When this video was posted on a forum I frequent, I made a quip along the lines of “so much for not going to the ground in a fight”. I thought it was an obvious point – that of course the fallacy of saying never go to the ground in a fight was an uninformed cliche – but apparently a couple of people didn’t get it. I think their replies make a good point of discussion.

What some replied was essentially this; “Well, this is not the same thing. The fight ended when the guy hit the ground. Using the ground as a ballistic impact zone is different“. Let’s look at those points.

First of all, the cliche is not mine. it is said by others, and the cliche is fairly clear i.e. Don’t Go to the Ground in a Fight. There is no wiggle room there. The winner in the video took the fight to the ground, in contradiction to the espoused line. No one who uses that cliche ever follows it up with any caveats. It is used as a cut and dried piece of advice. Period. So this video is a contrary to that, no matter what. Just that fact alone shows up how foolish it is when that hoary bit of wisdom is trotted out.

Second, There is no way that ending was preordained. Sure, we look at the video in hindsight and say well of course that ended the fight. However, there is no way the thrower knew that the fight would end when the impact happened. It could easily have not knocked the loser out. How many times do we hear of cases where someone is shot multiple times, or shot in vital areas like the head, and continues? It is a well established and accepted fact that almost no handgun round, including a 45acp or 44magnum will stop someone with one round. The human body is capable of taking an amazing amount of punishment and still keep on ticking. If an aggressor can take multiple rounds of modern high-velocity hollow points and still fight, why is being slammed on the ground magically superior? It simply isn’t. There was at least an even chance that the fight could have continued after the throw. If you watch the video carefully, you can clearly see the thrower expected (or at least was prepared for) the fight to continue. He held the dominant controlling position for a moment, realized the other guy was out, and only then released his hold. So for anyone to think this was any different than the thrower making a conscious decision to take the fight to the ground, and do whatever he needed to do, you are mistaken.

Third, someone out on the interwebz will undoubtedly say “Well, if the other guy had a weapon the fight would have been different”. Really? Take a look at the video again. The thrower had control of either the other person’s limbs or he was disrupting the guy’s base and balance the entire time. See how the loser is flailing away with full energy just to try to stay upright and on his feet? At what point could he have accessed or deployed any weapon? The answer is, he couldn’t, even if he had the latest tacti-cool gun and rig. It is one thing to have a fast draw on a flat range. Try accomplishing the same task when you are being tossed all over God’s green earth. It is not done with much chance of success.

And, finally, we get to the other rallying cry of the RBSD crowd – “If there were multiples, it would have been different”. Let’s ignore possibilities for a second (and I am actually deep into a research project where we are trying to actually document with hard numbers how often multiple attackers happen) and look at what did happen. There were no multiples involved, and the thrower very likely saw that and made an informed decision to go to the ground. Further, if he had been wrong, and other assailants had become involved, he was in a fine position to engage them. Contrary to the popular RBSD trope, when an expert grappler fights someone who knows nothing about grappling, they do not roll around for hours, The fight will end in seconds, with plenty of time to take care of other attackers.

To sum up, there are plenty of times when going to the ground in a fight is the worst decision possible. There are plenty of other times it may be the single best thing you can do. Trying to espouse one single answer as dogma is wrong. To paraphrase an old saying “Saying never is the last refuge of the intellectually lazy”.

A while ago, I was searching around for a good solution to being able to discreetly carry a pistol when I was in a situation that was not well suited for the standard arrangement of a good heavy duty holster and a strong and sturdy belt. I had looked at a few other belly bands, but was never quite satisfied with any of them. A noted firearms trainer (and a friend), Rob Pincus (http://www.icetraining.us/robpincus.html) stepped in and showed me a holster he had a hand in designing, the I.C.E. Belly Band. I was able to get my hands on one and away I went.

I have spent the last few months putting the ICE belly band through its paces. I have been wearing it fairly often and in a number of different situations and contexts. It is a very good option for someone needing a discreet carry method.

