testtest

Self Defense & Combat Arts

10mmLife

Moderator
Staff member
Founding Member
I've have been training in Kali also known as Arnis or Escrima and another art, Pencak Silat for many years. Both these arts have a heavy emphasis on bladed combat and empty hands techniques.

Does anybody else train in a type of defensive art or combat art to supplement their firearm skills?

If so what arts do you train or what arts would you like to train in?
 
I think that while important, those who are seeking to improve their self-defense capabilities should first focus on improving their overall fitness.

I'm not saying this as someone on a high-horse...rather, I'm saying this as someone who needs to be on that train, myself 😅 - years (decades, really) of a rather sedentary lifestyle brought about by the perils of a white-collar career and the need to shuttle a school-aged child from one activity to another have led to a shocking BMI, a decrease in muscular strength, and also decrease in cardiovascular health and capacity - none of which are compatible with not only general-health/longevity, to say the least of self-defense.

Prioritizing, I would put both raw strength and cardiovascular capability above combatives training.

Both strength and cardiovascular health are of tremendous importance to aging well, and what's more, improving capabilities in these areas simply raises our baseline survivability. Pat McNamara calls our bodies the "combat chassis," and I think he's really on-point in this description. While none of us have a chassis as enduring as, say, the T-800:

1579457321778.png


- a stronger, more fit body nevertheless makes us less vulnerable to injury overall and enables quicker recovery, regardless of the cause or circumstance.

To me, this difference is plainly seen in how my father-in-law is aging, versus my stepfather, versus my biological father.

My FIL has led the life of an academic/white-collar upper-middle-class individual all his life, from childhood to present-day, and he also was never very physically active. My stepfather, also a white-collar worker for most of his life, maintained a much more active lifestyle. My biological father, on the other hand, was active/sporting in his youth, and as an immigrant, worked hard physical labor during mid-life and continued in a blended blue/white-collar work environment - interspersing clerical work with the need to fill-in physical labor - throughout. Not unexpectedly, my FIL is the most frail of all, while my stepfather enjoy a very active retirement, and my father was able to recover very rapidly from major surgery last year.

Additionally, it is said from the likes of Dr. William Aprill ( https://aprillriskconsulting.com/ ) that the predators in our midst makes initial calculations of their potential targets by observing - perhaps even at the subconscious level - the physical capabilities of those prey: i.e. even something as simple as our way of walking and self-carriage. If this is true, then my FIL certainly presents as a much more appealing target versus either my stepfather or biological father.

Being able to simply last longer in the physical fight as well as being able to avoid/escape the fight ("Run-fu") are both also inexorably tied to simple physical fitness.

And that brings us, of-course, to fighting.

I think that for those who are looking at fighting for self-defense, the best medium to pursue would be integrated combatives specifically tailored towards the concealed carrier. Since many of us come to the legal concealed-carry at differing stages of life, integrated combatives teaches the skills and techniques to increase survivability specifically with defensive tools (be it OC, knife, gun, or even improvised weapons), along with some basic - but widely cross-applicable - empty-hand skills, including ground-fighting. Most of these integrated combatives instructors are very cognizant of the physical limitations that their clientele may present with (whether it be due to age or injury), and furthermore, will frame these skills in terms of the likely scenarios that their students will face in real-life.

That said, a deeper dive into the martial arts - particularly those which provide contact in the form of sparring or other pressure-cooked contexts - will serve to both harden the individual to take that first hit (Mike Tyson's amazingly incisive "everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face" rewording of the age-old axiom) as well as vet techniques for real-world applicability. Furthermore, most martial arts will also help develop stamina, strength, and flexibility, which are all "chassis hardening" characteristics.

For me, I'd like to get back into Krav because of the simple physicality of the program.

