illness that could have been easily been cured with proper medical treatment. Basically, one could assert that his “faith” killed him.

Of course, that example is most probably why I have such a bias against the healing quality of faith on its own. That is why I’m adamant that without proof one should not extol the virtues of “faith healing” as a true method of healing anyone.

Yes, it’s a hard-line, but it's based on personal experience, and every thing I’ve ever read, heard from others in the medical profession, or seen on TV.

But I digress.

While I was reading the various posts debating no-touch healing versus no-touch knockouts, one particular method of healing was constantly referred to. That method is called Reiki.

Since Reiki seemed to be a major component of their discussion, I will address only that particular method in this essay, though I’m almost certain what I’m about to say applies to most other methods (magneto therapy, pranic healing color therapy, aroma therapy, music therapy, gems and stone therapy, etc).

Now I’ve heard of Reiki before, but really didn’t know enough about Reiki at the time this discussion was “heated” to make any fully informed comments., Now after several days of Internet research I think I can make a better, definitely more informed, opinion. And yes, the information presented here is just my opinion.

Before I start though, let me quote a description of Reiki I found on the International Center for Reiki Training website, (www.Reiki.org). Per their website they describe Reiki as:

Reiki is a Japanese technique for stress reduction and relaxation that also promotes healing. It is administered by "laying on hands" and is based on the idea that an unseen "life force energy" flows through us and is what causes us to be alive. If one's "life force energy" is low, then we are more likely to get sick or feel stress, and if it is high, we are more capable of being happy and healthy.
The word Reiki is made of two Japanese words - Rei which means "God's Wisdom or the Higher Power" and Ki which is "life force energy". So Reiki is actually "spiritually guided life force energy."

A treatment feels like a wonderful glowing radiance that flows through and around you. Reiki treats the whole person including body, emotions, mind and spirit creating many beneficial effects that include relaxation and feelings of peace, security and wellbeing. Many have reported miraculous results.

Reiki is a simple, natural and safe method of spiritual healing and self-improvement that everyone can use. It has been effective in helping virtually every known illness and malady and always creates a beneficial effect. It also works in conjunction with all other medical or therapeutic techniques to relieve side effects and promote recovery.

An amazingly simple technique to learn, the ability to use Reiki is not taught in the usual sense, but is transferred to the student during a Reiki class. This ability is passed on during an "attunement" given by a Reiki master and allows the student to tap into an unlimited supply of "life force energy" to improve one's health and enhance the quality of life.

Its use is not dependent on one's intellectual capacity or spiritual development and therefore is available to everyone. It has been successfully taught to thousands of people of all ages and backgrounds.

While Reiki is spiritual in nature, it is not a religion. It has no dogma, and there is nothing you must believe in order to learn and use Reiki. In fact, Reiki is not dependent on belief at all and will work whether you believe in it or not. Because Reiki comes from God, many people find that using Reiki puts them more in touch with the experience of their religion rather than having only an intellectual concept of it.

While Reiki is not a religion, it is still important to live and act in a way that promotes harmony with others. Dr. Mikao Usui, the founder of the Reiki system of natural healing, recommended that one practice certain simple ethical ideals to promote peace and harmony, which are nearly universal across all cultures.

Based on this above description I can certainly see why some people would believe in the value of such a healing method. However, while they claim to have no “dogma,” it certainly sounds like they do. Clearly, they are stating their opinions and ideas, which are founded on faith, in an authoritative manner (that’s the definition of dogma).

This description also claims believing in Reiki isn’t necessary in order to benefit from it. However, they fail to offer any verifiable proof of that assertion. They simply refer to the spiritual nature of Reiki to explain why it works. What if I’m not spiritual by nature? What if I don’t believe Reiki comes from God?

Furthermore, they assert that Reiki has been beneficial in “helping virtually every known illness and malady.” If this statement is true, where are the statistics, the scientific data showing cause and effect. In addition, what is the definition of “helpful?” I need more than a few testimonials by individuals who believe Reiki helped them before I can believe this stuff actually has merit.

Lets face it, you can find and elicit testimonials regarding just about any product or idea out there. The diet industry is one such example of this. You know the ads: I used the cheesecake diet and lost ten pounds in one week, so can you!

Granted, most websites that discuss Reiki give the disclaimer that Reiki should not be used as a sole means to cure anything. In fact, many websites encourage individuals to seek professional medical advice in addition to Reiki treatment.

I respect this disclaimer a lot, but it goes a long way to proving my point. If one is seeking professional medical treatment at the same time they do Reiki, how could they possibly tell which method is actually more effective?

For example, I’ve suffered chronic neck pain for over ten years. I’ve tried everything short of surgery to ease the pain and get some relief. Nothing seemed to work, and trust me I wanted to believe something would.

Well, several months ago my doctor finally prescribed a painkiller that I have to take daily, but which takes several weeks before becoming fully effective. Let's assume I would have gone for Reiki treatments during those weeks; would I now believe the Reiki made me feel better, or it was the medicine? Or was it a combination of the two?

Using the same logic as those that propagate Reiki, maybe the real reason I feel better now isn’t due to the pills. Maybe it is actually due to my new pillow, the fact I cut my hair really short and lessened the weight of my head, or maybe it was just the Twinkies I ingested. Sorry if that sounds antagonistic or I come off sounding like a jerk, but what if?

That’s the problem with this debate; there is a lack of proof, a lack of hard evidence to confirm or at least legitimize their claims. Most testimonials they present as fact are only based on the belief this works, not scientific study or serious long-term investigation.

Like I said I’m no expert on Reiki, and have no first hand experience regarding how this method is employed. Based on what I’ve read this treatment is either hands-on (light touch), no-touch, or a combination of both.

In either case, I discovered that there appears to be a direct correlation between Reiki and acupuncture/acupressure. Or in other words, many of the points used in Reiki to “transfer energy” are the same used in acupuncture, Shiatsu, and various other forms of massage.

I’m sure this correlation is no accident or fluke either, though I could hardly find any evidence of such a link on most Reiki websites. The topic is debated on some forums discussing Reiki though.

Now, I’m aware that acupuncture as a healing method also has its detractors and that explaining why it works can also border the mystical realm. However, I have lot more faith in acupuncture/acupressure than anything involving no-touch methodologies. At least with acupuncture there have been some major scientific studies to investigate why it works.

The flaw with the theory of Reiki, and other similar methods, is the spiritual component, a component that can’t be proven. This component is based solely on FAITH.

Any healing method that claims to transfer/channel universal life force needs to be scrutinized. What is this “universal life force?” Is there any proof such a thing exists? Are they referring to my aura, the radiation I naturally emit, heat transfer, or something else.

This claim is very similar to those who claim to have the power to knock someone out with out touching them. No-touch knockout proponents clearly state that they transfer and use life force (Chi) to knock people out. That is their assertion at least.

Of course, there are major differences between proponents of no-touch knockouts and no-touch healing methods such as Reiki. These differences mainly have to due with how both methods are taught, and that no-knock practitioners don’t claim their abilities will work on everyone, especially skeptics.

Since I have already discussed the later in previous posts, I’ll focus my attention on the differences each system has when it comes to learning and acquiring these skills.

According to the International Center for Reiki Training website, they claim learning to do Reiki is extremely simple, and anyone regardless of their intellect can do it. Per their website:

An amazingly simple technique to learn, the ability to use Reiki is not taught in the usual sense, but is transferred to the student during a Reiki class. This ability is passed on during an "attunement" given by a Reiki master and allows the student to tap into an unlimited supply of "life force energy" to improve one's health and enhance the quality of life.

Its use is not dependent on one's intellectual capacity or spiritual development and therefore is available to everyone. It has been successfully taught to thousands of people of all ages and backgrounds.

Now I had no idea what could possibly be giving during “attunement” but according to Wikipedia:

The Reiki attunement process is an awareness of self-empowerment usually involving initiation, spiritual ceremony and /or meditation with a specific purpose and intent to connect to the Universal Energy Source. Following and coming to understand this process is how one becomes a Reiki Healer. Being attuned to Reiki is purported to give one the ability to easily access the Reiki energy (Universal Life Force) for the purpose of healing a person or situation by realigning that person or situation's energy. Many believe that only a Reiki Master can give Reiki Attunements.

When the attunement is given, depending on the type of attunement, Reiki Symbols are placed into your Crown, Heart, and/or Palm Chakras. During the attunement, Chakras are opened and cleared. Reiki symbols are used and there is transference of Reiki energy during the attunement. Central to this process is the establishment of a connection with the source of Reiki.

Now I’m not sure what all of the above means, sounds like mumbo-jumbo to me, but it is certainly pretty complicated. I would have to believe it would take more than a weekend class to obtain such skills, even if that skill was on a beginner’s level.

Of course, the assertion that obtaining Reiki skills is easy is directly contrary to what no-touch knockout proponents say. In fact, learning to do no-touch knockouts, learning to focus one’s internal power and externalizing it is suppose to take years of arduous painstaking practice, and well as personal insight.

While I have been unable to find any specific information stating how practitioners of no-touch knockouts transmit their knowledge, I would assume it has to be akin to techniques taught to develop and build up one's Chi (internal power).

Of course whether one system is easy to learn and the other isn’t really isn’t important to the topic. That topic is why one would believe one method is real and the other is not. However, it shows a definite contrast in the average person’s ability to master something such as learning to externalize and channel energy.

From everything I’ve seen and read regarding both methods my opinion is you either believe in both, or neither. You can’t have it both ways.

In other words, if it is the realm of possibility to externalize energy at all, why is this ability only limited to good not evil?

The answer of course is more of an issue of morality than science. It is mush easier to accept something as fact when it is for the greater good, than when it is evil in nature. Fighting is, after all, considered evil.

In addition, a lot more people have been exposed to and accepted alternative methods of healing than have practiced martial arts, or been exposed to practitioners that claim to be able to do no-touch knockouts.

Whether no-touch healing works or not, I can’t say for certain. My opinion is that is does not and I wouldn’t trust these methods if I were ill. However, if they work for others, that’s great.

That of course is also my opinion when I listen to people who adamantly say they have been knocked out by a no-touch knockout, or claim to have felt something unexplainable during an attempted no-touch knockout.

My final thought on this topic is simple; believe what you will, just don’t tell me there’s proof when there is none. Don’t try and convert me. Let me enjoy my skepticism, until I’m proven wrong. I’ll be the first to admit my mistake when I see the real proof.

Lastly, don’t try to tell me one exists and the other doesn’t. Either accept both or keep quiet. After all you’re talking about the same abilities, used for different purposes.



***** Please note: I am not clear if Reiki is a no-touch method of healing, or if some practitioners just elect to use Reiki in a no-touch manner. Photos on the Internet showing Reiki practitioners clearly depict some do make physical contact and others do not.

My opinion on the effectiveness, or I should say lack of effectiveness clearly lies on the practitioners who practice no-touch versions of this method.

Since I believe Reiki is akin to acupuncture/acupressure those that touch are employing a method that has more validity, since as I said numerous times touch is beneficial to one’s overall all physical and mental health.

Faith – The Power Of Belief

“What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires — desires of which he himself is often unconscious.

If a man is offered a fact, which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it.

If, on the other hand, he is offered something, which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way.”

Bertrand Russell (05/18/1872 – 02/02/1970)
British philosopher, logician, and advocate for social reform.

My last few essays regarding No-Touch Knockouts (here, here, and here) have clearly conveyed my opinion. I don’t believe in any shape way or form that no-touch knockouts exist.

Fortunately, my opinion is clearly in the majority, and most people immediately dismiss this claim when they hear about it.

However, for whatever reason, there are many others who do believe such mystical—what certainly can only be considered fictional—things can occur.

The real question shouldn’t be whether no-touch knockouts exist; the question should be why do some individuals have the need to believe in such mystical things? What motivates them to believe?

Furthermore, why do these believers so vehemently argue about the validity of no-touch knockouts when faced with such overwhelming facts to the contrary?

The answer is all about, “FAITH.”

It’s their faith, their desire to believe in something, such as a higher power, that inspires them.

The American Heritage Dictionary defines the word faith as:

faith (f³th) n. 1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, an idea, or a thing. 2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. 3. Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance. 4. Often Faith. Theology. The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will. 5. The body of dogma of a religion. 6. A set of principles or beliefs. --idiom. in faith. Indeed; truly.

Clearly those that believe in no-touch knockout are confident this phenomenon exists.

They also see the potential value of such a technique for life-protection, as do I—if it were a reality.

Lastly, they also trust and admire, in almost cult like devotion, those who claim to have such powers and skills.

However, anyone approaching this topic logically would see there is no merit it to it, since there is absolutely on material evidence to support its existence.

That however, is not what faith/belief is all about. In most case faith/belief is often based on intangibles, and people who have faith in something, believe in something strongly, proof is not necessary.

For example, religion is based on faith. There is absolutely no proof of any deity, heaven or hell, after life, or reincarnation, yet people strongly believe. People claim to have experiences where they have communicated with the divine, seen the light, were touched by an angel, or been tempted by demonic forces. Furthermore, most religions of the world were founded and propagated by charismatic individuals who sought out others searching for a greater meaning to their life, and would be willing to embrace their message. Even at times, die for their message.

While I have no desire to discuss theology there are parallels to those that truly believe in mystical martial arts myths.

For starters these individuals are searching for something. Something on a higher level than the average person can attain. They want to rise above normality, and obtain a higher power. While most people are content with becoming warriors they want to become a Jedi.

They seek out like-minded individuals who exchange these ideals, and talk about amazing techniques they’ve personally witnessed or that a friend of a friend has witnessed. How cool would it be to know how to do that!?

Lastly, they seek out someone who has allegedly achieved these abilities. Someone who is willing to teach these skills, especially if you afford him the proper, respect, loyalty, and devotion someone in his position deserves. Someone who has the personality, magnetism, and mastery to further instill that these beliefs are actually fact not fiction. In other words, someone who is a guru.

The funny think about the power of faith and belief is that even when such a “guru” says something that debunks the myth, his followers and others who believe the same thing seldom get the message. Or they refute what was said; normally blaming others for misinterpreting what was actually meant.

This is apparent if one watches the YouTube.com video clip titled “Dillman Explains Chi KO Nullification.”

In this interview Mr. Dillman explains why a no-touch knockout attempted by his associate Leon Jay didn’t work. In this interview he clearly states that the technique failed because the subject was a “skeptic,” and was a “total non-believer.”

I’m sorry, but if a technique is viable, skepticism shouldn’t be a negating factor. I mean who would go to a fight counting on something like that, especially if the counter is just disbelief.

My interpretation of what Mr. Dillman is saying clearly indicates that no-touch knockouts don’t work.

Another proponent of no-touch knockouts, Harry Thomas “The Human Stun Gun” Cameron states that no-touch knockouts only work on 40% of the population and that “natural athletes are the toughest.”

First of all, I wouldn’t bet on something if it only had a 40% chance of winning. I certainly wouldn’t waste years and years trying to master such a thing, when there are so many other viable options to choose from.

Secondly, aren’t most soldiers akin to “trained athletes?” Isn’t that why soldiers spend so much time enduring physical fitness exercises during basic training? Does this also imply that if one should happen to fight a professional soccer player, a definite example of an athlete, a no-touch knockout may not work?

These are nothing more than excuses that come out when frauds are exposed. I see it, the majority of people who see these clips see it, but the faithful some how miss it.

Of course all of the blame shouldn’t be directed towards George Dillman, Harry Cameron, Yanagi Ryuken, and others like them. Their followers—the “true believers,” the guys who fall down when attacked, and claim to have felt “something”—are just as guilty, if not more so, of conning the unsuspecting public.

These individuals are the salesmen for such fraudulent claims. These are the individuals who unwittingly (hopefully) fool others into believing that such things are real.

These are the individuals who stroke the egos of the con-man, until he reaches a point where he even deludes himself into believing he has the actual power, the gift. Just look at the case of Yanagi Ryuken (see previous post).

Of course, accusing the “believer” of fraud isn’t fair. After all, he truly believes that such things exist. His belief, his need to believe, has been preyed on and manipulated.

The problem with faith and belief is that you can’t fight it with logic or reason. Because of this, there will always be those who will perpetuate and try to achieve the power of the supernatural. There will always be those who will prey upon such believers.

Furthermore, there will always be those who will vigorously and even fiercely defend what they believe to be true.

This means that debates like this will continue on, and lines will be crossed in the sand. For the most part, it’s really not worth all the anger and energy, not to mention time, both sides spend debating the topic.

The only true solution to the debate is to agree to disagree. After all, the believers can have faith and feel confident that one day the truth will be known by all.

No-Touch Knockout Fraud Exposed

You know, sometimes I just feel so out of the loop. How was I suppose to know that there was a perfect video circulating around that shows just how fraudulent the no-touch knockout hype is all about? Where are all the guys who normally send me these links?

Now, I’m not talking about the George Dillman clip form the National Geographic special, or even the Youtube.com clip featuring Darren Brown.

No, this clip is from Japan and features Yanagi Ryuken (ryuken = dragon fist), a supposed 10th degree black belt in five traditional martial arts.

Problems with Bio Info of Yanagi Ryuken

First of all, according to the Internet, Yanagi Ryuken is a “Daitouryu Aikido” practitioner. What is “Daitouryu Aikido?” Do they mean Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu? If so I feel very sorry for legitimate Daito Ryu practitioners. I wouldn’t want this guy claiming to represent my art.

However, according to Yanagi Ryuken, his system is based on koryu jujutsu arts (unnamed), with Aiki, Qigong, and other mysterious elements mixed together.
In addition, Yanagi Ryuken is also supposed to have won over 200 Val Tude (anything goes) fights. You think with that many victories there would be more written about the man. I couldn’t find anything.

Video Clip #1

Watch this clip and make up your own mind.

If you believe what you’re seeing, please send a check to Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei Dojo for $1,000.00 and I’ll send you the “secrets” so you too can learn to do these techniques. Money back guarantee not valid in any of the 50 states of America, or any other continents where some form of terrestrial life exists.

For those who don’t believe... well we now know nothing is wrong with your sanity.

Video Clip #2

Yanagi Ryuken Versus Iwakura Goh (Team Barbosa Jiujitsu Japan)

My Personal Comments

"Evil Gary" wants to say that Yanagi Ryuken got just what he deserved. He got the crap beat out of him, because what he claimed to do doesn’t exist. He met a skeptic, and the skeptic beat him. Beat him bad.

Furthermore, "Evil Gary" has to wonder why such a great fighter, a winner in 200 Vale Tudo matches, didn’t look like he could whip cream. The guy he fought was clearly a lot younger, and less experienced. I mean he isn’t a 10th degree black belt in even one system, let alone five.

"Compassionate Gary" sort of feels sorry for this old guy. Obviously, there is something mentally wrong with the man, since he seems to really believe he has mystical powers. Clearly he is delusional.

I mean, he must be delusional, since in one post I read he actually claims to fight ghosts.

To bad Iwakura Goh wasn’t a ghost. Maybe then Yanagi Ryuken wouldn’t have suffered several broken teeth, and numerous cuts to his nose and lips. Maybe then he wouldn’t have looked like a buffoon. Sorry, I'm being evil again.

"Gracious Gary" appreciates that Yanagi Ryuken publicly admitted he had the lost the match, even though he blamed heart trouble for his loss. At least he didn’t mention anything about the old "tongue and toe defense."

Further more, "Gracious Gary" wants to thank Mr. Ryuken for showing what happens to, and will happen to, anyone who dares to fight using such fictional skills. Mr. Ryuken did more in 2 minutes of getting his butt kicked to dispel this myth than months and months, maybe even centuries of debate ever has.

Closing Comments

Okay, I’ve had my fun discussing these two video clips.

On a more serious note I think video clip #2 clearly illustrates what every skeptic already knew. There is no such thing as no-touch knockouts. They just don’t exist.

You can argue the issue as much as you want to, but fact is fact. Sorry to burst your little bubble.

Like I said, I’m not sure if I feel sorry for, or respect Yanagi Ryuken for at least meeting the challenge. Sure a great deal of money was involved, and I’m sure he saw dollar signs, but at least he was willing to back up his claims. That’s more than the likes of George Dillman, or his army of generals ever has done.

The good thing in this case is that Yanagi Ryuken has now decided to retire, and will no longer accept challenges.

The bad thing is that I’m sure some of Yanagi Ryuken’s students, and other gullible individuals like them, will still believe. They’ll find some excuse for what happened that day, dismiss reality, and go on arguing that no-touch knockouts do exist.

Worst yet, these individuals will find others gullible people to believe them. I guess what David Hannum said was true, there is a sucker born every minute.”1

1 Quote is attributed to P.T. Barnum, but was actually said by David Hannum. Source “P. T. Barnum Never Did Say "There's a Sucker Born Every Minute" By R. J. Brown Historybuff.com

My No-Touch Knockout Experience

My last essay reminded me of the below story, and made start to think that maybe I should reevaluate the possibility of that no-touch knockouts do exist. Or at least what the definition of one would be.

Many years ago during a reported burglary in progress, I came face to face with the suspect as he tried to exit through the window.

Burglary is a felony, and since I couldn’t see the guy’s hands I drew my gun and told the guy to “Freeze.”

As I lifted my gun from the holster and pointed the barrel in his direction the guy fainted. Yes he drop to the ground and was completely unconscious.

By definition wasn't that a "no touch" knockout? I didn’t touch him, and he was “knocked out.”

After all, my "chi" must have passed from my hand through the gun and hit him.

HA HA HA

The No-Touch Knockout

I know this topic has been discussed to death on the Internet already, but believe it or not there are still groups discussing if such a thing exits or not.

I’m going to keep this short…. at least for me, and sum things up in one sentence.

There is absolutely no validity, or scientific evidence to prove, that anyone, living or dead, can or ever could knock someone out without touching them, without the aid of a some type of projectile.

Fact is fact!

Okay, so much for one sentence.

I know there are those that will vehemently argue that no-touch knockouts do exists, and that they have witnessed someone get knocked-out in such a manner, or know of someone who witnessed such an event.

Okay, I also have a bridge I like to sell you here in San Francisco. It’s really pretty and attracts a lot of tourists. I’ll sell it to you for a steal.

I realize many people have a need to believe in something. I understand that some people want to believe in mystical or super human abilities. Furthermore, I know people can at times be pretty gullible, and someone with a forceful charismatic personality can sway people into believing the unbelievable.

I’ll be the first to admit that if such a technique existed I would want to learn it. I mean, who doesn’t want to have that skill. It’s the ultimate self-defense.