Here is a short video showing the properties of this rig:

The nylon wrap has proven to be fairly durable and has shown no significant signs of wear. It is well made and comfortable. Even better in my opinion, is that the band itself is a bit wider than most other bands that I have used and it seems to have increased the comfort/”feel” during daily carry. The holster itself is a separate kydex piece that can be attached differently and adjusted somewhat to the user’s needs. Mine came for a Walther PPS and has good retention qualities. There is a good deal of Velcro along the band (more so than some other belly bands I have seen and used) and this allows for a really secure arrangement when strapped on. Even through different movements throughout the day, I found the band to rarely move much.

My only real criticism is that the holster attaches to the outside of the belly band. I am sure this makes it easier to make adjustments to the positioning of the holster, as well as making it much more comfortable to wear, but it weakens the “stiffness” of the gun. Occasionally the pistol will tend to lean outwards away from the body, which can compromise concealment. This is exacerbated with the smaller type of pistols that will most likely be carried, since there is less barrel length to help stabilized the weapon. To ensure this does not happen, the band must be underneath some support, like a belt or a tightly knotted waist drawstring. Unfortunately, sometimes the place of the belly band is for those times when that outer support might not be available. This is the only issue I have with the set up. I really wish the attachment was on the inside of the band (albeit at a cost of possibly irritating the skin). The issue can be worked around, but I wish it didn’t have to be.

Other than that caveat, it is a fine piece of equipment, and I continue to use it regularly.

http://icestore.us/I-C-E-Modular-Belly-Band-Holster-from-Crossbreed.html

We need to ask ourselves ; “Why do the techniques advocated here:”

“Not look anything like what is working here? ” :

The answer is that these two separate groups are not testing their material the same way. They might use the same language, but it does not necessarily mean the same things.

It seems that in today’s training community, everybody throws around the term “pressure testing” in order to justify the functionality of their method or technique. What is usually meant by pressure testing? Generally, it refers to some kind of force-on-force training where two or more people can actually apply techniques with energy that simulates real world conditions and situations. Unfortunately, like the quote from The Princess Bride “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means”, most of them really don’t use it correctly. Rather than being an objective standard, it has too often become whatever the person wants it to mean as long as they look good. For it to have true worth, we have to have a defined standard of measure. Then, we can use it as a way to judge.

The most amusing part of all this to me is that I was part of the martial arts world in the early to mid-eighties when the term first started getting thrown around, and the outcry and antagonism towards that concept by many of the ones who today try to hijack the phrase makes me laugh.

One of the most prominent and public, especially in the U.S. of those who first advocated the need to pressure test was Bruce Lee. He ruffled a lot of traditionalist’s feathers when he compared most typical training methods to be like learning to swim on dry land. He wrote and lectured many times on the need to put some gear on and actually – GASP! – fight. Another early proponent was Jon Bluming, who had years of hardcore judo and kyokushinkai karate and was actually one of the first to talk about what we now term MMA. Unfortunately, since he was based in Europe, a lot of what he taught and wrote didn’t have the impact in the U.S. that Lee did. After Lee’s death, some of his students such as Dan Inosanto continued his teachings and ideas, and through some of Inosanto’s students like Paul Vunak, more and more people became exposed to this idea. And, with the arrival of Gracie Jiu-jitsu and its open challenge, and then the first Ultimate Fighting Championship, the concept exploded.

Still, even then, for years afterwards, many martial artists tried to dismiss any use of the idea of pressure testing as a needed component. One magazine columnist in particular, who now writes a monthly MMA column, derided all things MMA up into 2004! However, with the internet, DVDs, and social media, it became easy for the most inexperienced layman to understand the powerful need to pressure test. And so, even most of the die-hard haters have had to adjust their own presentation. However, as I said earlier, they do not always understand what they are trying to do, or even worse, intentionally try to subvert the principle. So how do we know if their testing actually meets the standard? Here are some easy to follow and understand guidelines. There are four basic components that must be present.

First, let me say that the following is based on years of study and research, and involved a number of gifted and talented instructors and fighters, who coalesce around the finest internet discussion forum, Total Protection Interactive (www.totalprotectioninteractive.com), and who were gathered together by Craig Douglas, also known as “Southnarc”. The group consists of people such as Paul Sharp (http://sharpdefense.wordpress.com/), Larry Lindenman, Chris Fry (http://www.mdtstraining.com/), Claude Werner (http://www.dryfire-practice.com/), Ryan Mayfield, Paul Gomez (RIP), and others, as well as myself. So while I had a small part in the following formulation, it was very much a group effort.