Aside from that, I'd really like to get back into the integrated-combatives side of the equation: to take on a program at a regular schedule (i.e. both conditioning as well as skills). From a lifetime ago, I had a basic understanding of grappling and full-contact sparring through Combat Shuai-Chiao, but I found with what little I was able to get from a few seminars' worth of integrated combatives that those skills needed some real-world framing, and that I needed a regular diet of being able to practice/test those skills, in order to truly retain them.

Regardless, I do believe strongly that we as legal concealed-carry citizens tend to place too much weight on "the gun" - and that for the worse, we start viewing the world's problems as nails simply because we're carrying a hammer. Even with what little integrated combatives and force-on-force I've done, I can tell you without a shadow of doubt that every time I did something wrong and had my ass handed to me, it was because I tried to solve the problem with a tool (be it the knife or the gun, or an improvised weapon), rather than having realized that I just needed to solve the problem.

And towards this end, I also think that myself - and pretty much the entire concealed-carry/defensive-shooting community - would benefit from more time in force-on-force training. Decision-making is more than half the game, and knowing not only how to fight, but when to fight or even if to fight, is truly the way to win.
 
If you really want to work on your speed, eye/hand coordination, and agility.............try and catch a 2 yr old toddler running through the house who has snatched your phone off of the table. That'll give a clue as to what techniques one should work on. :)
 
If you really want to work on your speed, eye/hand coordination, and agility.............try and catch a 2 yr old toddler running through the house who has snatched your phone off of the table. That'll give a clue as to what techniques one should work on. :)

tenor.gif


Just wait until you also need to sidestep legos at the same time, bruddah!

1579464404582.png


That makes it seem not so harsh at all, getting off the mountain.......

1579464471462.png
 
I think that while important, those who are seeking to improve their self-defense capabilities should first focus on improving their overall fitness.

I'm not saying this as someone on a high-horse...rather, I'm saying this as someone who needs to be on that train, myself 😅 - years (decades, really) of a rather sedentary lifestyle brought about by the perils of a white-collar career and the need to shuttle a school-aged child from one activity to another have led to a shocking BMI, a decrease in muscular strength, and also decrease in cardiovascular health and capacity - none of which are compatible with not only general-health/longevity, to say the least of self-defense.

Prioritizing, I would put both raw strength and cardiovascular capability above combatives training.

Both strength and cardiovascular health are of tremendous importance to aging well, and what's more, improving capabilities in these areas simply raises our baseline survivability. Pat McNamara calls our bodies the "combat chassis," and I think he's really on-point in this description. While none of us have a chassis as enduring as, say, the T-800:

View attachment 625

- a stronger, more fit body nevertheless makes us less vulnerable to injury overall and enables quicker recovery, regardless of the cause or circumstance.

To me, this difference is plainly seen in how my father-in-law is aging, versus my stepfather, versus my biological father.

My FIL has led the life of an academic/white-collar upper-middle-class individual all his life, from childhood to present-day, and he also was never very physically active. My stepfather, also a white-collar worker for most of his life, maintained a much more active lifestyle. My biological father, on the other hand, was active/sporting in his youth, and as an immigrant, worked hard physical labor during mid-life and continued in a blended blue/white-collar work environment - interspersing clerical work with the need to fill-in physical labor - throughout. Not unexpectedly, my FIL is the most frail of all, while my stepfather enjoy a very active retirement, and my father was able to recover very rapidly from major surgery last year.

Additionally, it is said from the likes of Dr. William Aprill ( https://aprillriskconsulting.com/ ) that the predators in our midst makes initial calculations of their potential targets by observing - perhaps even at the subconscious level - the physical capabilities of those prey: i.e. even something as simple as our way of walking and self-carriage. If this is true, then my FIL certainly presents as a much more appealing target versus either my stepfather or biological father.

Being able to simply last longer in the physical fight as well as being able to avoid/escape the fight ("Run-fu") are both also inexorably tied to simple physical fitness.

And that brings us, of-course, to fighting.