However, if such a skill did exist don’t you think a lot more people would know how to do it? Don’t you think there would be reports in the news, because such a skill is being abused?

I mean why use drugs to commit date rape, just knock her out from across the room. Why point a gun at a clerk, when you can just knock him out from a distance.

Now the argument of course is that in order to develop such a skill requires a lot of training, and dedication. Training and dedication most people wouldn’t endure.

Maybe that’s true, but there are millions of people in the world, and a few bad ones would. Just like a few bad people take the time to learn to make bombs, plan terrorist plots, and even cultivate bacterial weapons like anthrax.

Strike One

Then of course, there is the argument that this knowledge was lost and only recently re-discovered. Crap! That’s just too easy of an explanation. Plus, except for legends, no reliable sources state that such a techniques was ever used in actual combat.

There is also no viable information that an actual living person in the past ever had such a skill.

I think anyone in the past that had such ability, and demonstrated it effectively-especially in a combative situation-would have instantly become a martial arts icon. He would have had tons and tons of disciples. Nnumerous stories about him would exist.

There are no such stories, and such a person never existed.

Strike Two

The last argument is my favorite, and usually used to attack skeptics like me. I call it the blame game.

In this case, when the no-touch knockout fails it’s the skeptics fault. They countered the techniques by lifting their toe or twisting their tongue.

Or how about this excuse: I can’t do the technique on you because your chi isn’t developed enough and it would seriously injure you. Don’t laugh; that excuse was used on me.

Many years ago there used to be a female martial arts instructor in San Francisco, whose students swore could knock people out without touching them. I forgot her name, and I’m not even sure if she is still alive. That’s not important anyway.

As a skeptic that would be willing to accept being proven wrong, I went to her school to see things for myself. I politely introduced myself to this teacher, and told her I had heard great things about her skills. I told her I was extremely interested in her ability to knock people out without touching them.

For the next half hour or so I got a lecture on chi, and the training it would take to develop my internal force. This lecture was followed up with her giving a demo, where she continuously knocked her students to the floor or into unconsciousness without ever touching them. She even knocked one guy out as he stood on the other side of a wall. Pretty impressive stuff to be sure.

I then asked her if she do it on me. She looked at me for a moment and said “No.” I asked her again, and she said she couldn’t. Not because she lacked the ability, but because my chi wasn’t strong enough and I would get seriously hurt.

Sure!

I then told her I would be willing to sign any release and wavier she wanted me to, and that any injury suffered would be totally my fault. She still declined.

Of course at this point she offered to accept me as a student and help me develop my chi. All it would cost was $85.00 a month.

“How long do you think it will take?” I asked.

“Years,” she said, “maybe longer.”

Once again I asked her to just please try and knock me out, I needed to feel her power before I could commit to training with her.

With a huff she agreed to try. I stood there waiting to feel something, anything. All I felt was bored...okay maybe a bit amused. I certainly was never knocked-out. If she was projecting any “force” my way, I never sensed it.

After a few moments she stopped. There was never any explanation why nothing had happened. She just left the room.

Of course some of her senior students asked me if I was feeling okay, and if I needed to sit down. I guess they were worried about my welfare. Nice of them, but unnecessary.

I left her school as I had entered it, still a skeptic. Maybe even more so.

This story clearly illustrates the main fact that disproves the notion of no-touch knockouts. If such a technique existed and one had the ability to do it they should be able to do it on anyone at any time.

If you placed 100 people in a room, 50 of them skeptics, 50 of them believers, your abilities should work on everyone. Maybe not to the same degree, not every martial arts technique works on everybody equally, but enough to show a verifiable statistic to prove its existence.

To date, I’m unaware of any such study, and I doubt any such study is forthcoming.

Furthermore, I find it interesting that those individuals who claim to be able to do no-touch knockouts, usually accuse the other person of countering their attack when things don’t work. What a load of crap! How can I counter something when I don’t even understand how it works?

More importantly if it’s that easy to counter, why bother learning it anyway?

Strike Three

The truth is that no-touch knockouts don’t exist. The body does not externalize energy like a ray-gun, any more than a goose can lay a golden egg.

No-touch knockouts are a con, a scam, and those that claim to have the ability should trade their black belts for a priest’s alb, since they are more akin to wanting to be a guru or a cult leader than a martial arts teacher.

Please give us legitimate martial arts teachers a break. Give the unsuspecting a public a break.

Challenges – "You wanna fight me?"

Shelter from the Rain

This weekend, the rain poured. As a result I’ve had to deal with a lot of trespassers who feel that the community garage of my building is a haven for them to do their illicit affairs, or a dry place to take a nap.

Unfortunately for me, who has to manage the building, trespassing into the garage area is nothing new; after several years, word has got on the street that it is a semi-safe place to do one's drugs, use as a bathroom, or for prostitutes to service their clients.

Judging by the current activity, one would think I live in a crappy neighborhood. But, while the neighborhood can be colorful at times, that really isn’t the case. There are just a few bad characters on the street, and a bunch of lazy tenants who can’t get off their fat ass to secure the garage doors that create this problem.

However, for some reason this weekend has been extra bad. As I’m writing this, I’ve already had to remove almost 25 individuals from the garage. That total, of course, does not cover the repeat offenders, who always seem to bring new people with them.

Now I know this problem is one I should leave to the police, but law enforcement in San Francisco, can at times be very strange. The patrol guys say call when there is a problem, but their response time to such a trivial thing (in their opinion) can be more than half an hour.

Furthermore, if I should dare restrain these trespassers and keep them from leaving until the police arrive, I could be deemed the bad guy. This is true even though I’m a retired police officer, know the law, and know what force can and cannot be used.

Then there is the problem that even when the police do show up, they won't arrest these people. It doesn’t seem to matter that there are no trespassing signs posted, and I’m ready, willing and eager to sign a citizen’s arrest form. For some reason unknown to me, the police feel they need to warn these people and wait for them to do the crime again. It kind of defeats the purpose of having such laws in my opinion.

Now don’t get me wrong, I don’t want to send everyone to jail. But there are a few who continuously trespass, and think my warning is a joke. I think if I could send just one or two to jail the message would get out that I’m serious about keeping trespassers out of the garage. Maybe!?

Fortunately most of these trespassers leave without an argument, and some even clean up their mess before they depart. How nice.

Unfortunately, every now and then I get ones who want to argue and worst yet, fight. They actually want to challenge my authority, though they are clearly in the wrong, and fight me. Yes, believe it or not, they get into my face, and try very hard to get me to strike them.

It really doesn’t matter what time day or night these encounters take place, or the fact that I often have my 85lb German Shepherd dog with me, who semi-convincingly looks like he would come to my aid.

Of course, the breaking point came today when one of these trespassers started to get in my face. Like I said, it’s not unusual for that to happen, but this time I was with my wife. Now I have nothing to prove to her, but if things had deteriorated like they appeared they would I most likely would have gone into overkill mood. Attacking me and hurting me is one thing, but my wife was there and most likely would have had to get physically involved holding back his female companion. The fact that my wife could have been in danger escalated the whole situation. Especially since this guy was really looking for a fight, and didn’t appear to have the common sense to shut up and just walk away.

He was in the wrong, he knew it, but I guess he had to impress the lady he was with—with his masculinity. She was more pissed than impressed. I guess she was the one with the brain.

Putting the whole thing into perspective, though I never lost my temper, the whole ordeal was loud enough that neighbors were watching. I like having witnesses.

Back to my point...

There's no Winning

Now I’ve lived in this neighborhood all my life. I did homicide and gang related investigations in this area for many years. More importantly, my martial art school is located within the building I’m talking about, and has been there since 1993.

In other words people in this area know who I am. I get stopped on the street all the time by people I’ve never met, who comment about the school, or tell me how I helped someone they knew during one of my investigations. I’m no celebrity, but people recognize me enough—too much sometimes for my liking.

This means that a lot of these trespassers also know who I am, and several have jokingly asked me not to do my "karate shit" on them. Many leave when they see me coming, because they are afraid I will hurt them, because of what I teach, even though I’ve never made a threat.

These "street people" also know I will fight if forced to, since I have a reputation for fighting those that left me no choice. The fact is, I almost shot a hooker in my garage area that came at me with a syringe full of heroin many years ago. I was in uniform, and she was extremely stupid. She can thank her boyfriend that she is still alive, since he took the stab instead of me.

I’ve also had to forcefully escort a few idiots out of the building, and there are marks and indentations on the wall to prove it. I’m not proud things deteriorated to that point, but it sent the right message and couldn’t be avoided.

Now don’t get me wrong, I hate fighting. But as the manager of the building I have an obligation to keep things safe and clean for the 130 people who live here, including my family. That means I have to stop and confront these trespassers and get them out of here. I have no choice. No one else will do it.

This of course leads me to the point of my essay, that point being the idiots who issue challenges to fight them. Especially those individuals that are aware of who I am and what I do.

See, I’m in a situation where I’m damned if I do, and damned if I don’t. As a martial arts instructor, if I resort to physical violence I can quickly be seen as the aggressor, the bad guy. If I win the fight and cause an injury I can look like a bully, and possibly be sued even though I was 100% in the right.

If I lose, well I lose, but that fact will get around like a wild fire burning out of control, and would just lead to a lot more physical challenges in the future. I certainly don’t need that.

In other words its basically a lose-lose situation for me.

Now I’m no stranger to being challenged to fight. As a police officer I got that a lot. I mean, how many people want to get arrested and go to jail. However those challenges weren’t personal. All these people only saw was the uniform, the badge.

In addition, as a police officer there was always back-up just a radio call away.

No the situation in the garage is more like the ones I faced owning a "commercial" martial arts school. These challenges were one-on-one encounters with people who thought they had something to prove—people who wanted to kick my ass, just because I’m martial arts teacher.

This especially true in two situations that had the potential to be as life threatening as any fighting that would occur in the garage.

Challenge #1

The first situation occurred many years ago as I was teaching a kinder-karate class (4 –7 year olds). A man walked in off the street, watched me teach for a few moments and then questioned what qualified me to teach.

I answered his question politely, who knows he might have kids and was interested in enrolling them. However, he wasn’t satisfied with my answer, which mainly consisted of the number of years I’d been training, and which associations I belonged to at the time.

No, he wanted to know if I could "fight," and if my fighting skills were good enough that I really had something to teach these kids.

Once again I was very polite, and told him I wasn’t a fighter, and that the kinder-karate class was all about teaching the kids not to fight. Once again he didn’t like the answer.

A few questions later, and after a few more polite answers, he finally asked me what was really on his mind, "WILL YOU FIGHT ME?"

What!? Was this guy actually challenging me to a fight? Here, in front of all these kids and their parents. Is this guy crazy?

Of course I declined to fight the guy, but he kept insisting. I clearly had to think of something else. I mean this guy was already taking his shirt and shoes off, and by now I’m pretty positive our discussion was over.

Certainly everyone watching had the expectation that if we fought I’d win. After all, I’m the "martial arts teacher." However, that’s the problem, or at least part of it.

If I won, so what, I didn’t prove anything. That’s what people expected. I mean a martial arts teacher should be able to beat a "guy off the street."

If I should lose however, well who wants to study with a martial arts teacher that can’t defend himself?

No, I had to think of another way, I had to use the greatest weapon I had, my brain.

So keeping my composure, I went up to the guy and told him I couldn’t fight him. I explained that if I won I would be considered a bully, and if I lost it would be bad for business. I then explained the real reason I couldn’t fight him, that reason being that it would set a bad example for the kids. Year after year I’ve told these kids fighting was bad, and should be avoided. If I should fight now, for no apparent reason, then what example would I be setting?

Now I’m not sure what part of what I said clicked in this guy’s brain, but he stood up, put his clothes back on, and started to walk out the door. As he left, he shouted that I was one of the best martial art teachers he had ever met, and that in his opinion I was qualified to teach these kids.

Of course I had to ask why. His answer was simple; I practice what I preach. Only someone confident in his or her abilities would have given him such an honest and straightforward answer to his challenge.

Well after this initial meeting, this man would stop at the school at least once a week. Not to challenge me again, but just to visit. Turns out he had studied martial arts for years while overseas, and was just interested in observing what I taught from time to time. He wanted to see where I was coming from, what I thought the martial arts were all about.

In a way, he was rather philosophical about life and the martial arts, and clearly had a lot of information to share. On the other hand, it was clear he wasn’t completely there mentally. And looking at the knife he always carried and that far away look in his eye wasn’t someone you wanted to have on your bad side.

I won't ever call the guy a friend, but he did support the school. And it was better to have someone like that on my side, keeping out other potential threats, than having to worry about what he would do next.

Isn’t there a saying that says, "Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer?" I’m sure it applies to even potential enemies.

Challenge #2

The second challenge was a little more serious. It occurred one afternoon between classes. A man, about 5'2", 110 lbs, with a crazed look in his eyes, entered the school and asked me if he could "spar" me.

At first I looked at him in disbelief, assuming I had misunderstood what he was asking. I mean people entered the school all the time asking me if I could teach them to fight.

Of course I had heard correctly, and he asked me once again to spar him. It wasn’t like he asked me in a manner I could say no either.

My first response was to ask him if he had a habit of entering martial art schools and asking the instructor to spar. To my surprise, he said yes. Strike one for me.

"Why," I questioned.

"Training," he responded.

"Training!?" as I looked at him with a puzzled expression.

"Yes, as I travel around I ask anyone I think may have something to teach me, to fight with me, so I can test my skills." As a demonic look gleamed from his eyes, he continued to tell me of his past fighting experiences, how he has been stabbed numerous times, and how he kicks trees in the park to strengthen and desensitize his legs.

I looked at him dumbfounded, I mean it’s the 20th century; do people really do those kinds of thing anymore? Do they? I had to know more.

Turns out, that this guy was a "self-taught" fighter, who honed his skills on the street. In fact, he said he would often offer some of the less than savory characters he met money to try and beat him up. If they kicked his ass they would get the money, if not they wouldn’t be in any shape to take it.

He then regaled me with some of his experience in barrooms, alleyways, and even in jail. Clearly this was a tough guy, if not someone who was a little psycho.

In a way it sure sounded like something out of a movie to me, but he was dead serious.

He continued by explaining that he didn’t have money for classes, and the only way he could train with a martial arts teacher was by challenging them to spar and seeing how they fought. Win, lose, or draw, he would learn something.

I then tried to convince him that he most likely had more "real" fighting experience than me, and I wasn’t sure what I could offer. He said it didn’t matter. Strike two.

Now, like I’ve said numerous times before I don’t like fighting or sparring. Then again something told me that "sparring" with this guy would actually lead to a no holds barred fight where one or both of us would get hurt, seriously hurt. He had that look, and based on our conversation I doubted he would care if he hurt himself in the process of beating me. In fact, I think he would have reveled with delight if lots of pain were involved, no matter who suffered it.

Like I said he had a strange demonic look to him. A look I know I’ve seen on violent criminals who just committed heinous acts, or those under the influence of serious mind altering drugs. Its a look like one would see when a when a tiger stalks its prey. A look that’s cold, uncaring. A look where it feels as if the person is looking through you, measuring you, formulating a game plan on which method to hurt you would work best.

Based on what I heard, and what my instincts were telling me I politely declined his request, stating that I no longer sparred due to injuries, and couldn’t afford to hurt myself further. He scanned my body, most likely evaluating what I said, and after a few moments insisted that we were just sparring and no one would get hurt. Strike three.

I thanked him for the offer to take it easy on me and once again declined. Of course by now I was edging my way to the phone so I could call 911.

For a few moments there was silence, then he postured as if he was going to attack. His whole body changed, and what once looked like a man of 5 foot 2, now looked like a demon, a demon ready to go for the kill.

There was no more smile on his face, and he clearly wasn’t the person I had been talking to for the last several minutes.

For the first time in my life, all those stories of Samurai sensing danger made sense. I sensed the threat, I could feel his intention, and my body automatically prepared for the attack. Things were happening like my instructor said they would if I ever felt my life was really being threatened. Further more, like the movies everything seemed to move in slow motion.

Unconsciously, my body prepared for his attacked, yet I felt calm. In a way it felt like I was watching the situation from the perspective of a third person. I realize my description sounds sort of cinematic in many ways, but I can’t think of any way better to explain it.

Fortunately, for both of us, the attack never came. In an instant it was all over, and we started talking again like nothing had happened. However, we both knew in the back of our minds a battle had been fought. I’m just not sure if either of could have figured out who the winner was.

After a few more moments I asked him to leave, saying I would never fight, because when and if I fight it is only to defend my family or myself and it is to the death. Dramatic yes, but it makes an unarguable point.

While he wasn’t happy with my comment, and started to provoke me again he realized I was serious. Our conversation, all the pleasantry, was over, and I’m sure my attitude and posture conveyed the fact this topic was no longer open for discussion.

As he left he thanked me, but he then asked if I had any students who would be willing to "spar" him? I said that would be up to my students, but I didn’t think so. We weren’t that type of school.

He left saying he would be back later. Sure, I thought.

A few hours later, during the adult class he returned. Bloody and busied he approached the class and asked if anyone would like to spar him. I stopped him, and asked him "what the hell happened to you?"

"I’ve been training," he said.

"Training?" I asked, as I looked at the cuts and bruises on his face and hands, his ripped shirt, and broken shoe.

"Yes, I was just training in the alley behind your school a few minutes ago," he responded. "There were two of them, one is still lying there," he said with a sickening grin which showed his pride.

Looking at him, all I could do is wonder what the other two guys looked like. I had to check the alleyway.

Sure enough there in the alley was a guy who looked like he had been hit by a bus. There was also his friend who looked like he had been caught in a blender. They were pretty messed up, and I’m sure at least one of them required medical attention.

To make the situation even worst were the ten other people that were trying to figure out just what happened to their pal. The level of anger, and talk about revenge was amazing. Fortunately, no one saw the guy, and no further violence occurred.

As we returned to the classroom, the guy once again asked if there was anyone there who wanted to spar with him. I tried to intercede by asking the guy if he hadn’t had enough for the day, but before I could finish one of my students I’ll call Bill started to accept. I say started because I stopped Bill before he could finish his sentence.

Now Bill was a wannabe kick-boxer, who has some real skills—real skills in a controlled environment such as kick-boxing ring. He wasn’t what I would call a well-rounded fighter, nor was he someone who could actually absorb and overcome a lot of punishment. More importantly, he definitely didn’t have a killer instinct.

The truth is, this street guy would have slaughtered Bill without breaking a sweat.

It would have been no contest, since the street guy had nothing to lose. Meanwhile, Bill had a family, work obligations, and let's just say a life that could be adversely affected if he should get hurt, especially in such a needless manner.

Furthermore, I knew Bill’s defeat would eventually lead to an escalation of this guys desire to fight me, something I really didn’t want to have to deal with. Based on what I knew, what I had seen in the alley, our "friendly sparring," would clearly end up as serious fight. In fact, this guy gave me the impression he would rather die than lose.

A new strategy was in order, and I had to think quickly. I offered to help clean the guy up, prior to any more challenges, and as I took care of his wounds started to talk to him about the "true meaning," of the martial arts. I told him that he had missed the point about what martial arts training was all about. Martial arts aren’t about only fighting, they are about building one’s skill to the point where fighting is no longer necessary. To avoid confrontation was the highest level one could achieve in training, and what he should really strive for.

I doubt what I said meant much to him, but he agreed to leave for the day. Unfortunately, while he left he also made it clear that he would be back.

I never thought I’d see this guy again, but the next day I asked a few people I knew on the street if they knew anything about this guy. I wanted to know what I was dealing with.

Turns out his name, nickname, was Crazy Charley (go figure), and people knew him as a brawler. Based on what I was told, everything he said about himself, including the fighting people on the street, was true. Furthermore, some of these fights involved weaponry, and he had done time for seriously stabbing someone in the past. He clearly was someone that shouldn’t be trusted. He was clearly someone who wouldn’t hesitate to hurt you.

Lucky me, I was now on Crazy Charley’s radar. I knew I couldn’t fight with him, and there wasn’t enough to get the police involved. At least, there wasn't yet, and I wanted to keep it that way.

True to his word, Crazy Charley showed up the next day, and the next, and the next. Each day he politely asked if I or anyone else would spar him, and each day after being rejected he would quietly leave.

Each time we would go and do our almost dance-like routine of posturing and feeling out each other’s intentions. Nothing was said, but we each knew what the other was thinking, and more importantly ready and capable of doing. Each time there would be that moment things felt like they would go to hell, and then nothing.

Slowly but surely, Crazy Charley visits occurred less often, but from time to time he would stop in showing me his new cuts and bruises from recent "training" matches. He displayed them as others display trophies.

After five months of continuous challenges, Crazy Charley disappeared. Some say he was stabbed, some say he went to jail, and others say he left the area. I didn’t really care. He was gone and that was fine. The potential for danger and violence was gone, without incident.

Of course, crazy people seldom disappear forever, and a year later I received a package in the mail. It was from good old Charley.

Basically, he wrote that he had liked our discussions on the philosophy of the martial arts. He had liked our "mental" duels. He appreciated the time I took cleaning up his wounds, and my advice to him to stay out of trouble. More importantly, he valued my opinion and wanted me to review the enclosed manuscript about his life and training. He considered me as his teacher.

Lucky me. Hopefully, this guy isn’t teaching others and claiming to be my student.

The enclosed manuscript was about 200 hand-written pages, which were basically illegible. It didn’t really matter though, since there was no return address and I’ve never seen Charley again.

Good Old Memories!

Why Would I Want To?

Of course these two stories directly relate to how I started this essay. No matter where I’m challenged, how I’m challenged, I have more to lose than gain. I will always be wrong, no matter what the circumstance, no matter how right and justified I am.

The truth is, if I’m attacked I will defend myself. If my family or loved ones are attacked, I’ll most likely go after you with the intention to kill. I’ll face the consequences of my actions later. However, to get me to that point where I’ll fight, will require a lot of work, as well as extremely bad intentions on the part of the aggressor.

But to fight in response to a challenge, when the other person is aware of what I do for a living is another matter. I don’t have the time, more importantly the need to stroke my ego, or to deal with that kind of thinking. It’s not worth it.

If I liked fighting, and needed that form of competition to stroke my ego, I’d enter the UFC. At least then there would be a potential to get paid.

Unlike the situations that occurred in the schools though, it’s very hard to reason with some of these garage trespassers. Some are just hostile violent people who don’t even care about their own health and welfare. In addition, I truly believe they want to get into a fight, and may even see dollar signs thinking about suing me in the future.