Resisting Opponent
The first principle of pressure testing that must be adhered to is that we need a resisting opponent. This is the base from where everything comes from. It also seems to be very intuitive. If we want to test whether our technique or concept works against resistance, we need to have someone provide that resistance! The problem is this is where most people start and end. While physical resistance is a key factor, it is only one piece of the puzzle.

Opposing Will
The second feature is opposing will. By this I mean an active attempt at preventing an action from occurring. Not just physical resistance, but mental resistance as well. If we use a technique such as an empty hand response to a knife attack for instance, it is not enough that the “bad guy” tries to physically mimic a real attack; he has to commit himself to said attack.

Malevolent Intent
The third component is malevolent intent. This is a term I first heard used by a LEO whose TPI moniker is KIT. It perfectly describes that beyond the mental and physical resistance our training partner has to give us, he also must want us to lose. Not just make us fail by our technique not working, but by us having to suffer a visible loss. In the case of the knife counter from above, our training partner must be trying to defeat our technique and put us in a position where he can repeatedly “stab” us. It is not enough to stop the technique, but he must also want to crush us. If he can succeed in doing so, he demonstrates it clearly that our whole concept/technique/method is in error.

Freedom of Action
The fourth and final part is freedom of action. In my opinion, this is the biggest aspect that many proponents of pressure testing miss. We can have all the prior components in place, but if all we allow our adversary to do is a finite number of things, are we really being true to the problem? For example, in the 90’s, it was really popular with the traditional martial art crowd to show how easy it was for their art to handle a grappler. The typical photo layout had the “good guy” standing ready to go while the evil grappler almost always shot in for a double leg takedown, and the good guy used his favorite technique to stifle the attack. The problem with this (outside of the fact that the “grappler” never seemed to know how to properly execute the takedown) was that the defender was only defending against a single and known move. If the grappler had also been allowed to throw strikes as an example, the difficulty would have increased exponentially, to the point that the defense would very likely to become overwhelmed. To truly test our methods under real world pressure, we have to simulate the real world, including the fact that we cannot know what are our opponent is going to do! It is a simple idea, yet every time I get into a debate about it, almost no one takes this into account. Somehow, they believe they will always be able to sense the attack and respond accordingly, like some kind of real life Jedi Knight. Unfortunately, that won’t happen, and to rely on it is to set yourself up for failure.

To sum up, if your pressure testing does not have all four of these components, you are not truly pressure testing. If you can conclusively show you put your favored technique/method/system/skill through this prism, then you can probably stand up to any scrutiny.

This is one of the hands down best books I have ever read on unarmed self-defense. Period. Incredibly useful and insightful, and written for the everyday person, Jerry avoids all the usual tough-guy clichés, as well as staying as far away from the typical paranoia inducing hyperbole that too many SD authors indulge in.

Jerry starts off with by setting up his ideas with fact and down to earth normal guy reasoning and logic. Then he proceeds to go over simple and highly functional physical skills that almost anyone can implement. Where he really shines, and where so many other SD authors fail, is at tying the physical skills into a cohesive game plan that comes as close to universal application as anything probably can. This sketching of his “game plan” might be my favorite part of the book. He finishes with some good words of wisdom and the caveat that there is no easy, one size fits all solution. In short, I cannot recommend this book too highly.

Order it here:

http://www.amazon.com/Red-Zone-Prime-Jerry-Wetzel-ebook/dp/B00HCLSMAK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1389379732&sr=8-1&keywords=red+zone+prime

http://thefightworkspodcast.com/2008/04/13/112-luciana-luka-dias-the-grappling-world-team-trials/

This is a podcast interview with my coach’s wife Luka. She is also one of my coaches, a valued training partner, was THE coach to both of my kids, and is one of the greatest competitors in BJJ. She, along with Megaton, are truly part of my family. Her perspective as one of the first major female competitors is worth listening to. Up until very recently, she had more Gold Medals in the Pan-Ams than anyone else, including male competitors.

