The Totality of the Situation

Posted by Mostly Genius – December 11, 2008

Chinatown AlleywayI use this phrase so frequently that I am sure my students are sick of hearing it. I repeat it so often because it is so important. Most self-defense training consists of drills or techniques and it easy to forget because of the constant repetition that there is not necessarily a stimulus-response relationship between a technique and a situation.

A simple wrist grab has all manner of escapes, counters and other responses. Some martial arts seem to have a fetish for this attack, and all sorts of joint manipulations are built around it. Many students are surprised when I teach responses to wrist grabs that include strikes, knives, and gunfire.

Knives and shooting are not my default response to a wrist grab, but they are certainly within my range of responses.

Correctly they will point out that a wrist grab is not in and of itself a lethal threat. This is absolutely true, but in the totality of the situation it might be an element of a lethal threat. If the attempt to pull you into the van full of ski-masked assailants begins with a wrist grab there is certainly justification. The wrist-grab is not the lethal threat: getting pulled into the van is.

We need to remember that without a context we are just practicing a drill, trying to learn the technical aspects of a technique and not demonstrating a use-case. We are answering the “how” question and not the “when” or “why” questions. Knives and shooting are not my default response to a wrist grab, but they are certainly within my range of responses.

This can go the other way too. Some people think that the Teuller drill means that we need to shoot people with knives (or other contact distance weapons) that are within some fixed distance. A threat with a knife that responds to a verbal command of “Stop” might not need to be shot. I would certainly be creating distance and getting a weapon in hand, but if the verbal commands are working I don’t have a reason to shoot (yet), I just have an excuse.

The complete scenario (or as much as we can understand of it) dictates what the appropriate response should be. There are a number of models for making these sorts of decisions, and none of the good ones look like a list of “Attacker does x, I respond with y.”

  • @Kelly
    Integrate scenarios into your training. As I mentioned above, without a scenario around a wrist grab I don't know which technique is really appropriate. As students progress make the scenarios "bigger", so instead of starting and ending with the wrist grab (a drill for a technique) you allow for some decision making, and choices.
  • Kelly
    You have touched on some of the problems I have had with my students in the past.Though I am a different type of instructor, ( hand to hand,grappling mostly)getting the idea in place that the "laws of escalation" are somewhat flexible is more than a chore.And though I teach these specific disciplines,explaining that the "tools" available extend beyond the range of training that I offer,feels as though it should be a seminar in and of itself. In the last paragraph you state," There are a number of models for making these sorts of decisions,and none of the good ones look like a list of "Attacker does x,I respond with y."
    I agree with this. However,in my experience, a good model can only help facilitate so much. Intuition is usually an intrinsic quality to an individual,and while I can teach them how to see with a different set of eyes,it is common place for the student to create a formula system (attacker does x...) for the purpose of retaining the information,which often leads to many misconceptions about what they are learning.As an instructor,this becomes my problem. So, heres my question....Should I incorporate more info in on other weapons systems,or perhaps rewrite my curriculum/look at other models? How can I prevent any future students that I have from slipping into this head space?
blog comments powered by Disqus