Worst yet is the realization that a few of these guys feel they have something to prove. Kicking my ass, would give them "street cred." If nothing else kicking my ass would open the door for even more trespassers, since they would get the sense they controlled the garage.

Besides nailing the garage door shut, (which I’ve considered but know I can’t do), I’m not sure what the solution is. I yell at the people who park there all the time, and have even threatened to take their parking space away.

Can the only answer be violence? Do I have to hurt someone, or get hurt to stop the challenges? Furthermore, if I fight barehanded today, what will stop the threats from escalating? I mean, I’m dealing with people on or taking drugs, who clearly aren’t in control of themselves. People who don’t care, and aren’t afraid to go to jail for what they do.

Clearly, the challenges I’ve had in my martial art schools, though potentially dangerous, are nothing compared to the ones in the garage.

Of course the true challenge for me is to hold my ground, remain true to my beliefs, and use my brain. Resorting to violence, to deal with the problem on their level, would make all the years I’ve preached about not fighting all meaningless.

Reality, Discovery, Aliveness, & MMA

One of the things I like most about teaching is the interaction between my students and I. Especially those interactions were my students ask insightful questions, or question the validity of something I said. Needless to say I’m often taught a lot, or at least giving information that might help me consider an alternative point of view.

I recently wrote two entries on Combat versus Combat Sports (here and here), and sure enough Spencer wrote an essay (here) quoting sources that had a slightly different opinion. Now Spencer’s essay wasn’t contradicting anything I said, or what he knows I feel regarding the topic, his essay was just a different way of looking at things.

In fact I found both the sources he listed very interesting, insightful, and to some degree I agree with both.

Not that either essay changed my opinion, but I would like to clarify a few things.

Reality Based Martial Arts

I’m not sure just what this “catch phrase” means, but it is definitely very popular to today. I mean, just pick up any issue of Black Belt Magazine and there is going to be at least one or two articles claiming to be about “reality based martial arts.”

Now, I understand the business of martial arts is all about what’s hot today. Just think about how many Ninja instructors appeared in the early 80’s when there was a ninja craze, and wasn’t it amazing how of all of a sudden there were so many jujutsu instructors when the UFC became popular. In my city alone it was amazing to see numerous Tae Kwon Do schools add the word jujutsu to their window displays. I didn’t even know jujutsu was Korean!?

My opinion on martial arts is that they are all “reality based;” it's just that a few have forgotten their roots. Some have forgotten the reality behind what they are now passing off as traditional martial art techniques.

After all, didn’t a Samurai have the need to learn reality based fighting skills? How about all the other warriors of different nations? Weren’t martial arts developed, tested, and refined during periods of time when hand-to-hand fighting was the norm not the exception?

The answer is of course they were.

Obviously, when discussing the sword fighting skills of the Samurai one can argue that people no longer fight with swords, and sword duels are a thing of the past. True, but that does not mean the techniques taught are not viable, or based on reality. It's just that in modern times it’s impossible to test these skills and we have to rely on the information being transmitted correctly.

If one really wants to know my opinion, the only people practicing “reality based” fighting skills are those that are in the military, and to some extent those involved in law enforcement.

While the argument can be made that the average soldier and police officer learn very little unarmed combat, one would be missing the point of what "reality based" means. Or more importantly, what the definition of “MARTIAL” is. The reality is that the martial arts of the 21st century involve guns, explosives, and dropping bombs from airplanes.

Soldiers no longer fight hand-to-hand on a regular basis, if at all. They shoot the enemy form long distances, normally while seeking cover.

The same line of thinking applies to unarmed fighting skills for any countless number of armies of the past. No one went to battle unarmed. Just imagine an army of Okinawans preparing to face an army of invading Japanese with just unarmed karate skills. Wouldn’t be much of a battle.

The truth is that all authentic traditional martial arts start their practitioners off with weaponry and then eventually train them in unarmed fighting skills. Weapons first, since that is what one will use in a real fight, and then unarmed skills in case one happens to lose or break their weapon during a battle.

The problem today is that to many schools specialize in only one facet of what once were complete fighting systems. That is especially true in many Japanese Budo forms. Because of specialization, few martial artists are well rounded enough to be prepared for any eventuality that may occur in the real world.

Add this element to the fact that many arts have become extremely stylized in their movements, and you have the making for a disaster. In fact, “stylized” movements are one element of martial arts that has led to its detriment, and if the process continues they will lead to the eventual uselessness of training altogether.

Worst yet are styles that practice one way, which is suppose to represet “real world fighting,” yet spar in a totally different manner. Now, does that make any sense at all? After all, if one’s forms are so lethal, and sparring is suppose to help one learn to apply those techniques then shouldn’t both methods resemble each other? Maybe that question alone can answer why I have such a problem with sparring, and why I said I didn’t care for it in my previous essay.

Now don’t get me wrong, I understand what proponents of “reality based” fighting system are trying to say, and the message is a good one. However, claiming that this is something new or innovative is a joke. People have been seeking out and developing reality based fighting methods since the dawn of our species.

The real reality is that what may work for one person may not work for another. Furthermore, what may work on one opponent may not work on another. There are just too many variables to say any one method is better or “more real world” than another.

Discovery

How often have I read about a new martial arts discovery? Something new and innovative, that’s never been seen before. Something revolutionary, which will change everything, and make everyone a better more effective fighter.

Really!!!!?

Unless the human body has changed recently, whom are these practitioners trying to fool. What have they discovered that wasn’t discovered centuries ago?

The truth is that the only things these people have discovered are concepts and techniques that someone senior to them either failed to teach or didn’t know.

To come out and claim in a public forum that you’ve discovered something new is the worst case of ego gratification I’ve ever witnessed, and those that applaud these individuals should be ashamed of themselves.

The fact of the matter is there is nothing new to discover, or should I say to claim to invent. How to attack another person, where to strike them, anatomical weak points, and the most efficient way to kill’s one opponent were already known in ancient times.

Let’s be honest, our ancestors actually used these skills; knowing how to fight hand-to-hand was a necessity for them, not a hobby like it is for so many of us.

They learned this stuff the hard way, by trail and error, and those who lost, or should I say died, didn’t have a chance to pass on their knowledge. In other words, what worked was passed on to future generations. What didn’t work, or was deemed less effective wasn’t propagated.

Whenever, I hear someone claims to have discovered something new or developed a new innovative method of fighting I just have to chuckle.

I mean Ed Parker, father of American Kenpo, and Morihei Ueshiba (1883-1969), founder of Aikido never claimed to have invented new methods of fighting. If anyone could make such an assertion it would definitely be people like them. However, they never claimed to have invented anything. They simply took elements of other systems and restructured things to suit their needs, and how they perceived martial arts should be taught.

Did these pioneers, and others like them discover or gain insights to new things over time? Sure, and changes within their systems are evident. However, they didn’t announce to the world that they discovered something new, something that had never been seen before.

That’s because they knew it wasn’t. They knew that if they could figure this out, if they could gain some insights to the techniques they’ve been doing for years, than someone before them could have also done the same.

Just because they had been show something, or had never seen it before, didn’t mean it didn’t already exist and that hundreds of other practitioners in the world weren’t doing this on a regular basis.

The simple fact is—and it is fact—there are only so many ways the human body can move, only so many ways the body can be used as a weapon, only so many ways the body can be attacked.

As a species, we may not have been on this planet for that long, but it has been long enough to discover just about everything that we can do when it comes to fighting each other.

Aliveness

This is a term I had never heard before, and one that I think has some real merit to it. The article "Why Aliveness?...." as posted in Spencer’s previous post is definitely worth reading.

For the most part I agree with the author’s assertions, and I really have nothing to disagree with in his overall argument that in order to see if one’s techniques are viable they have to be done in such a manner where there is a degree of realism.

It is the “realism” part I have issues with, or at least his thoughts on how far should this realism be applied.

For example, there is a video on “YouTube” where a practitioner of Systema, (a Russian Martial Arts System) does a gun take away with a firearm that is actually loaded with live ammunition and ready to fire. I mean how much realer can things get?

Another question about realism is how much do I need to see if something is really effective. In other words, do I need to test everything out to see if it actually works for me? Do I need to shoot someone with my gun to see if that will kill him? Do I need to stab a person to see if a knife will really penetrate flesh? Do I need to hit someone in the windpipe to see if they will actually stop breathing?

Sure these are extreme examples, but hopefully they make my point. My point being that sometimes certain things can’t be practiced realistically because they would cause great bodily injury.

In addition, there is a big difference between applying a technique to someone who is aware of what you are trying to do, and the poor sucker one catches by surprise in the alleyway when attacked.

A lot of martial arts skills, especially for the hobbyist, rely on the element of surprise. That’s how a lot of “real world” life protection techniques go for the kill, and are designed to inflict serious damage. You may only get one chance.

Sparring, no matter how realistic or alive will always have a degree of unrealism about it. It has to, because the intention is different. I’m not trying to hurt my sparring partner. I don’t want him to hurt me. I’m going to hold back to some degree.

In addition two trained fighters approach things differently than two strangers on the street. Fighters entering a match have some anticipation, some foresight that their opponent has the skill and ability to cause damage. They approach each other cautiously, “feel each other out,” I believe is the expression. They only go for the kill, the knockout, when they feel they have the upper hand.

Two strangers on the street have no expectations, nor are they aware that either person has any fighting skills. There is no time to “feel each other out.” The fight is on and it is life or death. That’s realism.

Is there a place for "aliveness" in training? Yes, there definitely is. Further more, there has to be. But there still has to be a distinction made between aliveness, and sparring. They are not the same.

While I won’t claim every technique I teach involves "aliveness," some techniques are done in a manner that is as close as it is possibly safe to do. They all require that the attacker attacks with intent, and that the defender defends themselves fluidly and with precision. These techniques also require immediate corrections as one’s opponent moves, balance shifts, and all the other countless things that can go wrong do go wrong.

In other words, our techniques cannot be done robotically, and no one technique is ever done exactly the same way twice. Each attack is different and changes one’s ability to instantly react, adapt, and modify things as they are happening. That real-time adaptation is the difference between success and failure.

In other words, the techniques become "Alive." They are constantly changing based on what is happening at the moment. The "aliveness" comes from not being restricted by overly stylized form, and the practitioner having the freedom to make adjustments as needed.

MMA

Unfortunately I have mixed emotions regarding the current trend in MMA (mixed martial arts). On one hand, I feel that that the MMA practitioners have clearly pointed out some major weaknesses within the state of martial arts today. On the other hand, I have a hard time with many of the claims they make, and frankly with the attitudes many have regarding other martial art systems.

First of all, MMA is not the end-all system of fighting so many claim it to be. Now, before the local MMA guys come looking to kick my butt, hear me out.

MMA is great for the ring, and there are a lot of MMA guys I’d like to have backing me up in a street fight. Some of these guys are very good fighters, and more importantly, they like fighting—which is diametrically opposed to me who hates fighting.

However, the way some MMA guys claim their system is the only viable fighting method is ludicrous, if not all out arrogant. I won't go into all the reasons I believe this, but if you read "Assumptions" by Toby Threadgill (also on Spencer’s post), you’ll get some idea.

Furthermore, let's not forget that MMA is a sport. There are rules. They do things that if done in a real life or death situation on the street would get them severely injured even killed. Go to the ground in a fight in my neighborhood, and see what happens.

They don’t train in weaponry or prepare for an opponent who is armed. That is a serious oversight in today’s world.

However, MMA practitioners do train hard. They constantly test their skills, honing them to a degree where they actually can use the skills they learn. Akin to warriors of the past, they constantly work to improve their abilities, and become the best fighter possible.

More importantly, the MMA fighter shows what type of physical condition one must achieve and maintain in order to be a “professional fighter.” Most of us don’t have the desire or determination to train in such a manner. Once again, this shows a major difference between the warrior and the hobbyist.

The most important thing the MMA has done is making people reevaluate the martial arts and their effectiveness. People are starting to understand that there are differences, and that there are martial arts that are less effective than others.

Let’s face it there are numerous schools that can be labeled Mc Dojos, Fu Fu Jujtsu, and belt mills. Many are nothing more than martial aerobics, or watered down shells of what once a real martial system. Many schools are nothing more than gloried day care, with a few adult classes.

The MMA has opened the door for people to question the arts that they do, and more importantly cross-train. Yes, cross-train.

Cross-training, seeking out techniques that cover the deficiencies in one’s system is nothing new. It’s been done since antiquity. No one person can know, or possibly transmit everything.

Unfortunately, for many years there has been a belief that is disrespectful to cross-train. Some teachers even forbid it. Because of this, many practitioners have been brought up to believe their style is the only method of fighting, the best of the best. These practitioners will vehemently defend their art, even when faced with overwhelming facts contradicting what their teacher told them.

In the end, the funny thing is that there is really no major difference between reality, aliveness, and MMA. They are all seeking pretty much the same goal, which I’ll sum up in one word: EFEECTIVENESS.

They want to go back in time to when martial arts were martial arts, and all the fluff, all the Hollywood, and all the BS weren’t so prevalent.

I may have issues with the arrogance of many of the proponents of these systems, but I have absolutely no issue with what they are searching for. I’m also searching for effectiveness. I to have problems with martial art techniques that have no basis in the real world, or would get a person killed if they ever attempted them in the real world.

Other Views on Martial Art Versus Combat Sports

I think it is worth adding a little outside context to Gary's post about distinction between "Martial Art" and "Combat Sport". There is a strong intellectual current in the martial arts that preaches a view somewhat the opposed to what Gary wrote, espousing the value of full intention sparring over traditional training. This view is growing in popularity along with the rise of Mixed-Martial Arts (MMA). I think that it is best articulated by the "Aliveness" doctrine. The essay Why Aliveness?.... by Brazillian Jiu-Jitsu exponent Matt Thornton is a very thorough treatment.

To my understanding, there are two basic points in the theory of aliveness and importance of sport. First, alive sparring is the only way to learn to fight with full commitment against total resistance in a world where most of us do not regularly engage in combat. Second, testing your skill against a non-compliant opponent is the only way to really know if your martial arts are any good (this point is especially made by MMA folks who previously learned a poor quality or fraudulent "traditional" martial art). These are important ideas and deserve to be taken seriously.

Another interesting point of view was given to me by a Zen teacher who practiced kendo. He felt that the full commitment of sparring, where you can let go of all inhibitions and attack with the full force of will, is vital for the awareness and spiritual training of martial arts—which he felt were more important than learning how to fight with swords.

I think there is a lot of depth in this debate as far as the history of martial arts goes. The example of the Greeks that Gary wrote about is just one of many times the same sequence has repeated:

1. Warriors develop martial skills and master them in order to survive.
2. In peacetime these skills are passed on as they were before, but without a life-or-death imperative, they tend to degenerate into empty form.
3. A sporting version the arts are developed to bring vitality back into training.
4. The sports become an art on their own and the original fighting skills atrophy.

It's worth thinking about where various arts fall in this spectrum, how to prevent the slides in to decadence of either pure sport (like Western fencing or Modern Wushu) or empty traditional form (like Tai Chi in a senior center). See this post for some of my previous blather on how Japanese martial arts developed.

For another viewpoint on the differing approach and value of traditional jujutsu compared to MMA, see the excellent article Assumptions by Toby Threadgill. The 3d paragraph about Takamura Sensei "sparring" a brash young challenger is priceless.

Martial Art Versus Combat Sport

Sparring

Several years ago during a martial arts tournament, the host of the event asked me if I would be interested in doing a sparring demo. Now, I hate sparring, but because he was the host I actually considered his offer. However, before I could agree I had to ask him what the rules would be.

Now this instructor happened to be a Tae Kwon Do practitioner, so he made it clear the rules would be those related to the sport of Tae Kwon Do. That meant I couldn’t punch to the face, do joint locks, strike vital points, take the fight to the ground, throw elbows, use my knees, or kick below the waist—all tactics I employ in the art I practice and teach.

In other words he wanted to fight his way, which clearly gave him the advantage.

I countered his proposal by saying that the first round should be fought his way and the second round my way—my way being that the only rules should be no eye gouges, no strikes to the groin, and no pulling hair. I also proposed we shouldn’t wear all the pads normally worn when competing in Tae Kwon Do.

After a few moments of silence, and a look I can’t even begin to describe, he walked away. Needless to say, the demo never happened.

Now, I’ve never claimed to be a fighter and I’m very happy to state I’ve talked my way out of numerous street fights instead of resorting to fisticuffs. With that said however, I know the difference between Martial Arts and Martial (Combat) Sports. I know the difference it takes when training, and to develop one's mind and body for competition and/or life and death encounters.

Of course, this was before the advent of MMA or the “Reality Based” martial arts that are so popular today.

The problem is, just like in the case of this instructor, most people don’t understand that there is a difference between learning to fight in a contest and fighting in the real world. Just because you’re good, even great, in the ring doesn’t mean you can survive a life or death altercation. There are no rules on the street, and everything goes. There are no points and no referees. Even winners in a street fight can suffer serious, even life-threatening injuries.

Train As You Would Fight

The truth of the matter is that how one trains has a direct relationship to one’s ability to really defend oneself. It also plays a factor in how one will spar.

I’m not implying that this means someone who trains in a combat sport won’t have an advantage over someone untrained, or can’t defeat a "reality" based practitioner. All I mean is that there are major differences between training for a "contest of skill," and real no holds barred/life and death fighting.

In the example above, if I had sparred according to this instructor's rules, it would have really limited the tools I have to defend myself. After all, I’ve honed my skills to use my entire body as a weapon and attack any perceived opening weakness. Call it "going for the kill," if you like, but if I have to fight it's going to be in a life or death situation and I don’t want to lose.

In addition, notice I didn’t claim to be any more dangerous or skillful a fighter than this instructor. Clearly he had the ability and technical skill to hurt me. However, my point with this example was that we had two completely different concepts of what the martial arts are all about, what self-defense/life protection skills are all about.

Like I said, I hate sparring and I’ll admit I’ve never excelled at it. However, it’s not my lack of skill that makes me dislike sparring; it’s the mind-set most sparring often cultivates. Sure, sparring has its merits: timing, distancing, speed, etc. However all these elements don’t make up for its primary shortcoming; sparring more often than not deteriorates into a game of tag.

Worse yet, sparring instills a mind-set of "give and take." I hit you; you hit me, and so on and so on. I mean, how many Kendo matches have I witnessed where competitors flail at each other for several minutes, when the first strike with a real sword would have ended the confrontation.

Although I’m no expert when it comes to fighting or combat, it's clear that in the real world I don’t want to be on the receiving end of an attack. In fact, I practice awful hard to avoid attacks and counter them in a way in which my opponent can’t hurt me. In fact, the joke in my school is that when it comes to a fight I want to be a generous guy and give and give until it hurts.

I don’t want to make a "game" of my fighting skills. If and when I’m forced to fight, it’s going to be to protect my life not to win some trophy. I have no desire to have my hand raised in victory, I just want to make sure I survive with as few injuries as possible, and that my actions are justified according to the laws of my state.

Having said all that, I’m also aware it’s almost impossible for me to practice in a manner where I can test my skills and execute techniques at full force. I would definitely hurt my training partners and quickly run out of people to practice with. I could even end up in jail or face several serious lawsuits.

However, I have to train realistically as possible, and try not to pick up bad habits. I don't want to be like the police officer who after successfully disarming a suspect immediately handed the bad guy his weapon back, because that what he always had done during training. I don't want habits such as making overly exaggerate movements/feints, or kicking so high my balance is jeopardized or I’m exposed to a counter-attack.

This means I have to train in a way such that I teach myself to do whatever works at the moment, to go for the "kill," and do unto others before they have a chance to do unto me. If this mean bringing a knife to a fistfight, or a gun to a knife fight so be it. That’s the true difference between martial art and combat sport.

Definitions

The debate between martial art and combat sport is a complex one that even the ancient Greeks discussed (see previous essay). This is a debate that the ancient Greeks clearly understood better than we can in our modern world; after all, their need to know hand-to-hand combat was clearly greater than ours.

Of course in order to discuss this debate one first must understand the definition of what a martial art and combat sport are.

A "martial art" is basically the method in which warriors/soldiers are trained in order to carry out their duties in time of war. The sole purpose of these techniques is to kill and/or subjugate the enemy. In order to do this efficiently, these techniques must be lethal in design and flexible enough to be used in any given situation that might occur on the battlefield. This also means that these techniques must be designed in a manner that not only allows a warrior to fight and dispatch another unarmed adversary, but are equally designed to be used against an adversary armed with a myriad of weaponry.

A "martial art" focuses primarily on weaponry, since any soldier going to battle will be armed, only resorting to empty-hand fighting as a last resort. This is one reason many authentic systems of martial arts teach practitioners weaponry prior to or in addition to unarmed skills.

A "combat sport" on the other hand, is a sport and/or contest that utilizes elements of, or mimics those found within martial arts. It is designed to either test one’s ability, strength, or prowess against another, or to be used as a form of entertainment. It is normally practiced as a leisure activity, and as a result the intention of the practitioner is not to kill, injure, or maim their opponent. Because of this, techniques are often unrealistic and "flashy," often times playing to the zeal of the spectators to the detriment of actual martial form.

Though techniques within combat sports can be lethal, many are taught in a manner that makes them unfit for practical self-defense applications, and would result in the death of the practitioner in a battlefield situation. As the famous Japanese swordsman Miyamoto Musashi stated:

"The Way of the warrior is a Way of life and can never be considered as a hobby unless you are seeking only to impress others with your techniques."

(Book of Five Rings)

In The World

Let's face it: few people really have the desire to learn true martial skills, or the perseverance to endure the training that is required to be a real warrior. Even fewer have the necessity to learn actual combat skills, since we have professional armies to fight our battles using guns.

Yes, many people want to learn how to defend themselves if attacked, but even learning self-defense techniques is not fully akin to learning life-protection/warrior skills. Many times these defensive skills are just bits and pieces of what once was a greater puzzle. A puzzle that when completed was a complete martial system that addressed everything the warrior needed to fulfill his professional military obligations.

Returning to the original story I used to open this essay, I could have sparred with the Tae Kwon Do instructor, but in order to do so I would have had to hold back, and fight instincts I’ve worked very hard to develop. This would have put me at a clear disadvantage, a disadvantage that would lead to my ultimate defeat.

Of course that was the same thing I sure he thought we he considered my proposal. He wasn’t prepared to fight. He wanted to "spar."

He wanted to keep things friendly and polite. He didn’t want to risk unnecessary injury. In other words, he wanted to show he had fighting skills, without showing the inherent lethality of what martial arts are really about. He wanted to throw flashy kicks to impress an audience—kicks that no one in their right mind would or should attempt in a real street fight.