An interesting side note for you martial artists out there: while Luka was living in L.A. in the 90’s, she was training with Rigan Machado, and was the regular training partner for Dan Inosanto when he would take his weekly private lessons from Rigan.

We talked about how many grapplers, even experienced ones, can sometimes have a poor Upa (Hip Lift) or use it incorrectly. In this article, I will go over the points that I think are critical to success in this move. This article will not cover how/when/why to use the move, but rather the technical execution only.

The first thing we need to do is make sure our arms are compressed inwards. The elbows should be connected to the ribcage, and the hands should be somewhere close to the face. There is no valid need to use the arms in the hip lift. It is a waste of time since we can use the power of the hips to do the work, and the arms are useless, so let’s keep them where they are useful and not vulnerable themselves.

Secondly, we need to bring the heels of both feet in as close to our butt cheeks as possible. If we are not spazzing out and keeping ourselves secure in Survival Position, we have time to make this crucial adjustment.

Third, we have to lift our head up from the ground. If we leave it on the ground, it actually acts as a brake and stopping point for our movement.

Finally, we lift upwards using our core and hips as the driver. The same part of our body that allows us to dead lift 500 pounds is what we rely on now. Continue the drive as high as you can until the only points touching the ground are the tips of our toes and our shoulder blades. Drive straight upwards. You are not trying to move the opponent to one side or another. Rather you are getting his weight as high up vertically as possible so you can use that room to move. Let him fall to a side if he has to, but it is not your immediate concern or intent.

May of the failures with the hip lift come about from where someone fails in any of the above points. Another failure is when someone does not practice the move enough and is not able to get much of an arch as they drive upwards with their hips so you do not end up creating much vertical space. However, there is an easy and cheap solution to that issue – practice the move properly! It sounds stupid, but doing 10-20 perfect hip lifts everyday will teach your body how to do it, and will groove in that neural pathway so you won’t have to think about it under stress.

Here is a video clip that covers all the above points in detail:

One of the backbones of my teaching is the “In fight Intent Triage” idea. It is a conceptual/strategic/tactical roadmap that acts as a mental checklist during a fight to ensure that even in the most chaotic situations, you are attempting to always choose the best and most efficient path to winning, while avoiding opening up unnecessary windows of vulnerability.

A number of people are surprised that I use it for all types of fights, whether grappling, standing striking and clinch, or even weapons. The knee jerk reaction to seeing it presented in one area (for example on the ground) has a tendency to make them look at it very narrowly.

However, it is most certainly not narrow. It is very broad in fact. IIT (In fight Intent Triage) is not about the specific mechanics, but rather about the overall direction of the fight. One area where people are most surprised at this is at the final stage, the “Finish”.

This is at the end of the checklist. I purposefully labeled it the way I did, rather than anything specific. The reason is that whatever finish you would like to do, they all require the same circumstances. If you are unsure of what I mean, or even that you disagree, let’s breakdown one specific type of finish and go from there.

So, to apply a submission as my finish, I need to do three things:

1) I need to maintain the spatial relationship/positioning between my
opponent and myself. If he can move away or even shift around too
much, the submission might become out of reach or closed off, or he is able to move into a position where he can actually turn the tide of the fight in his favor, so I
have to control both mine and his relative positions.

2) I have to have some control or open space for whatever I am putting
the submission on. I need to have the ability to get to his arm if I
want to do a kimura for example. I can’t choke him if he is covering
up his neck. If I can’t get to his legs or prevent them from moving, I can’t do a kneebar.

3) I have to prevent him from stopping my attack. If I am doing an
americana and I leave his other arm free, he can reach in and grab his
arm and defend the sub. If I am looking to do a loop choke and he gets
one or both hands in the way, I will fail, etc..

So, those steps have to be there for me to do a submission (the
“finish”). But those things all also have to be accounted for if I am
going to strike him, if I am going to disengage and escape, if I need
to hold him so others can come to my aid, or if I am going to draw a
weapon. If any of those three things are not present, and I draw a
pistol, my opponent has the same chance of fouling/stopping me as he
would defending a submission! All of the same exact circumstances have to be met in order to make my chosen finish a high percentage move.