I think that for those who are looking at fighting for self-defense, the best medium to pursue would be integrated combatives specifically tailored towards the concealed carrier. Since many of us come to the legal concealed-carry at differing stages of life, integrated combatives teaches the skills and techniques to increase survivability specifically with defensive tools (be it OC, knife, gun, or even improvised weapons), along with some basic - but widely cross-applicable - empty-hand skills, including ground-fighting. Most of these integrated combatives instructors are very cognizant of the physical limitations that their clientele may present with (whether it be due to age or injury), and furthermore, will frame these skills in terms of the likely scenarios that their students will face in real-life.

That said, a deeper dive into the martial arts - particularly those which provide contact in the form of sparring or other pressure-cooked contexts - will serve to both harden the individual to take that first hit (Mike Tyson's amazingly incisive "everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face" rewording of the age-old axiom) as well as vet techniques for real-world applicability. Furthermore, most martial arts will also help develop stamina, strength, and flexibility, which are all "chassis hardening" characteristics.

For me, I'd like to get back into Krav because of the simple physicality of the program.

Aside from that, I'd really like to get back into the integrated-combatives side of the equation: to take on a program at a regular schedule (i.e. both conditioning as well as skills). From a lifetime ago, I had a basic understanding of grappling and full-contact sparring through Combat Shuai-Chiao, but I found with what little I was able to get from a few seminars' worth of integrated combatives that those skills needed some real-world framing, and that I needed a regular diet of being able to practice/test those skills, in order to truly retain them.

Regardless, I do believe strongly that we as legal concealed-carry citizens tend to place too much weight on "the gun" - and that for the worse, we start viewing the world's problems as nails simply because we're carrying a hammer. Even with what little integrated combatives and force-on-force I've done, I can tell you without a shadow of doubt that every time I did something wrong and had my ass handed to me, it was because I tried to solve the problem with a tool (be it the knife or the gun, or an improvised weapon), rather than having realized that I just needed to solve the problem.

And towards this end, I also think that myself - and pretty much the entire concealed-carry/defensive-shooting community - would benefit from more time in force-on-force training. Decision-making is more than half the game, and knowing not only how to fight, but when to fight or even if to fight, is truly the way to win.
I started running last year (forced due to health reasons) and realized pretty quick that it helps me in almost every aspect of life. I would list sleeping as an exception to that, as I get less now, but it is better sleep. It has helped so much that I have started to mix in weight training on my none running days.
I was just shy of 300 lbs when I started walking a mile a day. I'm 230 now and run 7 miles every other day. I still haven't quite gotten used to getting up at 3:30 in the morning to go but it helps me keep up with the kids and grandkids.
 
Everyone in my house has been in Chinese Kempo for many, many years and have trained in knife fighting. I always thought of it from a fitness perspective, not an equalizer to someone with a gun. If someone is pointing a gun at you from 10 feet away, credentials are kind of out the window. I like to think awareness is key. Of course, it's never a bad thing to be fit either.
 
Everyone in my house has been in Chinese Kempo for many, many years and have trained in knife fighting. I always thought of it from a fitness perspective, not an equalizer to someone with a gun. If someone is pointing a gun at you from 10 feet away, credentials are kind of out the window. I like to think awareness is key. Of course, it's never a bad thing to be fit either.
I enjoy the training and 100% agree don't bring a knife to a gun fight. But there is always the 30ft rule you need to worry about with the bad guys is how a person can clear 30ft before most people can draw and get shots on target. Even if you're shots kill the perp a stab wound to yourself can be just fatal. The fight doesn't always end when someone is shot.
 
I enjoy the training and 100% agree don't bring a knife to a gun fight. But there is always the 30ft rule you need to worry about with the bad guys is how a person can clear 30ft before most people can draw and get shots on target. Even if you're shots kill the perp a stab wound to yourself can be just fatal. The fight doesn't always end when someone is shot.
Mythbusters did that on a show. As I recall 21 feet was the distance. Knife won every time.
 