For those that still don’t get it, let me make it simple:

The difference between a martial art and a combat sport is intent and focus. Martial arts were developed for one primary purpose: to kill or cause serious bodily injury. These martial skills weren’t designed or developed as a hobby. They were created, tested, and re-tested with one goal in mind and that was to win during an aggressive confrontation.

Call your martial system what you will, but be honest. If you do a combat sport, be proud of what you do, but don’t delude yourself or others that you are doing more. Know the difference.

Martial Art Versus Combat Sport in Ancient Greece

While this distinction between martial art and combat sport is very clear today (see following essay), historically the two approaches have been very closely associated with each other. In fact, this association makes it very hard to determine what fighting systems were solely utilized for war, and which were used solely as contests of skill. This is especially true in societies that had several variations/styles of unarmed fighting, such as the Greeks who had boxing, wrestling, and Pankration (basically Greek MMA).

Obviously, all three Greek fighting systems had lethal potential. Clearly, athletes and warriors practiced these methods to some degree, either for physical fitness or self-protection.

Historically, according to writers of the period, these fighting skills were all used on the battlefield and in life and death struggles. In addition, Greek literature is full of examples of heroes and warriors who were masters of one or more of these unarmed fighting methods and being skilled in the fighting arts appears to have been a true indication of one’s manhood; it could even confer “godlike” stature.

Since all three fighting methods are viable one must look at the "intent" of the individual and underlying circumstances in any given example to determine whether or not the techniques used are martial or sport related. Even then, making any absolute conclusion is still conjecture.

Arguably, martial arts and combat sports paralleled each other to some degree in antiquity, and ancient artists and writers did not see the need to make any discernable notations to differentiate them for their intended audiences. Clearly, their audiences would have understood their references, and applied them to prevailing knowledge and social practices of their time. Unfortunately, looking at these works in hindsight, and not being fully immersed in the cultures that produced them or the everyday idioms of those periods, both systems seem indistinguishable to us.

The question is, however, whether combat sports prepared a warrior for battle or were detrimental to his ability to really fight in war.

The sophist Philostratos, (circa 170 C.E.), definitely appeared to be of the opinion that there was an affinity between sports and warfare, and he stated that great athletes of the past "made war training for sport and sport training for war." He professed that the Spartans had developed boxing to learn how to avoid blows to the head during battle, and that the Athenians had found wrestling/Pankration skills very useful in their battle at Marathon after their weapons were rendered useless.

Of course, which method of fighting Philostratos favored most is debated. Some historians believe Philostraos felt Pankration was the "worthiest contest of the Olympiads and the most important preparation for warriors." After all, Pankration had fewer rules, and resembles real combat more than boxing and wrestling.

Other historians believe Philostraos felt wrestling was the most useful sport since soldiers wearing armor could use wrestling techniques on the battlefield. According to these researchers Philostratos felt that Pankration was little more than a combination of bad boxing and worse wrestling.

In either case, it is important to note that Philostartos’ opinions were based on athletes of the past, and not on the current state of athletics as he witnessed them. In fact, he felt that the athletes of his day were inferior to the athletes of the past. According to Philostartos, athletes of his day spent too much time eating, drinking and fornicating instead of actually training. In other words combat sports were more of a hobby than a way of life.

The famous philosopher Plato also believed Greek sports were an augmentation of survival skills, and that it was important for men to practice them in order to maintain proper physical fitness in case they should be called for military service. In his book, entitled “Laws” he specifically mentions how the practice of some athletics improved military skills. Plato writes:

"Education has two branches-one of gymnastic, which is concerned with the body, and the other of music, which is designed for the improvement of the soul. And gymnastic has also two branches-dancing and wrestling; and one sort of dancing imitates musical recitation, and aims at preserving dignity and freedom, the other aims at producing health, agility, and beauty in the limbs and parts of the body, giving the proper flexion and extension to each of them, a harmonious motion being diffused everywhere, and forming a suitable accompaniment to the dance. As regards wrestling, the tricks which Antaeus and Cercyon devised in their systems out of a vain spirit of competition, or the tricks of boxing which Epeius or Amycus invented, are useless and unsuitable for war, and do not deserve to have much said about them; but the art of wrestling erect and keeping free the neck and hands and sides, working with energy and constancy, with a composed strength, and for the sake of health-these are always useful, and are not to be neglected, but to be enjoined alike on masters and scholars, when we reach that part of legislation; and we will desire the one to give their instructions freely, and the others to receive them thankfully. Nor, again, must we omit suitable imitations of war in our choruses; here in Crete you have the armed dances if the Curetes, and the Lacedaemonians have those of the Dioscuri. And our virgin lady, delighting in the amusement of the dance, thought it not fit to amuse herself with empty hands; she must be clothed in a complete suit of armour, and in this attire go through the dance; and youths and maidens should in every respect imitate her, esteeming highly the favour of the Goddess, both with a view to the necessities of war, and to festive occasions: it will be right also for the boys, until such time as they go out to war, to make processions and supplications to all the Gods in goodly array, armed and on horseback, in dances, and marches, fast or slow, offering up prayers to the Gods and to the sons of Gods; and also engaging in contests and preludes of contests, if at all, with these objects: For these sorts of exercises, and no others, are useful both in peace and war, and are beneficial alike to states and to private houses. But other labours and sports and exercises of the body are unworthy of freemen, O Megillus and Cleinias."

Book 7 (Translated by Benjamen Jowett)

Clearly Plato believed wrestling was more closely related to the arts of war than then other forms of athletics. Plato even states, "… of all movements wrestling is most akin to the military art, and is to be pursued for the sake of this, and not this for the sake of wrestling." He also asserted that because wrestling helps prepare men for war, all Greek youths should work out in wrestling-schools (palaestra) whether they were serious about becoming Olympic contenders or not.

Though Plato believed in the value of wrestling, he also believed that the principal purpose of education should be the life-long training and preparation of citizens for the "greatest of contests," the struggle for the defense of their country, and not the breeding of professional athletes. Basically, Plato rejected the notion of specialized, intensive and exclusive athletic training since he considered it detrimental to the health and well being of the practitioner.

Of course, for every proponent of combat sports there were also those that refuted their assertions.

The Spartan general Tyrtaeus (late 7th century BC) claimed he did not believe that training in athletics could fully prepare a man for battle. He stated:

"I would not say anything for a man nor take account of him
For any speed of his feet or wrestling skill he might have
not if he had the size of a Cyclops and strength to go with it
Not if he could outrun Boreas, the North Wind of Thrace
not if he were more handsome and gracefully formed than Tithonos,
or had more riches than Midas had, or Kinyras too,
not if he were more a king than Tantalid Pelops,
Or had the power of speech and persuasion Adrastos had,
not if he had all splendors except for a fighting spirit.
For no man ever proves himself a good man in war
unless he can endure to face the blood and the slaughter,
go close against the enemy and fight with his hands."

(Tranlated by R. Lattimore)

Euripides, (480 – 406BC?), one of the three greatest Greek writers also questioned the practice of using athletics to prepare soldiers for war. During the Peloponnesian Wars (a twenty-seven year war between Sparta and Athens that started in 431BC) Euripides wrote a play titled, "Autolykos." In this text Euripides states

"What man has ever defended the city of his fathers by winning a crown for wrestling well or running fast or throwing a discus far or planting an uppercut on the jaw of an opponent? Do men drive the enemy out of their fatherland by waging war with discus in their hands or by throwing punches through the line of shields? No one is so silly as to do this when he is standing before the steel of the enemy."

(Translated by Stephen Miller)

It should be noted that while Euripides is famous for his writing, during his youth he was trained to be an athlete, and it is alleged that he was a skilled Pankrationist and boxer. Because of his background, Euripides definitely understood the merits of training in athletics. However, Euripides’ comments regarding the worthiness of athletes as soldiers, was a direct result of the increasing professionalism and specialization he saw within athletics. Euripides felt that this professionalism glorified physical strength to the detriment of spiritual and mental growth resulting in a poor soldier.

In the biographical story of Philopoemen, (a Greek statesman and general 252 –183BC) the Greek biographer Plutarch, (46? –120AD), writes that the athletic body and lifestyle were different in every way from those of a soldier.

According to Plutarch, soldiers and athletes had different types of diet, as well as different forms of exercise. Athletes slept and ate regularly, while the soldiers trained to endure wandering, irregularity, and lack of sleep. According to Plutarch, athletics was something that distracted a man from more important things, such as waging war or earning fame.

What’s even more important in the story of “Philopoemen,” is the evidence that asserts certain Greek generals disapproved of using combat sports and athletics for training soldiers. Not only does Philopoemen not practice wrestling he develops a "contempt" for it.

“He (Philopoemen) was strongly inclined to the life of a soldier even from his childhood, and he studied and practiced all that belonged to it, taking great delight in managing of horses and handling of weapons. Because he was naturally fitted to excel in wrestling, some of his friends and tutors recommended his attention to athletic exercises. But he would first be satisfied whether it would not interfere with his becoming a good soldier. They told him, as was the truth, that the one life was directly opposite to the other; the requisite state of body, the ways of living, and the exercises all different: the professed athlete sleeping much and feeding plentifully, punctually regular in his set times of exercise and rest, and apt to spoil all by every little excess or breach of his usual method; whereas the soldier ought to train himself in every variety of change and irregularity, and, above all, to bring himself to endure hunger and loss of sleep without difficulty. Philopoemen, hearing this, not only laid by all thoughts of wrestling and contemned it then, but when he came to be general, discouraged it by all marks of reproach and dishonor he could imagine, as a thing which made men, otherwise excellently fit for war, to be utterly useless and unable to fight on necessary occasions.”

(Translated by John Dryden)

Clearly, Philopomen despised athletics, and when he became a general was noted for saying, "men who are otherwise fit for war became, through athletics, too delicate for battle."

Furthermore, Philopomen is not the only Greek military commander asserted to dislike "sport" related athletics. Both Alexander the Great and Epaminondas (418 – 362BC) show ambivalence and/or disapproval of combat sports.

In Plutarch’s biography of Alexander the Great he writes:

"Indeed, he seems in general to have looked with indifference, if not with dislike, upon the professed athletes. He often appointed prizes, for which not only tragedians and musicians, pipers and harpers, but rhapsodists also, strove to out vie one another; and delighted in all manner of hunting and cudgel-playing, but never gave any encouragement to contests either of boxing or of the pancratium."

(Translated by John Dryden)

In the tale, “Life of Epaminondas,” written by the historian Cornelius Nepos, (100 – 24 BC), Nepos asserts that while Epaminondas practices wrestling, and realizes its benefits, he still spends most of his time doing military exercises. Nepos writes:

"After he grew up and began to apply himself to gymnastic exercises, he studied not so much to increase the strength as the agility of his body; for he thought that strength suited the purposes of wrestlers, but that agility conduced to excellence in war. He used to exercise himself very much, therefore, in running and wrestling, as long as he could grapple, and contend standing with his adversary. But he spent most of his labor upon martial exercises."

Another example providing evidence that someone skilled at combat sports wasn’t always seen as effective on the battlefield can be found in Homer’s "Iliad." In Book twenty-three, Epeius admits that while he is the best boxer among the Achaeons, compared to the rest of the Greek warriors he is an ineffective warrior.

“Son of Atreus --- all you Achaean men-at-arms!
We invite two men --- our best --- to compete for these.
Put up your fists, fight for what you’re worth
The man that Apollo helps outlast the other ---
clearly witnessed here by Achaea’s armies ---
he takes the beast of burden back to his tents
but the one he bets can have the two-eared cup. Line 740
And a powerful, huge man loomed up at once,
Penopeus’ son Epeus, the famous boxing champion.
He clamped a hand on the draft mule and shouted,
“Step right up and get it --- whoever wants that cup!
This mule is mine, I tell you. No Achaean in sight
Will knock me out and take her --- I am the greatest!
So what if I’m not a world-class man of war?
How can a man be first in all events?
I warn you, soldiers --- so help me it’s the truth ---
I’ll crush you with body blows, I’ll crack your ribs to splinters! Line 750
You keep your family mourners near to cart you off ---
Once my fists have worked you down to pulp!””

Book 23 (Translated by Robert Fagless)

Lastly, there is evidence that the gap between athleticism and military training was also considered one of the reasons the Greek empire fell. According to Plutarch, he felt the Greeks should have spent more time practicing military arts instead of sports, even if those sports did involve personal combat.

Plutarch definitely makes his opinion clear that the Romans, "who live for war," beat the Greeks who "engaged to extensively in athletic contests."

Plutarch further asserts:

“The Romans considered nothing to be the cause of the Greek’s enslavement and degeneracy as much as the gymnasia and palaestras, which gave rise to much time wasting and laziness in the cities, and also profligacy, pederasty, and the ruination of the youths’ bodies through sleep, strolls, eurhythmic exercises, and precise diets, because of which they stopped practicing with weaponry and were happy to be called nimble and wrestlers and handsome instead of hoplites (Greek infantry men) and good horsemen.”

“Moralia” (Greek and Roman Questions)

* * *

So in the end what does this all mean? Clearly, training in combat athletics had/has merit, but as these athletic events became more specialized, as athletes became more focused on winning contests a natural deterioration of actual fighting (battle/warfare) skills has to occur.

It’s the same scenario we face today. As more and more martial art systems become sport-oriented, or are practiced solely as a hobby/diversion, the martial aspect of them becomes less and less viable. Studying the Ancient Greeks gives us a good analogy to understand what is happening to martial arts/sports in the modern world.

No Bullshido, the Trademark Violation

A few months ago I posted about a short film named "No Bullshido" that used our dojo as the set for a scene. It was an amusing little piece thrown together in just a weekend for the "48 Hour Film Project."

I had always wondered what reaction the folks at the message board Bullshido.net (famed for calling traditional martial artists LARPers) would have to the film, given its name and the theme of making fun of ego-inflated martial arts. I was expecting them to slag on it, but I didn't expect them to be quite so upset about the name as they are in this thread. The owner of Bullshido.net stated that the film committed "[t]rademark infringement, and we're pursuing options."

This is quite staggering to me… a few non-martial artists make a short film for a competition that coincidentally has the same name through the obvious combination of bullshit and bushido (together at last) and they are talking about legal actions?

I often tell people that as passionate as I am about the martial arts, I really can't stand most martial artists. This is a prime example of why. You collect a bunch of people who love to fight together and they attack everybody else. After all, you cannot win unless others lose.

Given that most folks practice the martial arts for love not money, why would anybody possibly take this issue so seriously?

Powerstrike Forza, Go!

A few years ago, at about this time in the holiday season, I was wandering around Midtown in New York. At Rockefeller Center, among all the joyous Christmas schmaltz, a little TV in a window caught the corner of my eye. I could have sworn I saw a legion of leotarded women swinging bokken around (nah, couldn't be). When I turned around to look back at the TV, it was just quick cuts to views of perfectly normal aerobics classes; but I kept watching and sure enough the sword-aerobics clip came back on.

I had discovered Powerstrike Forza. "Also known as Samurai Sword Training, the one hour class is a supercharged workout that blends elements of two Japanese sword fighting techniques - Kendo and Aikijujitsu."

Just imagine if you traveled to Tokyo and saw a roomful of people with baseball bats doing synchronized batting practice to music.

Actually, as much as I'm amused (bemused?) by visions of Samurai Jazzercize, I'm all for the idea behind this. Kendoka extol the virtues of suburi, exercises with a heavy bokken, for training strength and technique after all; this is what you get if you remove the kendo from suburi—and replace it with house music. From a Western perspective, it sounds like a fresh and fun take on the hoary old idea of training with Indian Clubs. Given what a hard time people often have getting a good upper-body work out with aerobics, it's a great idea. In fact, pretty much anything that can get folks excited about exercise is a good idea.

But still, the silliness can be a bit much. It seems hard for the marketing/press folks to avoid describing these classes as "learning sword fighting" and they always seem to pull out the word "empower." Plus, some of the pictures really do look goofy (this from a guy who wears a pleated "skirt" while he swings his sword around).

The snob in me desperately wants to know what sort of "aikijujutsu" sword fighting the creator has trained in (a bio says she got a "black belt in Shorinjiru Karate and a brown belt in Aikijujitsu, and has trained in kick-boxing for four years").

Somewhere on a news clip, I heard an instructor say "Just keep your body straight, it's all arms."

YouTube
"The Pulse" Magazine
The Official Book

The New Guy Speaks

Well, this is my first contribution to Yachigusa-Ryu’s blog. I was asked to talk a bit about my impressions of my first tameshigiri class - what I expected, what happened, my thoughts on the accident, etc.

Yachigusa Ryu is my first step into the martial arts. At the time of this writing, I have had exactly one month of training. I joined for two reasons: first, to find out what martial arts is really about. It’s been “Hollywooded” to death, but what is it really all about? The second reason is that I wanted to develop mental discipline, and if there’s anything I’ve heard, it’s that the study of any martial arts teaches discipline. Okay, I have to confess, there is a third reason, and that is I just love the samurai sword… I’m a shameless geek, and my love of swords is part of it, but I’ve always felt the samurai sword stood head and shoulders above all others in terms of beauty, function, and mythology.

So by the time we break out the straw mats at my first tameshigiri class, I’m like a kid on Christmas morning. I was lucky enough to get my hands on a Paul Chen sword, which I was going to use at this class. I really did have my doubts about whether it would actually cut, because the blade really didn’t seem too sharp to me, but then what do I know? Sensei assures me it’s fine, and sure enough that straw mat was cut straight through, no effort at all. Wow, this thing is real! In another time and place, that could’ve been someone’s wrist or neck I just severed.


At this point, the evening continues to go by well. I got some good solid cuts and I had some embarrassing misses. I’m the new guy, after all! Then the next student goes up to cut. He cuts the mat, no problem. Then he looks down. He says he just cut himself. He did????? Where’s the blood? I didn’t even see anything! But Sensei sits him down, grabs the first aid kit, presses gauze against his foot, and sure enough the red shows through. Then the student starts to grunt in pain. Sensei has to wrap the student’s foot together tight as a mummy to be sure that the wound doesn’t open wider. (Sword cuts are supposed to get bigger if you keep moving…yes, somebody thought about this…pretty morbid, huh?). Thankfully, the student is able to get himself to the hospital.

Looking back, it happened so fast. No one saw it coming, and no one saw it when it happened! The blade moved so fast, and cut so efficiently, the student didn’t even feel any initial pain.

The next week, I took a look at the stitches on his toe. Now my impression when the accident happened was that he only cut the top of his foot maybe an inch. Imagine my surprise when I see stitches starting at the tip of his toe, and going back at least three inches!! Good Lord, I think to myself. That sword is deadly!

As fascinated as I am with the katana, this incident reminded me, loud and clear, that it is a weapon, the loaded gun of its day. Its every inch is engineered so that it could carry out its single purpose: to kill. The sword wasn’t a toy or a show piece; people died on the end of these blades.

This incident, along with what I’ve learned in kenjutsu thus far, has shown me very clearly how fragile life can be. We deal with weapons that can pierce flesh so well, the victim is sometimes not aware he is being cut until it’s too late. We’re learning to go for the femoral artery when attacking the leg, or how to slash at the throat when attacking high. How easy it is for life to be lost! Life is all we have. If it is lost, nothing else matters. To see how something so important can be so fragile speaks volumes on how precious it really is.

Yachigusa Ryu is not about learning how to beat someone up. It’s not that shallow. This discipline was developed during a lawless time in human history, and as history has shown, adversity breeds greatness. The Yachigusa family developed this style of fighting not because they wanted to kill, but because they wanted to live. These people developed their art against the backdrop that any minute, they could die. So it’s only natural that everything to do, teach and believe would be saturated with that impetus to live life as well as possible. The result is an art that was rooted in everything that makes a human great: discipline, patience, strength, courage, honor, self control and even compassion. Perhaps the greatest paradox in what we do is that by learning to fight and kill, we learn to become better people so that we don’t have to fight and kill.

I hope I’ve only taken the first few steps of what will be a lifetime of learning. There is no greater way to live then to improve oneself constantly. I now say a prayer every once in awhile in thanksgiving that I live in a time and place where I can learn the martial arts to become a better person, and will never have to use it in anger.

-Piya Wannachaiwong

Some Thoughts on the Essays Regarding the Top 10 Principles of Yachigusa Ryu

Men give me credit for some genius. All the genius I have lies in this; when I have a subject in hand, I study it profoundly. Day and night it is before me. My mind becomes pervaded with it. Then the effort that I have made is what people are pleased to call the fruit of genius. It is the fruit of labor and thought.

Alexander Hamilton

Now that I’ve spent almost three months writing down the top ten principles of the Yachigusa Ryu martial art system I have to admit I’ve learned a lot. Yes, it’s true, I definitely learned a lot from this experience.

You see, it’s one thing to explain things orally or with physical demonstrations, and a totally different thing to describe the same things in writing. Writing clearly takes more effort and lucidity, since there is no opportunity to discuss the matter or answer questions that may arise during the explanation.

Because I finally made the effort to sit down and explain our principles in writing, I had to really examine the science within them, and figure out the best manner in which to explain them. This is something I had never really done before. I never felt I had to do it before.

In order to complete this project, I also had to do a lot of extra research. That is something I do routinely, but I normally have no set goal or motivating factors.

However, I didn’t have to do all of the research on my own this time. I had a lot of help from my students. Not only did we have a lot of discussions and debates about each principle and the best way to explain them, there was also a lot of discussion which techniques we should use to illustrate them.

In addition, many of my students aided my endeavor by sharing their expertise, and I really appreciate all their efforts and patience in taking the time to see that I fully comprehended the material they shared. I’ll be the first to admit that mathematics and physics were not my strong points in school.

To be honest, without the aid of my students, and their cooperation during a lot of physical trial and error, this project would still not be finished.

I also want to thank one “blog” reader from Texas who was the first to ask me to write about these principles, and kept e-mailing me with encouragement until I was done. It’s nice to know someone is actually reading this stuff, and appreciates the effort.

While I’m not totally satisfied with many of the essays I wrote (the perfectionist part of me always feels I could have done better no matter what others may think), and question how valuable the information really is, I know I did my best. At least I did my best with the information and transmission skills I have at this time. Hopefully, as I improve in the future, so will my abilities to explain these principles in more precise and intelligible detail.

For now, I know I’ve learned a lot of new information, and gained valuable insights into the intricacies within the principles themselves. That alone was worth the effort, and the insights I gained will definitely improve my skills as a student of the martial arts and as a teacher of life-protection skills.