Can I try to finish without all those prerequisites being met? Sure, but the chance of failure skyrockets. If I try to draw a weapon without those three steps, I am betting literally my life that I can out drag race the bad guy. Maybe I can, and maybe I can’t. But if I had only followed the above rules, I minimize the effects my opponent’s attributes will have on the outcome of the fight. Which is certainly important, especially if said opponent is bigger, stronger, faster, tougher, in better shape, less injured, etc.

So it is irrelevant what we are looking for as a finish. I need to
have the same steps in play for any desired end state. Whether I want to play the striking game, or get a submission, or be Mr. Gunfighter, I need the same things. Unless I want to risk a
scramble/drag race, in which I have a decent (probably even at least)
chance of failing. If I take the time and effort to fulfill the above
requirements, I am stacking the odds towards my favor.

 What if I told you there was an absolutely guaranteed way to make your jiu-jitsu performance noticeably better in a short time? Sometimes as short as immediately? Would you be interested?

Okay, here is where I show that I have no ability to do fancy money making internet marketing stunts, and am doomed to never be the next Social Media Marketing Guru. I am about to tell you, free of charge and with no caveats, how to increase your BJJ ability possibly overnight.  Are you ready?

Work the upa!

Yes, I know it is one of the two most fundamental moves in jiu-jitsu. I know everyone learns it in their first couple of lessons. And I know that everyone probably does them regularly. Here’s the thing though. Most people don’t do them correctly, or do them at the correct time. I see it time after time, at gyms and training groups all over the world. People think they are doing them, and they are actually far from the ideal.

A few years ago, I taught at a school in the UK. The head coach at the time was a solid purple. And when I watched the attendees warm up, they all had terrific hip escapes, but no one could do even close to a decent upa. When I pointed that out, there was some indignation until I demonstrated it under pressure how poorly they were at it.They thought they could do it, but didn’t realize how far from the ideal they actually were.

I recently did a seminar where a number of attendees were experienced BJJ players. There were even a couple of purple belts there. When they did positional sparring, I saw over and over again failures at performing an upa correctly, or not performing it when they should, or failing to chaining it together with other things. All I had to do to turbo boost their success rate at escaping was to simply say “do an upa”. Suddenly, where before they were stuck futilely trying to escape, now they immediately were doing it left and right! Of course, this was after about 30 minutes of actively working the move with correct details. This is absolutely not an isolated instance, but rather the most recent example of how simple it is to achieve this goal.

I know it sounds simple, but it is true.

In the next two parts of this article, we will look at the two issues (technical failure, tactical failure) and how to fix them.

A couple of years ago,  I wrote a post on the best Forum on the internet, Total Protection Interactive (www.totalprotectioninteractive.com) about what I thought was a good approach to trying to establish a solid and functional H2H self-defense game for the regular guy, who only had a small and finite amount of time to train. I wrote the following to give my perspective on how to make the right decisions.

I offer this up only as MY take on priorities in allocating training time for Practical Unarmed Combat (PUC), no one else’s. This is how I categorize it in my head to help with my own structuring. Take it for what it’s worth.

In order of importance, I would list the main skill sets as:

Area 1) Keeping from getting KTFO and efficient movement while vertical
Area 2) Dictating range, position, and attachment or un-attachment
Area 3) Groundwork
Area 4)  Basic high percentage offensive moves
Area 5) Staying on your feet
Area 6) IFWA (in-fight weapons access) at contact distances

So where to train these and where do we get the material from?

For Area 1) Boxing/MT/Savate/MMA – these arts have methods/techniques that work under stress. They all have developed high percentage defenses and ways of moving. I have found most TMAs actually pay mostly lip service to defense. They all are much more focused on the cool offensive moves. And here lies my biggest issue with most combatives guys. They give almost no thought to defense, either in the technique or in flight time training. It’s why I give the thumbs up to very few combatives instructors.

