Unbeaten

[Joe Hubbard]

Yes, I have trained with Vu and so has Hock. Back in the 80s Hock use to host Vu in Texas.

Out

Joe

[Joe Hubbard]

No worries, glad you liked it.

Out

Joe

[Tant01]

To think like the enemy is a slight misnomer... No dis respect intended but but it's really knowing how the enemy thinks and going to the next stage. Putting said enemy in the OODA loop. Great outline, thanks for sharing.

None of this victim mindset crap. I appreciate that!.

[Joe Hubbard]

Okay, I have to start this off by explaining that all self-protection begins with understanding the concept of “concentric layers of defense.” Let me clarify this by saying that most people who train a sport based or traditional martial art predominately train from a physical standpoint. With that in mind, it is critical for that person to excel, that they focus on the development of their athleticism and their ability to explode and recover- not a bad attribute to possess. However, for anyone to rely solely on this concept in the arena of urban, suburban and rural reality is fool hardy and places you in a late phase reactionary gap when your are confronted by sudden violence. In other words, your actual self-defense skills make up the last layers of defense that you want to fall back on.

Through my experience as a security contractor for the U.S. Government, I have adopted a physical security model and transmuted this into a blueprint for personal protection. It is based on four separate pillars:

1) Detection
* -Awareness
* -Avoidance
* -Intelligence
* -Threat Analysis

2) Delay

* -Hands Up: Fence or Barrier to protect your head
* -Effective Communications
* -Aim for Peace/Prepare for War

3) Defend
* -Deceptive Delivery System
* -Preemptive Strike
* -Defend & Counterattack
* -Disengage & Assess

4) Defeat
* -Neutralize to Degree
* -Use of Force Model
* -Force Multiplier

Keeping these ideas at the forefront, it is paramount to understand that all self-protection ends with the ability to think like the enemy. This doesn’t come easy to citizens of good character, but is essential for survival against a criminal attack. Please remember that this is why many trained people loose on the street and why our militaries continually fall victim to asymmetric warfare.
Now as far as actual tools to teach your mother, daughter and/or wife; think of areas on the body where no matter how hard you try, you cannot physically strengthen:

* -Eyes
* -Throat
* -Groin
* -Top of the Feet

Hope that helps

Out

Joe

Joe the Contractor Hubbard

doubleouch,

Like your post, like your point of view, and I like SBG (educated guess)

In fairness, Mr Thompson was a very good martial artist before he went on the door, I don't doubt that his door ability gave him the reality of combat, but just to give credit where credit is due.

Anyway, genuine question for you: Training in what I would refer to as Combat Athletics, in an alive way, is an excellent foundation for self-protection without a lot of the BS street hocus pocus. However, take someone like my mother, or my cousin who has disabilities, and they want to learn self-protection and cannot get on the mat or in the ring. How would you approach the instruction of such an individual?

Interested in your thoughts.

[doubleouch]

Maybe the real problem here is not how many fights or whether or not their claims are bullshit, but the fact that they are making them at all. It's sort of a "Hi, I'm the toughest street thug so I can teach you how to beat all the other street thugs" mentality. This draws exactly the wrong kind of crowd to a gym and I'd never associate with a gym that did that in the first place. I'd rather train with athletes and law abiding citizens. What the hell does everyone want to learn "street fighting" for anyway? I have no desire to fight anyone on the street. I just want to go to the gym and do stuff that I know is not bullshit. I want to train in an athletic and alive manner and enjoy the camaraderie that comes with it. I'd never think to ask my instructor how many fights he's won as it would be so besides the point to make no difference at all. Geoff Thompson got so good by fighting every day at work, not by training martial arts. If that's how he got good how the heck is he going to convince me that I can get good by a different method that he never used?

[sly fox]

thanks mate, certainly will..

[Thai Bri]

I guess an "interest level" in anything is low.... until people get to know about it. A few fliers ion the right place, especially including links to his site, hi talk forum and what he did on the Black Belt site would certainly drum up interest.

If there is anyone better out there (and there may be), then I haven't met him!

[sly fox]

Thanks Bri,
I had the pleasure of training with Mick and it was a great experience, in fact he may be coming out to Texas to do some training for a relatives law enforcement department and I may try and put on a seminar as well, although Im still trying to ascertain an interest level locally.
regards

[Thai Bri]

In my view the best guy I know of who is offering courses in Combatives at the moment is Mick Coup

https://www.corecombatives.com

He has a logically structured system, it is scientifically based (unlike many others who claim science but only offer flawed theories) and he actively welcomes disagreement in the true hope that he can get better himself. Whereas some others I have seen take it as an insult if you disagree with them at all.

Mick can teach any able bodied person how to hit hard, and how to apply that impact against the vulnerable areas of a person who is trying to knock your face in. There is no "fluff" whatsoever. It doesn't loo cool, there are no high kicks.... no wrist locks.... no chi balls....... and no bullshit.

There are other good guys too of course but, out of all those I have seen in the last 28 years of training, he is the best.

[sly fox]

This would be better done in a pm. It is on it's way......

haha... spoilsport ... can you at least post the guys who you felt had something really good to offer

[Thai Bri]

This would be better done in a pm. It is on it's way......

[Bullseye]

Seriously??????????????

I thought he was one of the most revered experts in the country. Geoff Thompson says he reveres him!

Wow, I never thought anyone would criticise this guy ever.

Bri, as you have trained with Geoff Thompson, and presumably other well known instructors, would you mind giving a brief overview on whose teachings you rate and why?

To be clear, I'm not asking you to slag anyone off. You have alot of experience, and I'd welcome your opinion as someone who has met some of the bigger names in RBSD. I never have, and so everything I know has been through books, magazines, the net ect. So I kind of have to take stuff at face value.

I'd be interested to know who you rate as the "real deal," and why?

[Thai Bri]

Bri,

When you were talking about the "cammo clown," were you referring to one of the old QandA resident experts? A long time friend of O'Neil who did doorwork with him?

That's the cookie.

I trained with him for a while. They know how to train until they puke..... but it is also very inefficient training. No impact generation, and a reliance on blows that only work when in an "in fight" situation if the other guy has no arms. Funnily enough they always deminstrate, with the "bad guy" having his arms down by his side.

And the pseudo psychology is just plain ridiculous. All this "accessing a state" and "de-anchoring" nonsense - hilarious.

[Bullseye]

I also think it would be more inspirational as well. I mentioned Vunak in the topic started, and if it's true that he fought, won AND lost, i find this very motivating.

Why? Well, if I got my arse kicked tomorrow, I'd feel pretty bad. I train, and I'd surely question myself and my training, and do a lot of armchair quarterbacking on myself.

This isn't rational, as we have established anyone can lose on any given day. But I think my reaction would be human nature.

I think it's pretty good if people can look at someone with a rep as a fighter, and know that they lost as well as one. It's an example that it's NOT the end of the world (unless the other guy kills you, then it's the end of your world, but I digress).

Some instructors, and I mean well known ones, are too caught up in portraying a perfect image. I don't mean Geoff Thompson, he seems extremely down to earth. Just want to clarify this as I have mentioned him a few times.