While I know I benefited from this experience, one of my main goals when I decided to explain these principles was to get other people to share what they knew regarding them.

I know for a fact that these principles are not unique to the system of martial arts I teach. While we may call them by different names than other styles, everyone utilizes these principles to some degree or another. After all, science is science, and there are only so many ways the body can be manipulated and various forces applied.

Like I’ve said many times before, teaching martial arts was never something I thought about when I was young. The fact that I’m teaching today, and that people think I have something interesting to share still amazes me at times.

Of course once I started teaching, I made up my mind to be the best teacher I could be, and to never stop learning. There is an old Latin Proverb that states “By learning you will teach, by teaching you will learn,” and I can honestly say I’ve learned a lot by teaching and listening to what my students have to share. Furthermore, I’ve definitely learned that sometimes the simplest question can lead to so many new discoveries.

William Ward stated:

The mediocre teacher tells. The good teacher explains. The superior teacher demonstrates. The great teacher inspires.

It is my hope that by sharing these principles I willinspire others to come forward and share what they know on these topics. I, for one, would really like to learn more about them, and I promise to investigate any leads, and/or share any and all information I think will help to clarify each topic.

The Top Ten Principles Of Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei - #10 Back Pressure

Since I first stated that the techniques taught at my school were based on principles, and that we focus more on understanding the principles that makes things work than the techniques themselves, people have e-mailed me asking me if I could explain these principles in more detail.

Unfortunately, trying to explain many of these principals in writing is very difficult, since many can’t be explained in words alone. However, I will try my best to describe these principles for the “blog” readers, using words, charts and pictures.

Keep in mind though, that in order to sometimes fully understand a principle you have to also understand other principles that relate to it. Most principles aren’t fully useable on their own, and have to be integrated with others.

Back Pressure

Trying to explain the principle of Back Pressure in written words and illustrations is almost impossible. In fact, it’s hard to describe—period—even in the classroom. And in my experience, trying to explain “Back Pressure” often confuses people more than it helps them.

Of all the top ten principles in the Yachigusa martial art system, Back Pressure is most likely the hardest to teach. And it is definitely the hardest one to learn to utilize properly. However, once learned, properly executed Back Pressure will greatly increase a martial art practitioner’s efficiency and effectiveness at projecting others.

To be honest, even though we use Back Pressure in many of our techniques, to this day I still find it hard to come up with a concise description: what it is, why it works, or how to practice it. I am still looking for an easy method with which to teach my students how to learn to apply it properly.

The main reason why teaching the principle of Back Pressure is so difficult is that Back Pressure is basically an intangible force. It is intangible in the sense that Back Pressure cannot be seen, and when executed properly the movement that creates the force is relatively hard to perceive. This makes the movements hard for others to emulate.

Furthermore, Back Pressure is definitely one of those forces where “less is more.” Using too much torque/power actually makes techniques less effective. This means that Back Pressure is a principle that can’t be faked or forced; you either do it in the right way at the right moment, or it won’t work.

Now before I continue to try and explain what Back Pressure is let me start by stating what it is not. Back Pressure is NOT Chi, Ki, or some other mystical force. It is an application of science. However, I’ll be the first to say that one could easily con others into believing it is something else; and the truth is that many upper level martial art practitioners do.

However, while Back Pressure is not something mystical, when one is describing it or trying to understand it, one must think “outside of the box” in order to fully grasp the concept.

In the most simplistic language possible, Back Pressure is a specific force that is generated by rotating or sharply twisting the back/hips. This rotational force is used to accelerate one’s opponent— usually in a manner that projects them off balance and to the ground.

It is a circular force that basically moves in a semi-arching circle from point “A” to the centerline of the aggressor, point "B."

In this photo Subject "A" rotates his back creating pressure to Subject "B’s" centerline.

While the “force” can certainly be felt, this “force” has no real direct relationship to the connection points (arms in picture above) between tori and uke. In other words, while tori and uke might only be connected at the arm, the force that actually makes the technique feasible comes from Back Pressure attacking the centerline of one’s opponent.

Confused yet? If you are, you’re like most of my students when first introduced to this topic. In fact, when I initially discuss the topic with new students, I often get perplexed looks; I often wonder if they think I’m just babbling.

While I do indeed often babble, the truth is that in order to understand Back Pressure one must understand basic “Body Geometry,” and some basic physics.

I’ll get to the physics later, but let's start with the premise that human body exists on several planes. These planes are commonly referred to as the:

• Coronal (Frontal) Plane – A vertical plane running from side to side; it divides the body or any of its parts into anterior and posterior portions.
  
• Sagittal (Lateral) Plane – A vertical plane running from front to back; it divides the body or any of its parts into right and left sides.
  
• Transverse (Horizontal) Plane - A horizontal plane; it divides the body or any of its parts into upper and lower parts.

As you will note, all of these planes share one common trait; they are all located along the midline of the body and intersect on the body’s axis. In addition, one can divide each of these planes into 45 degree sectors in a manner identical to the more familiar Happo No Kazushi (eight directions of breaking balance) diagram. I believe I’ve stated numerous times that Happo No Kazushi is an extremely important science to fully understand.

Thinking “outside of the box,” let's pretend that the lines dividing each of the three planes actually exist and extend away from the body as in the diagram. Imagine that these lines are rigid (like rods), fixed to the body, and move in direct correspondence to the movements of the body.

In other words, when the subject is standing still these lines are just as pictured. However, if the subject rotates his upper body, without moving his feet, those lines will also move the same distance.

Now, assuming these lines exist and are rigid like rods, they would push anything that may happen to be in their way as the person rotated. That would be Back Pressure.

Of course, in the real world there are no invisible lines that extend from our bodies. So the question I; if there is nothing there to actually “push” with, how can Back Pressure work?

As I was being taught the Aiki arts I was always told that one of the goals of proper Aiki technique was to learn to “blend/flow” with ones opponent. This often meant understanding the concept that when two individuals become connected together the truly become as one. They share a common point of center and any movement done by one person will create a direct resulting movement on the other.

Imagine there are two individuals sharing a common center of balance, which I’ll refer to as the "axis point." It’s easy to see that if Subject "A" rotates his upper body rearwards to his left side, his right side moves forward a corresponding 45 degrees.

Since both parties share a common axis point, as "A" moves he also pushes subject "B." The force may not come from the connection point, but since there is a direct relationship between the two subjects, whenever one moves so does the other. The torque of the body from Subject "A" produces the force that creates the movement, and that is Back Pressure.

Now for the more scientific explanation.

Fortunately for me, I have a student who majored in physics at Stanford University and has given the science of Back Pressure a lot of careful scrutiny. Due to his efforts, we actually have a working model we can demonstrate Back Pressure on at the school. Unfortunately, that model won't work in this format, though we hope to eventually film it and add that to the “blog.” Until then. I will defer to his written explanation.

* * *

A Simplistic Model for Understanding Back Pressure

By Spencer Burns

As is traditional in physics, we should simplify the problem until it is almost, but not quite, trivial. The basic model I'm going to talk about consists of two masses connected by a bar. These represent the tori (who applies the technique), the uke (who receives it), and their connection. We want to think about how force can be exerted on the "tori" to cause the "uke" to move in a direction perpendicular to the connection with minimal effort or disruption. The apparent force that causes that perpendicular motion is the "Back Pressure."

"Zeroth Order" Model

The simplest thing for thinking about the mechanics of Back Pressure is to imagine one of those "balancing man" toys.

Ignore the "man" in the center; he's just a fulcrum. Consider the two weights on the sides: these are the uke and the tori. When you push on tori, then uke also moves. This is the most basic model of Back Pressure: uke and tori rotate as one around their common center of mass (at the fulcrum).

"First Order" Model

The major failing of the "balancing man" model is that in the real world, there is no fixed fulcrum. So let's be more formal: the tori and uke are rectangles of width "w" and mass "m". They are connected by a massless rigid bar of length "2d-w"; that is, the distance from the center of the bar (which is the common center of mass of the system) to the center of mass of each rectangle is "d". This system has no fixed point and is free to move in any direction.

Naively, we push on the center of tori, perpendicular to the connection, with an impulse "I". This would make tori move in a line at a speed of "I/m" if he weren't attached to uke. However, the impulse moves the combined center of mass of uke + tori linearly forward at a speed of "I / 2m" while simultaneously inducing a rotational velocity of "I / 2md". The instantaneous effect of this is that tori moves forwards at speed "I/m" while uke twists but doesn't move laterally at all, as in the diagram below.

In a real world analogy, tori just applied back pressure incorrectly and has the feeling of having "bounced off" uke while uke just stands there well balanced.

This is the opposite of what we want; we would like to see tori stay stationary while uke moves. Consider instead what happens if we give impulse Ia backwards on the outer edge of tori and impults Ib forwards on the inner edge, with Ib<Ia. If we balance the forces exactly right, such that Ib = (2d+w)/(2d-w)*Ia, then we have the situation where tori is instantaneously motionless (but rotating), while uke is moving forwards at speed (Ib-Ia)/m—exactly the opposite of the naive case.

In a real word analogy, tori would be simultaneously moving both of his hips in opposite directions with a balance of force such that he can "hit" uke with Back Pressure without having to move or losing his balance.

In other words, the Back Pressure in this case involves balancing a translation motion of uke and tori perpendicular to their connection together with a rotation around their common center of mass in such a manner that tori remains stable while uke is displaced in a crisp fashion.

There are many other configurations in which Back Pressure can be applied, but they all involve similar physics. In each case, the "first order" issue is balancing rotational and translational impulses on the connected uke-tori "system" such that tori's center remains stationary while uke's center is displaced.

* * *

Like I said at the beginning, describing Back Pressure—especially in this format—is very difficult. Hopefully, between Spencer and I, we have at least started to transmit the core of what we know. Or, I should say, the parts that we have figured out how to explain in writing.

Fortunately, plans are in the works to film and post more details on this principle as well as the other nine already posted. While there is no projected date to complete this project, we should do it by the beginning of the New Year. At least, that’s what I’m hoping for.

Until then, please feel free to ask questions. Or, more importantly, if you have any clearer explanations please share them with me so I can continue my study of this principle.

I realize that almost every Aiki/Budo system utilizes this principle, whether explicitly or implicitly. I’m sure there are many instructors/students who have faced the perplexing problem of verbally passing on this principle. I, for one, would find it extremely interesting to see how others describe/explain this principle.

* * *

The article on this blog on the Principle of Back Pressure recently caused controversy after it was (much to our surprise) featured on the front page of the Aikido Journal website. Part of the anger we received was due to the fact that nothing in the "Back Pressure" article gave credit to Don Angier of Yanagi ryu.

That was a mistake on our part, and we apologize.

We had intended to give Mr. Angier significant credit for the debt we owe him, but due to negligence during editing, that section of the original article was not included. Indeed, in the other "principles" essays, Mr. Angier was given significant credit for his help (e.g. the essay on #9 Chains of Motion/Commutive Locking).

Mr. Angier not only provided the name "Back Pressure," but he also really opened our eyes as to how to understand the subtleties. The way Gary has described it to me is that he had previously had an understanding of this principle on a less sophisticated level and had asked other instructors about it; most jujutsu instructors also had an intuitive understanding of Back Pressure, but no term to describe it. However, Mr. Angier was able to describe it in more detail and give us the language to describe it. So as a named principle, this is not something that was handed down to us from the ages, but we have adapted it because of its importance.

As has been pointed out, if one really wants to understand this principle more deeply, Mr. Angier would be a superior source of knowledge. Be we have found working on this article to be very educational for us and we hope that it has been helpful for others. Our intention has never been to try to take credit for Mr. Angier or anybody else's work; rather, we are trying to better understand these principles of how the human body moves and share with others our meager understanding.

We are sorry once again for the omission.

--Spencer Burns
March 05, 2007

Dojo Injuries

Every now and then, conversations at the school arise regarding injuries people have witnessed while training in the martial arts. Sometimes these conversation revolve around the various injuries we personally have suffered while training, but more often than not we talk about injuries that have happened to friends and training partners.

Of course, like many conversations, these discussions often slowly but surely turn into a game of "one-upmanship" as each person wants to top the last person's story or personal suffering.

Sometimes the stories are so bizarre that it's hard to believe them, and people stare at each other in disbelief. Other times they are so funny that we forget someone really suffered.

In either case, these stories and the injuries they describe are a reminder that really bad things can happen, and that they can happen in an instant. One second of inattention or dropping one’s guard can lead to permanent scars, loss of limbs, or a reduction in one’s overall quality of life.

No matter whether the injuries are short term or permanent, these stories are clearly “Cautionary Tales.” Tales people should not take so lightly, and should learn from.

* * *

Case in point: Several weeks ago I told a story, which I have to admit is very hard to believe. To be honest, if I hadn’t seen it myself I would have to question whether it was true or not. However, I was there, and witnessed every second of it.

To this day, I’m still not sure how it happened, but I will never forget it, nor will I forget my emotions at the moment when it occurred. Shocked, sickened, and definitely in a state of panic worrying about the ramifications. I wish it had all been just a dream. However, bad things do happen, and to this day this event is always in the back of mind reminding me to be careful.

Many years ago, I had several friends I would practice with. We were a group of martial artists that worked together to figure out why our teachers made us do certain things in class, and how we could use what we knew more efficiently and effectively. It was sort of a study group where we analyzed movements within forms, and tried to make sense of all the various aspects of the martial arts we studied.

Each one of us had a different martial art background, as well our individual reasons why we trained. The one thing that united us was our desire to learn techniques that had real world effectiveness, and a desire to seek out knowledge we felt we were not getting form our respective teachers. Actually, we were pretty progressive for the early 80’s, and what we were doing was something we definitely had to keep hidden from our personal instructors.

Well one day while working on some iai-jutsu (sword draws) and drills, a friend of one of my friends decided to show us some new forms he had learned while visiting Japan. Of course, we were all excited to see them.

The first forms were executed with grace and precision. The guy actually looked like he knew what he was doing.

Then all of a sudden, disaster!

Sure, that last draw was excellent as was the cut to his imaginary opponent. Then came the chiburi (flipping blood off the sword after cutting an opponent), which at first appeared to be as good as the draw. In fact we were all ready to congratulate the guy on a job well done, and to ask him to teach us what he just done.

That, of course, was the calm before the storm.

Now, as he tells the story, everything was going fine, he had just completed the chiburi, and was getting ready for noto (putting the sword back in the scabbard). For some unknown reason he looked down at the ground and saw some red liquid spots on the floor.

Puzzled by what he saw, and sure these spots hadn’t been on the floor a few seconds earlier, he started to look around for their source.

As he looked more closely at the floor, he saw several flesh colored objects lying on the ground in front of him. Objects he definitely knew hadn’t been there moments before.

On closer inspection he discovered to his horror that they were severed toes.

Then it hit him they just weren’t just toes, they were his severed toes.

Yes, during his chiburi he had sliced off three of his toes.

It was a clean cut, and so fast and smooth he didn’t even feel it.

Of course, once he processed what had happened, and now that he was now minus a few toes, he fell to the floor in agonizing pain.

Now, you can imagine the shock and disbelief that overwhelmed the rest of us. I mean, you see things happen like this in the movies, but not in real life. I felt like this really couldn’t have happened.

Of course, as dumbfounded as we were, we had to quickly gain our composure. Our friend’s life was now in jeopardy.

It took a combined effort to clam him down enough to wrap his foot, gather and ice his toes, and rush him to the emergency room, but we did it. I’m not sure how. I’m also sure we broke every traffic law in the process, but within minutes he was at the hospital.

Now I’m sure you can imagine the looks we got, when we told the staff at the hospital what had happened. Sword injuries are not very common in the 20th century, and once again anyone who wasn’t there would have his or her doubts as to what actually occurred. In this case, because of our ages and the nature of the injury, the police were even called and his injury was investigated just to make sure we were not lying.

Fortunately, this story has a happy ending, and his toes were reattached. It took him months to recover, and he lost a lot of sensation. But except for some major scarring, one would never know what had happened.

Now, I share this tale with no intention of grossing people out. I, for one, actually think it illustrates how quickly things can go wrong. I tell this tale to show people how important it is to always focus on what they are doing, especially when it comes to working with lethal weaponry.

Sure, people kind of laugh when they hear this story, but we’re normally not laughing at the guy. We’re laughing about the morbidity of what happened, realizing that if we make a stupid mistake the same thing or worse can happen to us. It’s an uneasy type of laughter we share to hide our repulsion to the fact that these things happen.

* * *

By now you may be wondering what prompted me to share such a tale with the world. Well if you will remember I said these stories should act as cautionary tales. They should teach us to be careful and always pay attention to what we are doing.

When I told this story less than a week ago I never imagined I would have to relive it. However, on Friday Nov. 17th 2006 I did. Well, sort of.

On Friday the 17th we were having a tameshigiri class (cutting rolled reed mats). It had been months since our last one, and everyone was eager to try it, especially those who had never done it before.

Of course it also had to be one of those nights where I had a guest and also one where we had an uncommon amount of onlookers from the street. Both of these are fairly unusual events for my school.

The night started off normal enough, with each person taking their turn with mixed results.

The goal of the tameshigiri class was to have fun, while gaining some insight into the proper way to cut with the katana. It’s a chance to witness the lethality of the swords we use, which normally builds a healthy respect between practitioners and their blades.

Sometimes I think people doubt just how dangerous these swords are. As one person mentioned, he didn’t think his new sword really looked like it was sharp. Of course it was and it cut through the tatami mats with ease.

Like I said the class started off like normal. However, that was about to change. In an instant the whole mood and tone changed.

Now I could describe what went wrong step-by-step, and just how many mistakes my poor student made. How he didn’t follow instructions, or the lackadaisical way he approached his task.

I could air my frustration about what happened, but I won't since I feel genuinely sorry for the guy. I have no intention to admonish him publicly. Let's just say that he has done martial arts long enough to know the risks; he knows what he did wrong, and he is ultimately the one who will suffer until things heal.

The good news is my student didn’t sever any toes completely off. In fact, only one toe was injured, though I have to say that toe was sliced right to the bone from tip to base.

Now, expressions can be worth a thousand words, and his face at the moment when this happened was priceless. It was clearly a combination of bewilderment, and anger towards himself for doing what ultimately can only be categorized as stupidity.

At first what he did didn’t hit me. And even when he verbally validated what I thought had happened, I was hoping, should I say praying, he was kidding. Unfortunately he wasn’t. He had in fact cut himself. In many ways it was almost like my story coming back to haunt me.

To say that everyone was shocked would be an understatement. It took a while after he left for the hospital for everyone to regain their composure and start cutting again. Needless to say, everyone was a lot more careful for the rest of the night, and it will be something no one present will ever forget.

Now I know one day this story will be shared with others. Those that hear it will wonder if it’s really true or not. There will uneasy laughter, as the realization that these things are possible registers within each individual psyche.

All I can hope is that by sharing such stories I stop at least a few people from injuring themselves. If that means I make people stop and think about what they are doing, or the manner in which they do things, than all the suffering I have witnessed, the injuries I have suffered personally have some meaning.

I’ve always been told to “learn from the mistakes of others.” And to be honest, that phrase has a tremendous amount of validity to it.

[C.f. earlier postings on accidents and live swords:
Respecting Live Swords by Spencer on 2006-04-19
Live Blades by Gary on 2006-05-05
Live Blades A Follow Up by Gary on 2006-05-10
References for Live Blades - A Follow Up by Spencer on 2006-05-10]

The Top Ten Principles Of Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei - #9 Chains Of Motion / Commutive Locking

Since I first stated that the techniques taught at my school were based on principles, and that we focus more on understanding the principles that makes things work than the techniques themselves, people have e-mailed me asking me if I could explain these principles in more detail.

Unfortunately, trying to explain many of these principals in writing is very difficult, since many can’t be explained in words alone. However, I will try my best to describe these principles for the “blog” readers, using words, charts and pictures.

Keep in mind though, that in order to sometimes fully understand a principle you have to also understand other principles that relate to it. Most principles aren’t fully useable on their own, and have to be integrated with others.

Commutive Locking

I originally called this principle "Chains Of Motion," which quite literally explains what the principle is all about.

However, I started using a different term about twelve years ago after hearing Don Angier, Soke of Yanagi Ryu, talk about this principle. He called it “Commutive Locking,” which I thought sounded a lot better. Since I often defer to his expertise on specific elements of the martial art I do, I switched to his terminology.

Recently it has been brought to my attention recently that Mr. Angier’s terminology might be inaccurate. "Commutive" is not a proper word, although there is something called a "commutator" that is used in the sequential “control of current to produce torque” in an electric motor. It is possible that Mr. Angier uses this term as a metaphor—referring to the sequential movement which is essential in this principle—but I have no first hand knowledge if this assertion is accurate. [See note below]

Chances are that a better term for this principle would be “Cumulative Locking,” which I’ve been informed is a better translation of a Japanese term (unfortunately, I do not know what that term is) that relates to this principle. In this instance, cumulative is defined as the act of following successively.

However, the name of this principle really isn’t as important as understanding it fully, or realizing its importance. To be very honest, understanding this principle is absolutely critical in any art that utilizes joint locks, projections (throws), and/or restraining holds.

The simplest explanation of Chains Of Motion is: One joint locks up another joint which locks up another joint. It is sort of like taking a length of chain and twisting it until it become all knotted up.

In other words one starts twisting at point “A,” which ultimately effects part “B,” and so on and so on until there is so much tension that the chain can no longer twist either B must let go or the chain will break.

To illustrate this concept in a martial art context I like to use a commonly done technique called kotegaeshi. kotegaeshi clearly demonstrates how the bones, muscles, tendons, and joints of the body are rotated to the point where they lock up and become “knotted” like the chain.

Click for full size

In the first picture, the arm is in its natural state. As the hand and wrist are rotated outwards the ulna and radius bones lock at the elbow: thus rotating the humerus, which in turn ultimately locks at the shoulder joint. The end result is that the uke either falls with the rotating force or his arm/shoulder joint is injured—often at multiple points.

While the above is a very simplified explanation of the process, it clearly shows the progressions from the point of applied force (the hand) to the shoulder. In order to fully understand the specific body mechanics involved in this technique and others like it, I strongly suggest that one reads an anatomy book.

The whole concept behind the principle of Chains of Motion is that he human skeleton can be divided into two parts.

I refer to the first part as those joints that form “Open Chains.” By this I mean joints that that can move independently without causing other joints to move in reaction.

The second division is called “Closed Chains,” which I use to describe joints that when moved cause other joints to move through reactive motion.