For Area 2) Folk/freestyle wrestling, Greco, Judo, and MMA are the predominant arts here, but any art that has any legit grappling will have some validity. This is essentially clinch work, but unfortunately since so few people actually train it, few understand what it entails. Clinch DOES NOT always mean you are attached. It simple refers to the general range where each participant can easily attach. The person who controls this aspect can also control the range, the relative positioning, and when the space can open up to longer range. In doing so, you can go a long way towards controlling the fight and winning (surviving).

For Area 3) I think BJJ is the highest expression of groundwork in that it works for everyone regardless of physical attributes, but judo, sambo, western wrestling, and MMA are terrific as well (with the understanding that there are some weakness’ with those arts).

For Area 4) This should be good solid material that can be relied on over and over again. There are a lot of arts you can choose from here but the best are: boxing/MT/savate/MMA/combatives. The general thought behind this choice should be what are the highest percentage, most robust, and easily maintained functional techniques?

For Area 5) There are a myriad of reasons a fight might go to the ground, many of which you have no control over. It is a good idea to try to ensure you are as well versed as possible in those areas where you do have control. So it makes sense that the arts that have the highest level of functional takedown ability have the highest development of countering those takedowns. It is hilarious to me to see someone showing how to defend a takedown by demo-ing against someone who has never taken someone down in their lives. Not exactly the best way to ensure your stuff actually works. Try against someone who spends a lot of time training it for real. So we are back to folk/freestyle wrestling, judo, sambo, and MMA.

For Area 6) I placed IFWA here because good IFWA is so dependent on the prior skills. While you do have to put in dedicated training time to this area, IMO it should only be done after you have a reasonable grasp of 1-5. Otherwise, you will find you have a lot of holes, and you will waste time trying to reinvent the wheel , i.e. you won’t know what you don’t know.

Caveats and considerations in training:
Just because these components are listed in this order of importance does not necessarily mean that is the order you should train them in. There are many factors to consider.

First, what is available to you? It would be stupid of me to tell someone to go do BJJ if all they had around them was a guy who got his blue belt online and has never trained with a high level instructor. Or if that gym by your office advertising MMA was actually run by a guy whose background was only kenpo and another guy who was a joke as a blue belt. If the choice is between a top judo program and someone teaching Muay Thai who has never really sparred, then go with the legit program.

Second, some things are much harder to come by. Finding a real wrestling program is like winning the lottery. And arguably the majority of MMA gyms have a low level of clinch work, and often really crappy BJJ. If you find something that is harder to come across, you should most likely jump at that before it is gone.

Third, some of these things are easier to develop a decent level in than others. For example, it takes only a few months to get good at DEFENSIVE clinch work. It takes years and years and thousands of hours of flight time to get decent at OFFENSIVE clinch work, but defensively it is quick to learn to negate what the other guy is attempting. So if you are looking for a functional level, you might only need say six months of focus in this area (you still need maintenance and understand you only have a piece of the overall clinch game). I would say the same thing in regards to learning to not get KOed. Six months of implementing those defensive skills against resisting opponents who are actually trying to hit you will go a long way towards internalizing that skill set. Other skills take much longer. Groundwork for example is the most complicated and chaotic part of H2H.  

And finally, some things have a better bang for the buck. If you are studying a system that covers a bunch of things, you are being more efficient. As an example, most people don’t realize it, but BJJ trains your clinch extremely well. A closed guard or butterfly guard game requires the same general techniques that a standing clinch game does. But because BJJ is generally done in a horizontal manner, people fail to mentally translate that to the vertical plane. And if you are lucky enough to train at a BJJ school that has a strong stand up/judo game, it is even better.

So, taking these things into consideration, you can decide how to prioritize it for yourself. Do you want to focus on the things that require less time, get solid at those, and then tackle the longer harder skills (BJJ, IFWA, counter takedowns), or do you want to get a jump on those ASAP since they do take such a long time to functionalize? Only each individual can answer what is the best path.

As for the question of BJJ being a good fit in a gun/knife context – If it is a good idea in an empty hand situation, it is good in a weapons situation. While there are things you need to tweak, BJJ is a must for a weapon grapple. Period. Those who go through ECQC with a solid BJJ base are FAR ahead of those who don’t have that base. It has been proven time and time again.