Mythbusters did that on a show. As I recall 21 feet was the distance. Knife won every time.
There is a video online of an officer in Melrose, MA holding a guy at gun point from at least 30ft when the guy charged the officer. Not only did the guy clear that whole distance the officer had to run back several feet more while firing multiple shots hitting the perp before the threat was eliminated.
 
If you are not at the ready what appears to be a long distance all of a sudden can become way too close.

100 ft. or 10 ft., there is so much truth in this. Great quote, @SMSgtRod . 👍

And towards this end:

I enjoy the training and 100% agree don't bring a knife to a gun fight. But there is always the 30ft rule you need to worry about with the bad guys is how a person can clear 30ft before most people can draw and get shots on target. Even if you're shots kill the perp a stab wound to yourself can be just fatal. The fight doesn't always end when someone is shot.

Mythbusters did that on a show. As I recall 21 feet was the distance. Knife won every time.

There is a video online of an officer in Melrose, MA holding a guy at gun point from at least 30ft when the guy charged the officer. Not only did the guy clear that whole distance the officer had to run back several feet more while firing multiple shots hitting the perp before the threat was eliminated.

The canonical Tueller Drill ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tueller_Drill ), as it stands, should *not* be interpreted to be more than it is.

The reality is much more along the lines of SMSgtRod's wise words above, and this ITS article digs into the reasons why - https://www.itstactical.com/warcom/...myth-why-the-21-foot-rule-isnt-a-rule-at-all/

Overall, we've seen time and again in CCTV footage (such as those analyzed by the Active Self Protection YouTube Channel - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsE_m2z1NrvF2ImeNWh84mw) as well as by media-covered events of the good guys being triumphant in unarmed/improvised combatives against armed aggressors (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Thalys_train_attack) that just because there is a gun involved, it doesn't necessarily mean that the person with the gun will triumph.

Distance and timing are real-world worries for the one with the gun just as much as for the one who is using OC spray, a contact weapon, or even bare-hands.

Towards this, in last summer's Practically Tactical "Diagnostic Handgun" class (see links at the end of this post - https://www.thearmorylife.com/forum/threads/targets.346/page-2#post-5432), Joe Weyer, the chief instructor, recounted to us how he eventually reconciled his observations of the misses he documented in his study of police shootings. During his study, he noticed that the misses (regardless of whether the officer shooting ended up hitting or missing his/her intended target) typically were either low in front of the intended target or were high over. Joe's theory became that such misses occurred because the officer either got on the trigger too early from the draw (low hits in front of the target) or too late (high over, as the office then tried to shield him/herself in defense or were otherwise pushed back), and that both of these failures could be prevented by revising what we think of as "retention shooting." That, in-reality, retention shooting needs to be a default capability of our drawstroke, and that our capabilities for achieving center-mass hits from retention should extend at least to the parameters set forth in the canonical Tueller Drill, if not well beyond it.

^ I know, this is very, very abstract.

Let's try to make it more concrete. ;)

Look back at the canonical Tueller Drill, via this old police training video -


The last scenario depicted showed the canonical gap of 21 ft. from defender to aggressor.

In this case, the defender engages from full extension.

My question: would you really want to?

Joe had all of us - myself included, and I'm by far *not* the fastest guy out of the blocks - consistently engaging the high-center-chest scoring oval of an OPOTA Qual target (https://shop.actiontarget.com/content/opota-rqt2-ohio-opota-qualification-target-version-2.asp) from-retention, at upwards of 7 yards (with just a little more practice, I was assured from not only the instructional cadre but also fellow classmates who'd been through the class before, this could be stretched easily to 10 to 12 yards), coming out of inside-the-waistband concealment at 1 second or less. And no, this wasn't the old "speed-rock," it's a modern draw-stroke from a balanced fighting stance.

Run-fu. Empty-hands skills. A fast draw and the ability to engage from-retention. These are split-second choices that we will need to make, when things go down the way they do as SMSgtRod so eloquently put it.
 
100 ft. or 10 ft., there is so much truth in this. Great quote, @SMSgtRod . 👍

And towards this end:







The canonical Tueller Drill ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tueller_Drill ), as it stands, should *not* be interpreted to be more than it is.