These “Chains” are further divided as follows:

• Chain #1 – Torso (head, neck, and trunk)
  
• Chain #2 – Upper Extremities (shoulders and arms)
  This chain is determined by the movement and structure of the collarbone, scapula, and the connection of the arm to the trunk.
  Upper extremities have the greatest range of motion.
  
• Chain #3 - Lower Extremities (pelvis and legs)
  This chain is determined by the connections of the upper leg to the torso from the hips to the femur to the knees to the fibula and tibia down through the ankles to the feet.

In the example of kotegaeshi, "Chain #2 Upper Extremities" is being manipulated in a specific, sequential order. As a result, a predetermined and repeatable reaction occurs. It requires very little force, and pain is not necessary to make the technique work.

However, as previously stated, this is just a superficial description of what is occurring and what the principle of Chains of Motion is all about. Unfortunately, in many styles of martial arts, kotegaeshi is simply completed by torquing the wrist to the point where it hurts so much that the person falls in order to prevent the wrist from breaking. In this case, kotegaeshi becomes nothing more than a joint lock—a joint lock designed to attack the wrist.

From a martial arts perspective, where a technique's merits must be judged on effectiveness, simply doing kotegaeshi as a joint lock misses the point. There is a big difference between doing simple “Joint Locks” and doing “Chains Of Motion”/"Commutive Locking" even though both methods are often referred to as kansetsu waza.

Kansetsu Waza

When I was younger, my teacher often referred to all joint locks as kansetsu waza (literally, "joint technique"). However, specific kansetsu waza were often categorized by the joint used and/or the technique(s) used to manipulate them. For example, wrist techniques were kote waza, finger locks were yubi waza, and arm locks were ude waza.

According to my teacher, kansetsu waza, was a generic term that referred to exploiting mechanical weak points of the body by applying force at one specific point, or by manipulating a joint (or joints) to their limit (past their normal range of motion). These kansetsu waza could be used as a means to project an opponent (break their balance), restrain an opponent, or injure/break a specific part of the body.

However, since my teacher’s death in 1989, I have come to discover that there are two main types of kansetsu waza applications. The first is the easiest to teach, and is the most often seen method. This method basically involves twisting, rotating, or bending a specific joint in a manner that moves the joint either past its normal range of motion or directly opposed to its direction of motion.

The second method is subtler and often only demonstrated by senior practitioners who have transcended the first type or locks. In this form, joints are manipulated precisely using proper sequential movement and alignment, thus locking the entire skeletal frame.

Clearly, the first method is easier to accomplish, yet often requires more strength in order to be effective. The main drawback to these methods is that while one is applying such techniques, the opponent can often feel the lock being applied, giving him a greater chance of launching a counter-defense.

The second method, however, requires a lot of practice and finesse to do properly. It also requires proper comprehension of human anatomy, physics, and physiology. Yet, while more difficult to accomplish, when done properly these methods require little or no strength. And by the time one’s opponent realizes what is happening it is too late to launch a counter-defense.

In addition, during the application of these second methods, the stimulus of pain is not required. It is not even necessarily an objective. It may be a welcome byproduct, but it is not the primary goal, since pain can be subjective. (Note: no real martial art technique, in any martial art system, should ever rely on pain in order to be effective. NEVER!)

Originally, I was going to spend a lot of time writing about anatomy and physiology in order to explain the principle of Chains of Motion to the fullest of my ability. However, that would require pages and pages of text, and I would still have to leave a ton of material out. That would not be fair to those individuals who seriously want to learn.

To be honest, I am often shocked at how few martial artists, even extremely highly ranked ones, ever bother to pick up and read an anatomy book. And if they do, they rarely study it in depth. It’s a fact that never ceases to amaze me.

I mean, I realized that understanding human anatomy was essential to fully understand my martial art techniques in my early teens. That was long before teaching others was something I ever considered. For me, understanding how the body works—its structure and its limitations—was crucial in order for me to be more effective with less effort.

Sure, my teacher covered the various applicable sciences in depth—to the best of his ability and with a serious language barrier between us. But seeking out even more information and studying different sciences in detail is what truly separates martial artists from martial hobbyists.

Okay, I’m getting preachy and off topic. My point is that if you study anatomy, you will understand how to do the principle of Chains of Motion. The simple truth is that compared to all of the principles I have covered so far, this is one of the easiest to understand and—with some serious trial and error—to learn.

[Editors note (for the terminologically inclined): There seems to be a lot of confusion in the Aikido and Jujutsu worlds as to exactly what Mr. Angier calls this principle. This is presumably because "commutive" is not a word in the dictionary.

One most often sees this principle referred to as "Commutative Locking," even though that is not very appropriate in a literal sense (it would imply you can do the lock in any order). I have also heard "Communicative Locking," which sounds quite nice. It has been speculated that "Cumulative Locking" would be closest to the original concept.

It is possible Mr. Angier intended to use the term "cumulative." He also might have purposely created a new word to make a metaphor with "commutator" or some other concept. See this thread for reference and details.]

Affiliations

Back in March and July of this year when my integrity as a martial artist was being attacked on forums such as E-budo.com and Bullshido.com I was ridiculed for comments I made regarding my affiliations with certain Martial Art Associations.

Basically, the ridicule came from a disclaimer I made which was posted as follows:

While a member of these organizations it does not mean he involves himself in any of their politics, supports or justifies their positions on the merits, abilities, or skills of instructors related, or not related, within their organizations, or believes one organization has more validity to represent the arts than another.

The people discussing this matter were under the assumption that I have the type of ego where I felt I was doing these organizations a favor by being a member of them. They were also under the assumption that I paid to be a member of these groups.

First of all, I’m not doing anyone any favors by joining their group. I’m just a small fish in a big pond.

Then again, hardly any of these organizations have done me any favors by being a member in their group either. In fact, the only benefit I have received by being a member is the knowledge that I should be extremely wary of affiliating myself with any organization, period.

The sad fact is that in the “business” end of the martial arts there are many instructors with over-inflated egos who are only out to make a buck. In addition, there are many others who judge you by the company you keep.

Of course, it was because of these reasons that I was open about who listed me as a member of their group. “Hiding’ the info, which is readably available to anyone searching for it, would just have looked worse. I have nothing to hide and put the info out there myself.

However, by doing so, I realized I had to put a disclaimer since I often don’t agree with many of the practices martial art organizations seem to perpetuate (meaningless ranks, promises to help increase enrollment, upper level training, etc.).

I realize that to the reader this topic may seem as old news and that I’m beating a dead horse, but things have happened recently to remind me that one can in fact become a member of an organization without ever requesting it.

* * *

About two weeks ago I received a large envelope from Germany. I thought it was from my mother who is there on vacation (lucky her). However, what was inside surprised the hell out of me.

The first item was a letter of introduction written by Mr. Siegfried Boedeker, informing me I was now a life member of the Nippon Yawara Ryu Aiki-Ju-Jitsu Renmei.

Now, I have no idea who Mr. Boedecker is or what his organization is all about. Nor do I believe we have ever met. In fact, I doubt he would be able to pick me out in a room if we happened to cross paths. This was absolutely something I never requested, and I have no idea how they got my address.

Now if the membership to his organization wasn’t a big enough surprise, the promotional certificates that came along with it were even better.

I’m proud to announce to the world that I am now an 8th Dan Hanshi according to the World Ju-Jitsu Aiki-Bujutsu Federation.

Click for full size

Furthermore, I have attained the level of Grandmaster 8th Dan Hanshi according to the Yawara Ryu Aiki-Ju-Jitsu Renmei, and I now have a lifetime membership with the group.

Click for full size

If these “awards” weren’t enough accolades, I’m also an Honorary Grandmaster 8th Dan Hanshi in the European Assocation of Daito Ryu Aiki Bujutsu.

Click for full size

Now what does all of this mean? Like I said, I have no idea who Mr. Boedeker is or what these organizations are all about. Then again Mr. Boedeker didn’t ask me for a dime. I’m assuming my life membership is free and all these things were gifts for all my hard work and effort through the years. But this is hard work and effort Mr. Boedeker would have absolutely no clue about since he is no more familiar with my history than I am of his.

Is it a scam, or is Mr. Boedeker just trying to organize a “fraternal” group of like-minded people? I don’t know and I suspect I will never know. I further suspect it’s most likely a combination of things.

I truly believe many martial art organizations started off with genuinely good intent, but unfortunately lost their directions along the way.

Certainly, if it weren’t for the promotional certificates I would tend to give Mr. Boedeker’s group more validation. However, promoting people one has never met, never trained with, or never seen in action is really a big warning sign to me. A BIG BIG WARNING!

All kidding aside, and without wanting to insult Mr. Boedeker, my point with all of this is that it is possible to become a life member in an organization without requesting it. It is possible to be promoted by people one has never met. And that’s were the danger lies.

If this group has a posted membership on the Internet, and my name is on it, people will judge me by the company I keep. However, in this case, as in others I’ve already listed on my web page, I have never met these people, never trained with them, never taught for them, and in all but two cases never requested a membership with them.

This of course leads back to the original disclaimer I posted regarding my affiliation with various groups.

Mr. Boedeker might be a great practitioner of the martial arts. His group may be legit. We might even be on the same page when it comes to our views on the martial arts. The truth is that I don’t know; and until I do know for certain, how could I ever blindly endorse him or his group? Yet, I am now officially a member of this group.

Until I meet the man, train with him, teach for him, and see for myself what he has to offer and what I think of him as a person I will continue to state:

1. I don’t involve myself with any of his group's politics.
   
2. I don’t support or justify their positions.
   
3. I make no claims as to his abilities, or the instructors related to the groups he represents.
   
4. I make no claim that his group is any more valid, upstanding, or ethical than any other group.

The same goes for any other group that I am now or have ever been affiliated with.

So judge me by the company you think I keep. Or, if you really think you’re the better person, take the time to get to really know me before you mock me to the world.

And before you wise guys make the obvious point of why I don’t write back and decline all of this, who says I haven’t? More importantly why should I feel the need to do so? I know what these promotions are worth. So do my students.

[Editors note: For the lineage groupies: It appears that this "Aiki-ju-jitsu" and "Daito Ryu" certification traces lineage from Mr. Boedeker through Cliff Witcher and Martin J. Rogers of "Zen Ha Daito Ryu" (a.k.a. "Zen Kenpo Ryu") and thence to John Williams of "Saigo Ha Daito Ryu." Saigo Ha Daito Ryu does not descend from Takeda Sokaku but traces its lineage back to an older generation of the Takeda clan.]

Bowing

I recently came across this essay by David Lowry on bowing in the Japanese martial arts.

In our small dojo, we are not very formal on a day to day basis and tend to let the finer points of etiquette slide. I suppose we have the poor manners of a bunch of barbarians in a garage, which is what we are. Nevertheless, it is important for us to know etiquette both to put our art in its proper context and to know how to behave in public.

This article is of note for both the historical context it gives, which I did not know to that level of detail, and as a reminder of the proper forms.

For example, the formal bow from seiza in our school is exactly what he describes as the "Ogasawara style seated bow that was used in certain situations where the person to whom one is bowing might have hostile intentions":

[Kneeling in seiza with] hands on the thighs, the left hand moves down to the floor first, then the right, then comes a bow with one's forehead placed approximately over a triangle formed by the thumbs and forefingers of both hands spread out. Coming up from the bow the order is reversed; the right hand moves back to the thigh, then the left.

This essay is an excerpt from his new book about the history of martial arts traditions, "In the Dojo". While the arrogance Mr. Lowry often displays in his writing can rub me the wrong way, he certainly knows his stuff and is a good writer. Assuming this essay is indicative of the new book, it looks to be worth a read.

What Does it Mean to be Aiki[ju]jutsu?

We usually refer to the art we practice as aikijutsu or aikijujutsu as a way of saying that we do subtle traditional jujutsu and weapon arts. Sometimes use these words to describe the whole art and sometimes for specific parts of it. It's hard to describe to people what these terms mean. In fact, I've read a lot of angry opinions on what aiki arts are and who has the "right" to use the word aikijujutsu.

Traditionally, marital arts were not called aikijutsu/aikijujutsu. These are modern (well, post-Edo) words for very subtle jujutsu either coined or popularized by the art of Daito-Ryu. However aiki is a much older word for certain principles of the martial arts.

Defining aiki is not easy; nobody quite agrees on a definition. I like to use the term "misdirection"; aiki techniques are ways of tricking your opponent's body and mind into betraying him. Many Aikido folks use metaphysical—or even magical—concepts of ki to define aiki. The simplest tongue and cheek definition is: any technique you can do to a piece of furniture is jujutsu, any technique you can only do to a human is aiki. The important thing is that techniques accomplished with aiki are very subtle and require little mechanical force. The reams of essays that Gary is in the middle of writing for this blog give some indication of how deep the study of aiki is.

But as for "aiki-jutsu" and "aiki-jujutsu," some controversy abounds. Is any jujutsu accomplished using aiki aikijujutsu? For that matter, is Aikido (which is descended from Daito-Ryu) a form of aikijujutsu? Does only Daito-Ryu have the right to call itself aikijujutsu?

By my own observation, when a school claims to teach aikijutsu or aikijujutsu, it usually means one of four things (in descending order of legitimacy):

1. The school is related to (or part of) Daito-Ryu.
   
2. The school teaches an old and subtle style of jujutsu and uses the word aiki[ju]jutsu to distinguish itself from harder or more modern jujutsu styles.
   
3. The teacher has learned both Aikido and jujutsu and is combining them, possibly trying to resynthesize more traditional aikijujutsu.
   
4. The school teaches straight-up jujutsu with little aiki but is using the word to stand out from other schools.

Of course, getting an honest answer from an aiki[ju]jutsu school about which they are teaching is hard. Certainly, many schools who are in #4 spin lineage tales to claim a connection to Daito-Ryu, even if they use little aiki (bringing back the question of "what is aiki?"). After all, everybody always wants to be a little more special.

The current consensus (on the English speaking Internet at least) seems to be that only category #1 can be "aikijujutsu" and that category #2 can be "aikijutsu." I do not know if that makes sense or not, but as we are in #2 I've tried to be politically correct in public and only use the word "aikijutsu" on our website. In private, we say aikijutsu and aikijujutsu pretty interchangeably.

This position is probably best articulated in this post by Toby Threadgill. It is worth noting that his art (Takamura ha Shindo Yoshin Kai) is referred to as "jujutsu", even though aiki seems to be a core part of the art.

The most illuminating thing I've read about the usage of the word "aiki" outside of Daito-Ryu is this passage from an interview with Kuroda Tetsuzan

Kuroda sensei does not use the word aiki. When this word was becoming popular his grandfather Yasuji felt that all jujitsu should be that subtle and there was no need for a word to describe it.

Well said.

The Top Ten Principles Of Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei - #7 Feet Always Pull and #8 Hands Always Push

Since I first stated that the techniques taught at my school were based on principles, and that we focus more on understanding the principles that makes things work than the techniques themselves, people have e-mailed me asking me if I could explain these principles in more detail.

Unfortunately, trying to explain many of these principals in writing is very difficult, since many can’t be explained in words alone. However, I will try my best to describe these principles for the “blog” readers, using words, charts and pictures.

Keep in mind though, that in order to sometimes fully understand a principle you have to also understand other principles that relate to it. Most principles aren’t fully useable on their own, and have to be integrated with others.

Feet Always Pull / Hands Always Push

(Aka: Feet Never Push / Hands Never Pull)

To be honest, when I started to write explanations for the top ten principles I had no idea how to properly explain this one. I also knew that photographs would basically be useless since on a static image a push can look like a pull, and a pull can look like a push.

In addition, the terminology used to describe these principles may just be a matter of linguistics. Many arm movements that we consider a "push" could reasonably be called a "pull" from other points of view. I speculate that many martial art practitioners, especially those involved with older Budo arts that have a multitude of joint locks and projections, already utilize these principles even if they are unaware of whether the movement they make is a push or a pull—or even why it matters.

I know that in my case, I had never thought about it until I heard Don Angier, Soke of Yanagi Ryu, explain this principle at a seminar. Then it dawned on me why my teacher was so “fanatic” about moving my arms and feet in such a specific manner. Thus, while I knew these principles already, I credit Mr. Angier for the terminology, since prior to him I had no word/phrase to explain these concepts.

Of course, it still took me a few years more of examination before I discovered that these principles were always applicable and yet more years to start to explain them properly. My explanations are often made with physical demonstrations showing the different reactions pushing and/or pulling make on one’s uke (person receiving the technique) during a technique.

Fortunately, while I may lack the skills to adequately explain these two principles in writing on my own, I have some very intelligent senior students (one of whom has a degree in physics) who were patient enough to discuss the best way to explain these two principles based on their personal insights.

Basically, and most importantly, both principles mean exactly what they say. In any given martial arts technique involving a throw or projection, one's feet always pull, and one's hands always push. If you push with your feet or pull with your arms the technique will be more difficult.

According to Spencer, (my student with the physics degree) when you push you increase pressure and make yourself bigger. When you pull you decrease pressure and make yourself smaller.

Per Spencer:

“With Aiki techniques it is vital that you don’t let the pressure you have on the uke’s body with your hands slip, if it does you will lose kazushi. If you pull your arms, you will reduce that pressure and create space inside the technique that the uke can wiggle around in and readjust. Thus you must always push to keep your uke tied up with no space.

With your feet (which are only connected to the uke via your hands) on the other hand, pressure is created by decreasing the space between your bodies, which is accomplished by pulling. In addition, for the same direction of motion, pulling with the front leg is smoother than pushing with the back leg; if you push you risk bumping the uke’s hip away from you.”

Now I’ll be honest, I never thought of it the way Spencer explained it above, but it makes sense.

As for me, I’ve always found that pulling with the arms usually requires too much strength, and that my opponent rarely moves into the position I want him to go to. In fact, in most instances my opponent either falls on me, becomes too heavy for me to move, twists around me, or crowds me so much that I don’t have enough space to position myself correctly. In a life or death confrontation, none of these mistakes, even if they are minor, are acceptable.

When it comes to using my feet, I notice that if I use them to push my opponent, my opponent rarely if ever becomes weighted (grounded to the floor); all I end up doing is either bouncing off him or making him step away, neither direction being good for much. In fact, if I’m bouncing backwards my instability can certainly be used against me, and clearly it makes it hard to recover my momentum. In addition, by not pulling with the legs I certainly need to use more power to be effective.

Since I was taught that in order to be an effective fighter one must first be in control of themselves and their movements, I’ve adopted the principles of Hands Always Push/Feet Always Pull in to make sure that I consistently perform my techniques.

Back in the 80’s when I did judo in college, I rarely questioned my coaches when they said to “push and pull” my opponent to break his kazushi (balance). I always assumed they meant push with the hands, and pull with the feet. However, I once went to a judo seminar where “pulling” with the hands was actually how the instructor described the entry for the throw. Funny thing was the throw was Osoto-gari (major outside reaping throw), which if analyzed is a clear illustration of a push with the hands/pull with your feet technique—more so that almost any other judo throw one could name.

Of course, when discussing how to do osoto-gari, whether one thinks that either or both hands make a pushing and/or pulling motion is really a matter of perspective. I really have no intention of upsetting any judoka who wish to believe in their methodology, terminology, or explanations. If the techniques works, explain it anyway you want to.

However, let me take a moment to explain my assertion.

First of all, I don’t think anyone will argue that the feet pull in this throw. The sweeping motion is clearly pulling the opponent’s leg from underneath them.

As for the hands, I was always taught the hands moved in a sort of steering wheel motion. This is the kind of the motion one would make to avoid a sudden obstacle in the road while driving. It turns out that when we drive, we “push” the steering wheel, few if any of us pull the steering wheel. In fact in the police academy you are specifically taught to move the steering wheel in such a manner.

The fact is when it comes to the handwork used to complete osoto-gari, one hand pushes the uke back, while the other hand pushes the uke down and to the side. Neither hand movement is a pull. In addition, during the pull with the legs, the hands often continue pushing the uke to the ground adding even more force to the throw.

Example:

#1 – Osoto-gari done correctly using the push with the hands/pull with the feet principle.

Click for full size

#2 – Osoto-gari done incorrectly, using a pull with one hand and a push with the second. While the movement might look similar in the photo, in this case the "pull" of the left arm was done with the biceps while the "push" above was done with the triceps.

Click for full size

Note the difference of the uke’s body position in both sets of photos. When osoto-gari is done correctly the hands make room for the tori to pass and enter in. The uke is also leaning less to the side and more to the back, over the foot that is about to be swept. When done incorrectly the tori is forced to come around the uke completely changing the uke’s body position, and making the throw much harder to complete, if it’s even possible to complete at this point.

I could go on and describe several other judo throws in this same manner, but I won't. If you’re really interested you can test the difference pushing and pulling with your hands will make on your own. Chances are you’ve already experienced both results, without even realizing what went right or what went wrong when trying to do a specific technique.

However, I would be remiss if I didn’t give you one last technique to contemplate, which is another aspect of the hands always push principle. In this case it has to do with chokeholds. To illustrate my point I will discuss a commonly taught constriction technique called kata-juji-jime (half cross choke).

The above is an illustration of how most judoka are taught to do this technique, which is extremely effective. It is actually my favorite constriction, and this technique helped me win several matches during my college years.

However, before I did judo I was taught this same technique, the difference being I was never on the ground when I applied it. I was also never taught to pull my hands in order to apply pressure as I was told to do by my judo coach.

The way I was taught was to push/bring my elbows together, which brings my hands together sort of like the working ends of a vise grip. This method not only allowed me to use all of my arms muscles to apply pressure, in a very natural motion, but also placed my opponent in a position where he could be immediately brought to the ground.

Like I said it’s just something to think about, and experiment with. (** Constrictions techniques should never be attempted in practice without a qualified instructor present since they are extremely dangerous. **)

Other Examples

#1

The above photograph is an example of a projection done with a pull of the legs. While the hands form the connection and help direct the opponent to the side, it is the rear kneeling drop that takes the attacker past his triangulation point and to the ground.

If one were attempting this technique with the use of a pull with hands the results would be quite different. Sure, the person would still fall, but he would fall directly into the person doing the technique. Ouch! The technique would also require a lot more force to execute, force that could be felt, and countered.

The sudden rear drop is also unexpected, and allows the tori to use all their weight against the uke.

#2

Click for full size

The above is an example of a projection done with the push of the hands. The right hand is raised and pushes to the left. The left hand goes dead, allowing the uke’s weight to push it back. There is no pulling action, the left arm does nothing but go dead.

Once the uke’s stability is completely broken there is a slight body drop and back-pressure (see forthcoming essay on the principle of Back Pressure) is applied.

Whether the strict accuracy of "Hands Always Push and Feet Always Pull" is a case of linguistic quibbling or not is arguable. I use this terminology because it suits my needs, and I can show what happens in a given technique if I use one or the other method.

My intention in sharing our principles is not to tell others how they should train, or to say I’m so gifted and skilled that my way is right and the only way things should be done. These principles, and the way I apply them work for me, and my students. They are right for us.

Like Bruce Lee stated, his martial art system was all about whatever works for you. Whatever is right for you is how you should practice.

Navarro’s Martial Arts Championships August 26, 2006 --- A Review

As I left the tournament at about 5:00 PM, all I could keep muttering was: Never Ever Again, Never, Never.

It had been a long day, mostly of waiting around for nothing, and I had had enough. Too much. I had seen too much poor sportsmanship, bad form, lackluster performances, and so much disorganization that they made the Department of Motor Vehicles look like a finely tuned machine.

Yes, all I could think during my whole drive home was Never, Never, Never Again!!!!!!!!

But let me start from the beginning…………………

I received the flier for Navarro’s Martial Arts Championships about two months ago. Now, I like Sifu Navarro and what he teaches. And in the past he has run a fairly decent tournament. Since it had been seven years since I last attended a martial arts tournament I played with the idea of having some of my senior students compete in some form divisions.

The idea wasn’t to go and win trophies; neither my students nor I care about that stuff. Instead I wanted to do a little advertising that the school exits, and to re-connect with some of the local martial art bigwigs I hadn’t seen in several years.

That was the original plan. However plans don’t always work out, and the decision had been made not to go at all. That was until my younger son decided he wanted to go and compete in the grappling division. What’s worst is he had saved his allowance to pay the entry fee, so what was left to argue about.

I woke up Saturday morning semi-dreading spending the whole day at a martial arts tournament I really didn’t want to go to. However, I dug out an old karate uniform I keep for situations such as these, made sure my son and his friend had all the equipment they might have needed for competing, and set off to face the day.

We arrived at about 11:30 AM, and after waiting about 20 minutes in line to register we entered the gym: a single basketball court filled to capacity to with competitors, family, and numerous black belt judges.

The first thing I noticed was that the place appeared to be in chaos. People were standing all over the place, even within the boundaries of the rings where the forms competitions were in full progress. It was so bad that those sitting in the stands couldn’t see what was happening on the floor. Over and over, announcements were made to clear the floor, but no one seemed to hear or care.

Now I can forgive choosing a place that is too small to accommodate a crowd, especially when one has no idea how many people may or may not show up. In addition finding an affordable place to hold any event is extremely hard. So I was ready, willing and able to overlook this issue. Besides, I was there to watch my son and his friend compete.

While waiting for the grappling events to start I distracted myself by watching the forms competition. I wish I hadn’t. If what I saw is an indication of the current state of the martial arts, then we are facing a very serious situation. A situation that calls for an immediate change, otherwise the martial arts will soon become nothing more than a glorified dance method.

As one instructor stated to me, some of the practitioners’ kiais lasted longer than their forms. What was worst was the definite lack of balance, power, focus, and intent almost all the competitors exhibited. I mean, some just flailed their arms wildly in gestures that made them look more like they were on fire than trying to fight an opponent.

Now, there were a few competitors who had skill and exhibited what one would expect to see at a martial arts tournament. However, few of these were black belts, and most were under the age of 15. Scary really, when you think about it.

Fortunately, the forms division ended soon after we arrived and the “fighting” portion of the tournament started. I say fighting portion since there were divisions for Thai Boxing, Savate, Grappling (with uniform and without uniform), Boxing, Kick Boxing, Point Sparring, MMA, Self-Defense, Stick Sparring, and Knife Sparring.

I thought things would get better, but boy was I wrong.

Now I can’t make any comments on the Thai Boxing since these events took place outside the gym and out of my view. All I can say is that a Thai Boxing competition that does not allow elbow and knee strikes isn’t Thai Boxing. However, these rules are most likely for safety and I can understand not wanting to have people hurt at your event.

I also can’t comment on the MMA, since that too was held outside. I also didn’t have a chance to review the rules.

I can however, talk about the Kick Boxing, Boxing, and Savate.

Okay to be fair the Savate never happened, because there weren’t enough people interested. Of course with the event canceled it afforded me the opportunity to talk with the guys who did Savate I learned a lot about Savate history and how some schools still practice the weaponry associated the older form of the art. It was very interesting, and I have to say was the best portion of the day.

Unfortunately, the boxing and the kickboxing were terrible. Now, I’m not saying I would want to be on the receiving end of many of the kicks and punches I witnessed, but almost 90% of the competitors had absolutely no skill. I mean basic skills such as moving off line, or fighting with your eyes open. That’s right, many fought with there eyes closed and just swung wildly. It was really pathetic.

Now, before you start assuming things, I’m not talking about the five to ten year olds. It’s cute to watch them; especially those who don’t seem to have a clue what’s going on, and you know really don’t want to be there. You know the kid who stands there and just becomes a punching bag, or those children who cry even before they are hit. Or how about the kid who charges in like a bull, and misses everyone except the bystander watching on the sidelines or the referee. Yes, I enjoy the kids, I enjoy them a lot, except watching them lose.

Distressingly, my comments were in regards to the older teens and young adults. These are people who should know better, or at least have the ability to be taught better skills. They had no business competing if these demonstrations represented their level of skill. Clearly, their teachers either don’t care about their safety, had no say in their decision to compete, or have lowered their standards so much that this is what now passes for competency.

This of course leads me to my worst observation of the day, and I’m not talking about the grappling events.

Like I said, one of my early reasons for attending this tournament was to re-connect with fellow teachers I hadn’t seen in a long time, instructors who helped me when I first started in the business. I wanted to see the instructors who were old school martial artists like myself, who had learned the hard way: from many, many hours of brutal practice, where blood, sweat, injuries, and tears had been the willing sacrifice we gave to achieve a certain level of expertise.

Anyone who knows me knows that I have a hard time being politically correct or “softening” my opinions when I express them. The truth is that I normally speak my mind, often without thinking about future ramifications or who else might overhear the conversation. This is an extremely bad habit in the martial arts community where egos run rampant. This is a business where when you bruise one person feelings, others judge you solely based on his opinion rather than getting to know personally or learning why you said what was said.

Fortunately, those I talked to during the day mirrored most of my comments regarding my observations of the day’s event. However, agree as they might, they had succumbed to the fact that was just how things are in this day and age. They agreed that it was wrong and was ruining things, but they defended things by saying that was the only way martial art school owners could stay in business.

In other words, they claimed that to run a successful school, standards must be reduced and the teacher has to promote people who really shouldn’t be promoted.

Of course, with the lack of high standards also came a definite shortage of teaching respect for teachers and fellow students, and the ability to even appear as if one had any real skills. If this is what having a commercial martial art school is all about all I can say is, thank God I don’t have a commercial martial arts school.

Now, I won’t bore you by telling you about the grappling events. They were what they were, and many of the competitors were the first to tell you they had very little if any grappling experience or training.

What I will share is this: after waiting almost five hours, my son’s event never took place. By 4:45 there weren’t enough people in his division to hold the event.

Now my son paid $50.00 to compete, and for a 17 year old that’s a lot of money. No, that’s a lot of money period. Of course, we went to the event coordinator to discuss the matter and get a refund. She quickly took down his name and a short description of why we were requesting the refund. Then came the bombshell… We would have to wait for the refund in the mail.

“How long will that take,” asked my son.

“Indefinitely” she answered as she walked away.

“What’s that mean dad?” asked my son.

“I don’t know,” I answered.

“Great, that means I’ll never get it back, $50.00 wasted” he muttered.

“No, I’ll make sure you get it back,” I said, knowing he is most likely right, though I’ll try my best to see that it happens.

So as he left the gym with his older brother and friend, (who also had to request a refund), all I could think of was how I had wasted my day. This day, which should have been fun for my son, turned into a disaster and left him with a negative view of martial arts tournaments.

I left the gym vowing never to go to a tournament again. Never. Ever. Or at least never again until I forget this day, which just might take another 7 years.

The Top Ten Principles Of Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei - #6 Indirect Pressure

Since I first stated that the techniques taught at my school were based on principles, and that we focus more on understanding the principles that makes things work than the techniques themselves, people have e-mailed me asking me if I could explain these principles in more detail.

Unfortunately, trying to explain many of these principals in writing is very difficult, since many can’t be explained in words alone. However, I will try my best to describe these principles for the “blog” readers, using words, charts and pictures.

Keep in mind though, that in order to sometimes fully understand a principle you have to also understand other principles that relate to it. Most principles aren’t fully useable on their own, and have to be integrated with others.

Indirect Pressure

This is another example of a principle that has both a tangible explanation and an intangible explanation depending on how it is used. In either case, both explanations have scientific corroboration to back them up and explain why they work. However, I’d be the first to argue that the intangible variation is better explained through physical demonstration than written description. But I will try my best in both cases.

Of all the top ten principles I teach, Indirect Pressure is most likely the one my students have heard the least about. It’s a principle we use a lot, but I rarely point out. I’m not exactly sure why that is the case, but it is. The only excuse I can think of is that we use Indirect Pressure so often I really don’t think about it, and take the principle for granted. So much so, that when trying to think of a specific technique to use for this “blog” I was at a definite loss.

The best analogy for Indirect Pressure I have ever found has nothing to do with the martial arts. However, it has a direct application to the aftermath of a bloody altercation when first aid may be required.

According to the American Red Cross indirect pressure is taught to stop arterial bleeding when other methods have not worked. According to the American Red Cross first aid book:

"When there is hemorrhaging, due to arterial bleeding, with blood gushing out in time with the rhythm of the heart, applying the direct pressure method may not be enough to stop the bleeding. In these cases, apply pressure with your fingers to the artery at a position closer to the heart than the wound itself."

In other words in order to affect one area of the body, pressure is applied somewhere else. That indirect pressure has a direct cause and affect on the other part of the body.

In essence that is exactly the way indirect pressure is used in the martial arts. We attack one part of the body in a specific way that has a direct effect on another part, or even on the entire skeletal frame.

Most martial art practitioner’s first introduction to the principle of Indirect Pressure happens when they are taught joint locking techniques. The principle is especially important for joint locks used for projecting/throwing an opponent. Consider, for example, a technique like kotegaeshi (wrist rotation).

In kotegaeshi direct pressure is applied to the wrist in order to rotate it. However, the actual technique works because it locks up the shoulder. The force applied to the wrist “indirectly” affects the shoulder.

Click for full size

However, while kotegaeshi is a good example of the principle of Indirect Pressure it should be noted that not all joint locking methods are. In many cases such as yubi waza (finger techniques) and certain ude waza (arm techniques/locks) they are clearly not.

Okay that’s an example of a “tangible” form of Indirect Pressure. Now let me explain an example of the “intangible” type.

First of all, when I use the word intangible, I’m not saying there is no physical connection between a person and their opponent, or there are not clear forces at work. I basically use the word intangible because there are no outwardly visible signs to show the observer what is happening. There is also no direct connection between point “A” where force is applied, and point “B” where the force is felt.

And no this has nothing to do with the application of chi, ki, or any other metaphysical force. It is nothing more than proper body geometry, and don’t let anyone fool you into thinking otherwise.

On the human body there are four specific pivot points, one on each shoulder, and one on each hip.

These points are used to rotate the body, and to destabilize a person’s balance. However, if they are pushed directly, little if anything will happen unless a tremendously high amount of force is used (diagram #1 below). The chances are that one will never be able to rotate an opponent with direct force on the pivot points.

However if attacked indirectly (diagram #2) the body will rotate very easily, and the person will not even realize what is happening until it is too late.

To test the above-diagramed techniques try the following:

• First test – Grab one hand and pull the arm as depicted in diagram #1. When that doesn’t work, start pushing the hand to the rear of the person and see how far you have to move it until the body moves. Carefully watch how the body moves. Is it pivoting, twisted, or collapsing onto itself?
  
• Second Test – Grab the other hand and push it towards the pivot point, the closer against the body the better. Actually it needs to be close to the body to work. Keep extending the hand forward as depicted in diagram #2. If you do this correctly, the body will rotate with almost no force. The person will actually twist around one leg.
  
• Third Test – Follow all of the instructions for test two, except instead of using the pivot point move the arm somewhere below the chest. Did you get the same results? If you did this test, you’ll discover the person will not rotate, or that it takes a lot more force, and I mean a lot more force, to rotate them.

Example

Click for full size

1. The uke has punched at the tori who has stepped to evade. As the punch passes the tori it is “checked” by both hands.
   
2. The tori drops his right hand over the uke’s attacking arm, and pushes downward back towards the uke.
   
3. The tori continues the downward push placing the arm next to the pivot point of the uke’s hip. (The hand and the hip never touch)
   
4. The tori continues pushing the uke’s arm across his body. Notice how the uke is rotating around his back leg. (The picture makes it look like there is a lot of space between the uke’s arm and body, but this photo shows a point after the rotation is almost complete, not the actual moment when the rotation starts. When the rotation starts the uke’s hand is almost near his back leg.)
   
5. The uke is now fully rotated 180-degrees and so off balance making him fall requires no effort.

Of course the principle of Indirect Pressure can be used in other ways, such as moving around the point of force. For example while you are standing minding your own business a guy grabs your wrist. The guy holding you is 6 foot 7 inches, 450lbs, and is built like a tank. There is no way you can out-muscle this guy, so any effort you make to raise your hand is futile. So what are you going to do?

I know, because I’m describing a cousin of mine and while we were roughhousing I had to figure a way to get away from him besides kicking him in the testicles or eye gouging him—he is family after all.

First of all, you’re never going to move the wrist, the point where this guy is applying “DIRECT PRESSURE.” Even if you can move the arm, which you probably can’t because he is pressing it down, using the old thumb trick to slip your hand out of his hold won't work. His hands are big enough to wrap around. Strike One!

Secondly, you might try striking the arm on a vital point, but if that doesn’t work now you have an angry giant to contend with. The same goes for any other strike or kick you may attempt. Strike 2!

Lastly, you might try to beg for mercy and hope he lets you go. Depending on his mood and his intention that might work. However, there is another way in case this strategy fails.

First of all, let the guy have the limb he wants. That’s the Aiki way. While he is holds your wrist at least he can’t hit you with that hand, making it one less weapon of his to worry about.

Now use indirect pressure to raise your arm and make space. In this case the indirect pressure comes from the shoulder. Yes, the shoulder raises and the arm follows. When done correctly you have basically gone around the point of his force.

Now this won’t get your hand free, but you now have control of your arm, and can move. You have taken his advantage away. Now you can apply other skills in your arsenal to lock up and/or project/throw your opponent to the ground.

This is an example of what happens when you try to move with direct pressure, your arm versus his arm. Notice the uke is still in full control. In order for this escape to work one must be a lot stronger than his opponent, and with that kind of force the uke will know you're up to something and most likely counter you.

This is an example of what happens when indirect pressure is applied. In this case the lift is done only with the shoulder and the elbow pulls the arm back after the lift. Notice the difference in the uke’s posture, and that he has a hard time maintaining his grip on the wrist. In this case very little power is used, and the uke shouldn’t feel any change until it is to late to react and counter.

Chances are that every martial artist, no matter what style, already uses the principle of Indirect Pressure in some form or another. They may either call it something else, or just do it with out bothering to label it all. Of course there are some practitioners who just don’t care, and will never care, as long as they can do the technique, and the technique works.

After all, we all don’t have a giant cousin to play with and see what techniques we can actually get to work on someone who isn’t quite so accommodating or patient enough to allow you to make a mistake and start over.

To be honest I never really thought about the concept of Indirect Pressure on its own or appreciated the importance of it, until my cousin held me, and threaten to pick me up and slam me to the ground. Necessity is clearly the mother of insight as well as invention.

The Top Ten Principles Of Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei - #5 Double Weighting

Since I first stated that the techniques taught at my school were based on principles, and that we focus more on understanding the principles that makes things work than the techniques themselves, people have e-mailed me asking me if I could explain these principles in more detail.

Unfortunately, trying to explain many of these principals in writing is very difficult, since many can’t be explained in words alone. However, I will try my best to describe these principles for the “blog” readers, using words, charts and pictures.

Keep in mind though, that in order to sometimes fully understand a principle you have to also understand other principles that relate to it. Most principles aren’t fully useable on their own, and have to be integrated with others.

Double Weighting

Over the years I have heard other people describe this principle as “grounding,” “anchoring,” “basing,” and “rooting.” Though the names are different, for the most part the applications and effectiveness have been the same.

Double Weighting, simply defined, is a state where one feels their limbs to be too heavy to move. A person is put in a position such that their body, or part of their body, feels rooted to the ground. Either they are unable to change their position without first readjusting or their entire mass is solely dependent on a specific limb for support.

In other words, the body, or part of the body, is manipulated into a position where it seems to become so heavy that the person is unable to move or adjust their position. Often the body is unable to maintain its own balance and must rely on an external force (normally the other person doing the technique) for stability.

In most Aiki, Jujutsu, and Judo arts double weighting is an essential step used to set up projections/throws.

A simple way to think of this principle is to imagine a man who weighs 200 pounds. If you cut him exactly in half, each half would weigh 100 pounds. In this case, both halves even each other out, and there is equilibrium. In this state the man has no problem changing body positions.

Now take that same man, and put a 100 pound dumbbell in his left hand. The left side of his body has essentially just doubled in weight. Every movement he makes will now require more effort, and for many physical actions he will have to make adjustments in order to maintain his stability—if he can move at all. He has essentially become “double weighted” on one side of his body.

Double weighting is used to manipulate stability in the same way judoka use their principle of “pushing and pulling” to place someone in an optimal position for a throw.

Consider the technique Osoto-gari (major outside reaping throw), for example. Osoto-gari is done by using a steering wheel-like motion with the hands to destabilize the uke, and then sweeping the foot from underneath him. When done properly the steering wheel motion of the hands places all the weight of the uke on the leg that is about to be swept.

In this example, the uke is “double weighted” since the majority of his weight is placed on one leg. He is “anchored” in that position until other forces push him back and down to the ground.

Of course applying the principle of Double Weighting isn’t limited to just using the uke’s weight against him. There are times when a person will use his or her own body weight and body position to add mass to the uke.

Example:

Click for full size

1. The uke is pushed down so that his entire body weight is balanced on his toes. He is now “double weighted:” all his mass is pressed towards the toes. In addition. he also has the weight from the push adding more force to his centerline. In this position he is totally dependant on the tori for his stability. It is almost impossible for the uke to “right” himself and regain his balance, let alone launch a counter attack.
   
2. The tori steps back and lets his right arm go completely dead. The tori’s left arm lifts and pushes the uke in a circular motion to the right. These motions lift the uke and force him to shift all his body weight to his left foot.
   
3. As the uke places his weight completely on his left foot, he is now double weighted on that leg. Once again he is totally dependant on the tori for stability. His hold on the tori's arms are the only thing keeping him from falling.
   
4. (Not pictured) From the position pictured in photo #3 it just takes a small body drop to project the uke to the ground.

Understanding the principle of Double Weighting is one thing, applying it is another. It is not hard to do, but it requires practice and knowledge of how to lock up the skeletal frame.

For beginners, applying the “push and pull” principle of judo is the way to begin. Of course, as one’s techniques become more sophisticated—and one learns that there are specific reactions to every movement they make—other methods will present themselves.

The above statement in no way implies that I believe that the art of judo lacks sophistication. In fact, I have seen many senior judoka apply the principle of Double Weighting so flawlessly that their techniques appeared as soft and effortless as many techniques performed by Aki practitioners. Of course, these were judoka who had transcended from the “sporting” aspect of judo where many judoka rely on muscle, power, and speed, instead of technique and finesse.

The Top Ten Principles Of Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei - #4 Zones Of Defense/Protection

Since I first stated that the techniques taught at my school were based on principles, and that we focus more on understanding the principles that makes things work than the techniques themselves, people have e-mailed me asking me if I could explain these principles in more detail.

Unfortunately, trying to explain many of these principals in writing is very difficult, since many can’t be explained in words alone. However, I will try my best to describe these principles for the “blog” readers, using words, charts and pictures.

Keep in mind though, that in order to sometimes fully understand a principle you have to also understand other principles that relate to it. Most principles aren’t fully useable on their own, and have to be integrated with others.

Zones Of Defense/Protection

This is not a very hard principle to understand. Basically, it's all about using body geometry to evade an oncoming attack.

Let's start with the basics. The body is divided into three "gates": lower gate (base line to medial line), middle gate (medial line to torque line) and upper gate (torque line and above). Each of these gates is divided in half by the centerline, and each section is broken up into quadrants.

Click for full size

(* Using quadrants and understanding their importance is much more necessary when it comes to offensive techniques rather than those related to defense. In regards to defense the application is clear, if you’re attacked in quadrant 6 all you need to do is move that portion of your body out of the way (and yes, there are 6 of them, but quadrant sounds clearer than "sextant"))

Surrounding each body is a zone of attack, and a zone of defense. As with the principle of kuzushi (balance breaking), these zones are divided into eight sections, each a 45-degree sector.

Click for full size

Zone of Attack

Basically, the zone of attack extends from the midpoint of the humerus to the torso in all directions around the body. You get this measurement by extending your arm straight forward and placing a ruler on midpoint your pectoral (nipple).

In my case, (not the guy in the photo), this measurement is approximately seven inches, which means any attack that penetrates past this seven inch zone of my body needs to be addressed, either by evading the oncoming force, redirecting it, or neutralizing it.

This “seven inch” zone represents my “personal space” and the amount of time I have to react when the bounds of my personal space are crossed. If I move before this barrier is breached, I can be tracked and possibly countered. If I move after the seven-inch barrier is breached chances are I will not have time to completely move my body out of the way.

Of course, one’s skill level is also a factor in the distance one needs in order to react to an attack, beginners normally requiring more, and “experts” sometimes needing less.

Corresponding Body Geometry

Needless to say, few martial art practitioners actually ever measure the distance of an oncoming attack, or how close it is in proximity to our bodies before we react. There’s a simple reason for this: we are taught to use the attackers corresponding body geometry to judge when they are fully committed to their action.

This measurement, while basically the same, can at times be a lot harder to put a quantitative amount on. That’s because it varies whether or not one is discussing empty hand combat, or combat with weaponry. However, like I said there are mathematical formulas, which are not significantly different.