The reality is much more along the lines of SMSgtRod's wise words above, and this ITS article digs into the reasons why - https://www.itstactical.com/warcom/...myth-why-the-21-foot-rule-isnt-a-rule-at-all/

Overall, we've seen time and again in CCTV footage (such as those analyzed by the Active Self Protection YouTube Channel - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsE_m2z1NrvF2ImeNWh84mw) as well as by media-covered events of the good guys being triumphant in unarmed/improvised combatives against armed aggressors (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Thalys_train_attack) that just because there is a gun involved, it doesn't necessarily mean that the person with the gun will triumph.

Distance and timing are real-world worries for the one with the gun just as much as for the one who is using OC spray, a contact weapon, or even bare-hands.

Towards this, in last summer's Practically Tactical "Diagnostic Handgun" class (see links at the end of this post - https://www.thearmorylife.com/forum/threads/targets.346/page-2#post-5432), Joe Weyer, the chief instructor, recounted to us how he eventually reconciled his observations of the misses he documented in his study of police shootings. During his study, he noticed that the misses (regardless of whether the officer shooting ended up hitting or missing his/her intended target) typically were either low in front of the intended target or were high over. Joe's theory became that such misses occurred because the officer either got on the trigger too early from the draw (low hits in front of the target) or too late (high over, as the office then tried to shield him/herself in defense or were otherwise pushed back), and that both of these failures could be prevented by revising what we think of as "retention shooting." That, in-reality, retention shooting needs to be a default capability of our drawstroke, and that our capabilities for achieving center-mass hits from retention should extend at least to the parameters set forth in the canonical Tueller Drill, if not well beyond it.

^ I know, this is very, very abstract.

Let's try to make it more concrete. ;)

Look back at the canonical Tueller Drill, via this old police training video -


The last scenario depicted showed the canonical gap of 21 ft. from defender to aggressor.

In this case, the defender engages from full extension.

My question: would you really want to?

Joe had all of us - myself included, and I'm by far *not* the fastest guy out of the blocks - consistently engaging the high-center-chest scoring oval of an OPOTA Qual target (https://shop.actiontarget.com/content/opota-rqt2-ohio-opota-qualification-target-version-2.asp) from-retention, at upwards of 7 yards (with just a little more practice, I was assured from not only the instructional cadre but also fellow classmates who'd been through the class before, this could be stretched easily to 10 to 12 yards), coming out of inside-the-waistband concealment at 1 second or less. And no, this wasn't the old "speed-rock," it's a modern draw-stroke from a balanced fighting stance.

Run-fu. Empty-hands skills. A fast draw and the ability to engage from-retention. These are split-second choices that we will need to make, when things go down the way they do as SMSgtRod so eloquently put it.
Awesome break down and insight on the subject!
I feel most people watch too many movies and shows depicting threats being immobilized by the hero (quick draw McGraw) that they get a false sense of security and understanding of what the human body is capable of before turning off permanently even with taking multiple shots.
 
Awesome break down and insight on the subject!
I feel most people watch too many movies and shows depicting threats being immobilized by the hero (quick draw McGraw) that they get a false sense of security and understanding of what the human body is capable of before turning off permanently even with taking multiple shots.
When I first joined the NRA, I joined their promotional DVD training course that offered training via PDN (Personal Defense Network). They covered many topics, included martial arts. I found them interesting & they talked about many aspects detailed in this thread. One DVD subject I thought was very useful, was one that demonstrated Cane Defense. This would come in handy while traveling to other countries where firearms were not allow. The cane used was a wooden hooked cane (recommended to be able to hook an opponent’s arm/leg, etc) and they even showed how the cane could be used as an offense weapon. This particular cane had teeth along the shaft (cutouts like a saw blade), that could be used to attack the face, neck, arm ,etc. I found the cane online and it was priced at around $80.
 
Back
Top