Unfortunately trying to give generalized measurements, or even basic formulas for every possible attacking method, would require too much writing, and in all honesty would most likely leave more people confused than satisfied. However, with that said here is one example hopefully a lot of readers can identify with.

I’ve always been told that when facing a swordsman preparing to make a downwards cut from the jodan position, I should wait until his front hand (or the tsuba (hand-guard)) passes his eyes before I make any counter movement.

If I measure my hand's position at this point when I am executing such a cut, it is a little over 12 inches from my body This, coincidently, is almost the same as the length as my humerus, (or the distance between my torso (midpoint of pectoral) and elbow joint right before I reach the point of extension). Interestingly enough this distance mirrors my zone of defense. Or in other words, almost the same distance I need to move off-line to avoid being cut.

For those who want to learn more, let me start you off on the right path: The humerus is a very very important bone when it comes to the martial arts, for many reasons.

(** For some of you I just saved you thousands of dollars, sharing this “secret.” I know of at least one individual who paid a few thousand dollars to learn this secret when he was promoted to 5th Dan in a jujutsu art in Japan. And before you think otherwise, what I shared is all this person learned, he received no explanations or techniques to illustrate what this phrase meant—nice to have expendable cash.)

Zone of Defense

Understanding the principle of Zone of Defense is extremely important because it is the mathematical formula for avoiding attacks. By learning to calculate how far the body needs to be moved away from any given point of attack, you can make your evasions smaller and more efficient.

The zone of defense is any point beyond the length of my Adam’s Apple to the tip of my shoulder. To obtain this measurement just take a ruler and place one end in the center of your neck, and measure out to one tip of the shoulder.

Or you can measure from the midpoint of your pectoral (nipple) to the tip of your elbow.

In my case both these measurements equal approximately 10 1/2 inches, which means in order to evade most attacks I only need to move my body 10 1/2 inches away from the point of attack.

In other words if someone is trying to attack me along my centerline, all I need to do is move approximately 10 1/2 inches (half my body) in any direction (besides the direction where the attack is coming from) to avoid being hit.

Ten and a half inches is a relatively small movement. Yet, depending on which movement I choose, it should put me in a position where I can easily counterattack while my opponent cannot attack me again. At least, he can’t attack me without either taking time to reposition himself or destabilizing himself as he extends to reach me.

Click for full size

Of course, just like with the Zone of Attack, beginners may need to move more to avoid being hit, while experts will need to move a lot less—and for some defenses not at all.

Examples of evasions used for defense against centerline attacks

#1

Click for full size	Click for full size

This is an example of avoiding a midline attack from a kneeling position. As you can see, it takes a very little movement to take the entire body off of the midline.

Application

Click for full size

1. tori is threatened by a swordsman while seated in seiza.
   
2. As the swordsman attacks, the tori does a kneeling evasion off the midline, evading the cut. In most of our forms the tori would draw his dagger during the turn and then stab the swordsman, however in this case he is unarmed.
   
3. tori rotates 270-degrees off the midline, creating more distance between the attacker and himself. However at this point he is not safe and his back is exposed.
   
4. The swordsman attempts a horizontal cut and tori ducks.We call this “The Turtle.”
   
5. The tori raises up and grabs the swordsman’s hands. From here a multitude of finishing moves is possible.

Obviously this evasion is done very rapidly.

#2

Click for full size	Click for full size

This is an example of a standing evasion. In this technique the feet are not moved, and the body simply rotates around the hips. This rotation, when done properly, takes the upper body completely off the midline.

Click for full size

Application

Click for full size

1. The tori is threatened by the swordsman.
   
2. The swordsman thrusts to the throat of the tori, who evades the oncoming attack. (Normally the tori would do a replacement step and move towards the swordsman, closing the gap, thus preventing any further attack. Or, if tori is armed, he would draw his weapon while rotating and attack the swordsman.)

This technique requires a lot of timing and faith in the form. The object is to draw in the attacker and keep him close. In addition this small rotation, when executed properly, will not be tracked by the opponent; the tori seemingly disappears. It’s an example of a true Aiki technique.

#3

Click for full size	Click for full size

This is an example of the classic cross step.

Application

Click for full size

1. The tori is threatened by a swordsman.
   
2. As the swordsman attacks the tori, the tori cross-steps off line evading the cut.

There are several advantages to using the cross-step. First of all, it gets one off the midline. Secondly, when done properly (no upper body rotation) it can’t be tracked. Lastly, with the weight properly shifted one can move into a multitude of follow up positions.

#4

Click for full size

Click for full size

Both of the above techniques are an example of a 180-degree rotation. These rotations are completed by pivoting around the axis of one foot. Though the result looks like a major movement, it is fact a small one. Once again only the half of the body needs to come off the centerline.

#5

Click for full size

This last example is a 45-degree forward step. Like all the others, only half of the body is moved off the centerline

All of the above examples were based on midline attacks. However, the same rule applies to attacks from all directions. Also notice that none of the above-depicted techniques utilize “blocks.”

In the system of martial arts I teach, we never ever “block” an attack. We evade the attack, strike it, blend with it, crowd it, re-direct it, or extend it. “Blocking” as described in many modern karate texts will not work. The term “to block,” and the mindset it implies is a relatively modern concept.

Trying to meet force with force will often destabilize the “blocker.” Worse yet, if the attacker’s limb is better conditioned (able to absorb more punishment) than the defender’s limb, a "block" can result in serious injury.

I always tell my students there is no reason to believe you have to do things quickly in the martial arts. Speed is great, but one only needs to be slightly faster than his opponent in order to be effective. Accuracy is the key element.

This is one reason why moving to specific angles which neutralize force is such an important element within the concept of zone of defense.

If the reader is wondering why I specifically selected to only depict centerline defenses the answer is simple. Most attacks are directed towards the torso and the head, which make up the bulk of the center of mass. These defenses are the most important to know initially.

Click for full size

Definition of terms specifically related to the formulaic process of defensive/offensive actions.

Acceleration	Physics - The change of velocity. To cause to move or act faster.
Force	The capacity to do work or cause physical change; energy, strength, or active power. Power made operative against resistance; exertion. The use of physical power or violence to compel or restrain.
Inertia	Physics - The tendency of a body to resist acceleration; the tendency of a body at rest to remain at rest or of a body in motion to stay in motion in a straight line unless acted on by an outside force. Resistance or disinclination to motion, action, or change.
Mass	A unified body of matter with no specific shape. A grouping of individual parts or elements that compose a unified body of unspecified size or quantity. The physical volume or bulk of a solid body. Physics. - The measure of the quantity of matter that a body or an object contains. The mass of the body is not dependent on gravity and therefore is different from but proportional to its weight.
Momentum	Physics.- A measure of the motion of a body equal to the product of its mass and velocity. Also called linear momentum. Impetus of a physical object in motion.
Rotation	The act or process of turning around a center or an axis. A single complete cycle of such motion. Mathematics - A transformation of a coordinate system in which the new axes have a specified angular displacement from their original position while the origin remains fixed.
Trajectory	The path of a projectile or other moving body through space. A chosen course, or a course taken.
Velocity	Rapidity or speed of motion; swiftness. Physics - A vector quantity whose magnitude is a body's speed and whose direction is the body's direction of motion. The rate of speed of action or occurrence.

Of course understanding the above theories and definition is meaningless if one doesn’t know proper tai sabaki.

Tai sabaki

Tai sabaki means, “body shifting.” It is one of the most important elements in the martial arts, and one too many people take for granted. While it certainly relates to offensive movements, one must fully understand all of tai sabaki's intricacies in order to use proper body shifting when it comes to defense.

I tell my students that if you can’t avoid (evade) an oncoming attack, then it makes no difference how skilled you are at applying offense. Once you have been struck, and struck hard with the intent to really injure/kill you, chances are you will be at such a disadvantage (physical and/or psychological) that you won't be able to launch a counter attack. That is especially true when it comes to fighting with weaponry.

I don’t want to beat a dead horse, but I see too many martial artists who have no understanding of proper tai sabaki. Sometimes I even see this in very high ranking individuals who should know a lot better. I mean, I have almost 35 years of training, and I still have to constantly work on my tai sabaki skills and I know I always will. It’s one of the first skills I lose when I don’t practice regularly.

So what exactly is tai sabaki?

Tai sabaki [teye sa-ba'kee] can be translated in various ways. In many systems it refers to turning and/or evasion motions, while in other systems it can refer to body positioning. I translate it as “body movement,” since we use it to describe all these elements.

Defensively, tai sabaki means moving ones body out of the way of an attack while at the same time placing oneself in a safe position where the attack can be countered and no follow-up attack can be delivered.

Offensively, tai sabaki means using one’s body in the most optimal position to maximize power and focus, while maintaining a strategic body position which prevents counter attack, or resistance to the techniques you are trying to apply.

Basic tai sabaki movements include:

• Koshi Sabaki - concentrating on the placement of the hips and pelvis
  
• Ashi Sabaki - concentrating on the placement of the feet and legs
  
• Te Sabaki - concentrating on the placement of the arms and hands
  
• Tenkah-ho - movement of pivoting the body
  
• Tsugi Ashi - steps

In order to execute proper tai sabaki several elements must occur:

Initially, one must start by being in a stable position that allows one freedom of movement in any direction. Depending on the situation, this may be one of the hardest factors in tai sabaki since one does not always have the opportunity to prepare for an attack.

However, in the cases where one is prepared for an altercation, most kamae (postures of readiness) are specifically designed to prepare one for such movements. In fact the proper application of a kamae can often dictate how one is attacked. After all, manykamae are designed to appear as if there is a flaw in the defense, which an attacker believes he can capitalize on.

In most cases I teach Hachiji Dachi as the starting stance for most techniques. As a neutral stance, with equal balance on both feet, it allows the most freedom of movement, without giving the appearance of any martial art knowledge or “aggressive” intent.

Secondly, movements must be made with the proper weight distribution. Depending on the movement, this can involve raising or lowering the body, pivoting on the ball or heel of the foot (yes it makes a big difference), placing one's weight on one or both feet, or a combination of all of the above.

Correct posture, foot placement, hip alignment and balance must be maintained in order to keep proper weight distribution,. This can only be accomplished by practice.

Lastly, movements should be limited to only those necessary for the action selected. In other words, one must have and maintain control over one's own body in order to avoid extra, nonessential movements. The intention and commitment of one's movement must be made decisively—with strength, speed, and proper angles; yet movement must also be small and controlled enough to avoid creating wasted space or weaknesses within the action taken.

This last element can be a very hard to achieve on its own, and even more so with the additional force of the attacker’s energy, weight and strength.

This is a basic example of stepping forward off the centerline. Note the relationship between the defender and attacker in #2. This small movement is enough to move the body off the midline, however if done incorrectly the forward force and foot placement of the attacker (even without contact) is enough to destabilize the defender.

Learning proper tai sabaki will help a student not only learn to control their own body movements, but it will also help them learn how to take control of another persons body, and use improper shifting against their attacker. This is very important in joint locking techniques and projection/throwing techniques. In fact many joint locks and projection/throwing techniques cannot be completed without proper tai sabaki.

There are no short cuts in learning proper tai sabaki. It is one element of training that must be refined over and over again.

Like most of the principles we utilize, learning proper Zones of Defense/Protection requires the study of numerous other principles, scientific theories, physics, and mathematical formulas. In other words few, if any, principles we utilize stand alone on their own merits. It is only by understanding them all, and their integration with each other, that one can become a true martial artist.

The Top Ten Principles Of Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei - #3 Reflex Action

Since I first stated that the techniques taught at my school were based on principles, and that we focus more on understanding the principles that makes things work than the techniques themselves, people have e-mailed me asking me if I could explain these principles in more detail.

Unfortunately trying to explain many of these principals in writing is very difficult, since many can’t be explained in words alone. However, I will try my best to describe these principles for the “blog” readers, using words, charts and pictures.

Keep in mind though, that in order to sometimes fully understand a principle you have to also understand other principles that relate to it. Most principles aren’t fully useable on their own, and have to be integrated with others.

Reflex Action

Ever heard of Sir Isaac Newton’s third law of physics? That’s the one that states “for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.” Well the principle of Reflex Action basically means the same thing.

However, a more accurate definition of what a Reflex Actions is would be, for every action (stimulus) there is an equal normally instinctual reaction that produces a specific predictable result. Clearly, when protecting your life the last thing you want is an equal opposite reaction directed towards you.

Basically, Reflex Actions are the reactions one obtains by stimulating various receptors located throughout the body. For example, one of the most commonly known of these reflex actions is the Patellar Reflex (knee jerk). That’s the one where the doctor taps the Patella ligament located just below the patella, causing your lower leg to kick/jerk forward.

Unless you have some medical issue, this reflex is innate, predictable, repeatable, and an example of the Monosynaptic Reflex Arc.

The medical definition of a “reflex” is an action that results from a nerve impulse passing over a reflex arc. This response can be either innate or conscious.

These reflexes are predictable and purposeful. They are intended to either inhibit or reinforce a specific action, such as protecting the body from injury. For example, the corneal reflex protects the eye by closing the lid when a foreign object approaches it.

Reflexes are identified or named in various ways:

1. According to the type of receptor stimulated to evoke a response
   • Exteroceptive – receptors located in surface membranes. They are sensitive to heat, cold, touch, and pain.
     
   • Intteroceptive – receptors located in viscera (the soft internal organs of the body, especially those contained within the abdominal and thoracic cavities).
     
   • Proprioceptive – receptors located in muscles and tendons and the labyrinth of the ear. These reflexes are known as myotic (tendon) or stretch reflexes because of the way in which they are evoked; stretching a muscle, or even slightly tapping a tendon.
     
2. According to the type of muscle response (flexor, extensor, convulsive, and coordinated reflexes).
   
3. According to what part of the body is responding, (knee jerk, ankle jerk, papillary reflex, etc.).
   
4. According to whether the response is natural or conditioned—natural being innate and unconditional; learnt being acquired, such as the voluntary control over one’s bladder.

Of course none of these reflexes would be possible without sense organs. The sense organs of the body are the millions of receptors of the nervous system. Some of these receptors are highly specialized structures, while others are simple, naked nerve bundles.

Stimulation of receptors gives rise to many different sensations, not just to the “five senses” most of us are familiar with. At least eleven distinct sensations are recognized: vision, hearing, taste, smell, equilibrium, touch-pressure, warmth, cold, pain, proprioception (sense of position and movement), and visceral sensations.

For the martial artists we are mainly interested in the function of the following types or receptors:

Classification	Location	Stimuli	Sensation Resulting
Exteroceptors	Skin and mucosa	Immediate environment	Variety – touch, taste, heat, cold, PAIN, etc.
Proprioceptors	Muscles, tendons, joints, and semicircular canals		The sense of position and movement
Tangoreceptors	Skin and mucosa	Pressure and touch	Touch, pressure, and tickling
Nociceptors	Throughout the body	Harmful stimuli	PAIN !

Okay, Warning a lot of anatomical and physiological information ahead.

The nervous system coordinates several activities that bring about a response to a stimulus. The first activity is reception, a process in which information is gathered from the external environment. The next activity is transmission, in which information is delivered by sensory neurons to the central nervous system. Then comes another activity called integration, in which an appropriate response is determined. The final activity is response. In response, a nerve impulse is dispatched via motor neurons to skeletal muscles or glands that will regenerate a response to the stimulus. Muscles and glands are the body's primary effectors.

During nerve activity, nerve impulses travel over a sequence of neu­rons. The sensory neurons, interneurons, and motor neurons are generally involved. These neurons are organized into circuits called neural circuits. In a neural circuit, neurons are arranged so that the axon of one neuron comes close to but does not join directly with the dendrite of the next neuron in the circuit. The junction between two close neurons is called the synapse.

The reflex arc is the simplest unit of nerve activity. It is typified by the knee-jerk reflex, and by the pain withdrawal reflex.

A reflex arc begins when stimulation is detected in the receptor portion at the end of a sensory neuron. A nerve impulse is generated, and the impulse travels over the sensory neuron to interneurons in the central nervous system serving as a processing center. The interneurons communicate with motor neurons, and an impulse is generated for transmission to an effector muscle or gland that will make an appropriate response. In the withdrawal reflex, for exam­ple, when you poke your finger on a pin the finger is pulled away from the pain as the muscles contract.

The reflex arc is automatic and unconscious; it does not involve the brain or any mental activity. It helps maintain homeostasis in the body, and it represents the simplest act that the nervous system can perform.

The components of the Reflex arc

Component	Description	Function
Receptor	The receptor end of a dendrite or a specialized receptor cell in a sensory organ	Sensitive to an internal or external change
Sensory neuron	Dendrite, cell body, and axon of a sensory (afferent) neuron	Transmits nerve impulse from the receptor to the brain or spinal cord
Interneuron	Dendrite, cell body, and axon of a neuron within the brain or spinal cord	Serves as processing center; conducts nerve impulse from the sensory neuron to a motor neuron
Motor neuron	Dendrite, cell body, and axon of a motor (efferent) neuron	Transmits nerve impulse from the brain or spinal cord to an effector
Effector	A muscle or gland outside the nervous system	Responds to simulation by the motor neuron and produces the reflex behavioral action.

The Nervous System: Basic Structure and Function

The nervous system is responsible for directing the complex processes taking place in the body's internal environment, as well as linking the body to the external world. Without the nervous system our bodies would not be able to function and there would be chaos. For example, muscles would not contract in any organized fashion, the body’s temperature would not be regulated, and blood would not be distributed according to tissue needs. Even our emotions and thinking abilities would be impaired, if they occurred at all.

The nervous system is divided into two principal divisions: the cen­tral nervous system (consists of the brain and spinal column and serves as a control center for the entire body), and the peripheral nervous system (composed of receptors in the sense organs and nerves that communicate between the central nervous system and the sense organs)

The Central Nervous System

The central nervous system is the main interpretation center for the human body. It is made up of the brain and the spinal cord.

The Brain
The brain is the organizing and processing center of the nervous system. It intakes information from various nerve impulses it receives, and transmits appropriate responses.

The Spinal Cord
The spinal cord is a white cord of nerve tissue approximately 18 inches in length (in an average adult). It passes downward from the brain and extends through the bony tunnel formed by the vertebrae.

The spinal cord has two major functions in nerve coordination. First of all, it serves as a coordinating center for the reflex arch. Secondly it also serves as a connecting network between the peripheral nervous system and the brain.

The Peripheral Nervous System

The brain and spinal cord are connected to every other part of the body and to the environment by a collection of nerves and cell bod­ies called the peripheral nervous system. The peripheral nervous sys­tem is composed of all the nervous tissue outside the brain and spinal cord. It is composed primarily of the peripheral nerves, the ganglia associated with them, and the sensory receptors.

The nerve fibers of the peripheral nervous system may be afferent (conduct nerve impulses towards the nervous system) or efferent (conduct nerve impulses away from the nervous system).

Nearly all peripheral nerves are mixed nerves containing both kinds of the above fibers. The afferent nerve fibers (sensory) arise in the senses. The efferent (motor nerves) arise in the central nervous system and include the somatic nerve fibers (fibers that innervate skeletal muscles) and autonomic nerve fibers (fibers that innervate smooth and cardiac muscles and glands).

The peripheral nervous system is sub­divided into the autonomic system and the sensory somatic system.

Autonomic System

The autonomic systems operates on an involuntary basis, and functions without conscious control. This system coordinates the functions of the visceral organs such as the cardiac muscle, visceral glands, and smooth muscles (muscle consisting of non-banded muscle cells normally found in visceral organs).

The autonomic system is subdivided into the sympathetic division and the parasympathetic division.

It is the sympathetic division that is responsible for preparing the body for an emergency. In a time of crises, sympathetic impulses duplicate the action of epinephrine, increase the heartbeat, constrict the arteries, dilate the pupils, and prepare the body to deal with the situation (see blog entry for the principle titled “Avoidance Tendencies;” “fight or flight response”).

The parasympathetic division is responsible for returning the body to a state of homeostasis.

Sensory Somatic System

The sensory somatic system carries nerve impulses from the senses to the central nervous system for interpretation. The system also car­ries impulses away from the central nervous system to the skeletal muscles and glands if a response is indicated. The system permits one to be aware of the external environment and to react to it. The awareness and the reactions occur on a voluntary basis.

* * *

By now you may be wondering why I’ve taken so much to explain the anatomical and physiological aspects of the nervous system. I mean, after all, what does all this information have to do with understanding the principle of Reflex Action?

Almost everything!

How the nervous systems works explains why this principle even exists. It is the “how it works” portion of the equation. Now to explain how the principle of Reflex Action is used.

The most common “Reflexes” used in the martial arts are: Accommodation Reflex, Tendon Reflex, Stretch Reflex, Pain Withdrawal Reflex (nociceptive withdrawal reflex), Crossed Extensor Reflex, and the Righting Reflex.

Accommodation Reflex

The accommodation reflex is a reflex action related to the eyes. It is a reflex associated with how the eyes change focus from a close object to one far away and vice versa.

While the actual reflex has no martial context, using the eyes inability to quickly reflex in this manner does. In other words, if one attacks the eyes quickly enough, such that the eyes are unable to maintain focus, two things can occur:

The first possible reaction is the head pulls back in order to place more distance between the eyes and the oncoming object in order to focus in on it. If the head moves back off its base, the entire body starts to become unstable. Further more, with the head pulled backwards the throat becomes exposed.

The second possible reaction is the eyelids close (corneal reflex). This innate reflex is designed to protect the eyes from damage by a foreign body. Clearly if your opponent can’t see he is at a disadvantage.

Another more advanced way of using the accommodation reflex against others occurs when one does “soft blocks”—blocking motions that use no physical contact, yet push the opponent off course from their intended target. In these cases the attacker's eyes focus on a specific movement the defender makes; the attacking limb then tracks that movement. Of course it’s a little more complex than that, but that’s the basic reason why and how soft blocks work.

Tendon Reflex / Stretch Reflex

Okay, this gets a little difficult...

Basically the tendon reflex, or inverse stretch reflex, is a mechanism designed to control muscle tension. It is an innate reflex designed to relax the muscles before muscle force becomes so great that the tendons get injured. When the muscles relax, they extend.

The stretch reflex on the other hand does the opposite. It is a reflex designed to control muscle length by causing muscles to contract, become shorter. This contraction is an innate mechanism geared towards the “flight” response, and helps to reduce the chance of muscle tearing though strain.

Basically the tendon reflex and the strength reflex keep each other in check.

For martial artist we are primarily interested in stimulating the tendon reflex, though the stretch reflex is used occasionally.

Example:
In the technique Gokyu