What is the goal in a fight? To get out in one piece is a laudable goal, but that can mean a lot of different things depending on the situation, the strategy or the presumptions of the individual... and it is not always possible.
Some people lock on to winning. That's fine. But some definitions of a win are more useful than others. My definition is both flexible and rigid-- whatever it takes to get the job done and be healthy. Sometime those aren't very compatible, but there it is. That 'whatever' (and the job description) make the flexibility.
But there are things that aren't in there, things that never affect my definition of the win. I don't care if anyone knows. (Including the threat. He just needs to be in cuffs. I don't care if he knows how it happened or who did it. It would be counterproductive in the long run to punk him out.) I don't care if I get the statistic. The job got done. No injury. Move on to the next one.
I don't care how it looked.
Emotional state is irrelevant as well. I've been scared of course. Rarely angry. But emotion has never been a source of energy or motivation for me. I got a paycheck. It was a job. To require motivation beyond that would be starting to make things personal, and that's where mistakes happen.
When the little stuff gets in the way, when it isn't enough to put cuffs on the threat or knock him into the wall but you want to dominate him as well* you tend to lose some efficiency, holding on a little too long or extending a fist a little slow to make sure he sees it, sees you.
It's a hard glitch to explain to a student, especially since it is slightly more common in people who are driven to win. But it is a glitch. You bring it out. That's your job as an instructor.
So you explain to this student the difference between domination and aggression; and maybe you explain to another student about touching their emotional core to access permission to take someone down... and a third student needs to be calmed away from the emotional core because they fight stupid when they get emotional.
You wind up telling three people three contradictory things, but in the end it is all about maximizing efficiency. Mental, emotional, physical and the links between those three forged into a tight, efficient and flexible unit. Creating a winner.
*Sometimes domination IS the goal. If you do it right, you don't have to use force. the question is always is this serving the job? Or my feelings?
3 comments:
"When the little stuff gets in the way, when it isn't enough to put cuffs on the threat or knock him into the wall but you want to dominate him as well* you tend to lose some efficiency, holding on a little too long or extending a fist a little slow to make sure he sees it, sees you."
Yet another gem!
The MMA world ("m'MUH," as I've come to call it) should meditate upon this.
Excellent.
You can never let the job get personal, because if you do, you lose.
As for telling a student to tap into their emotional core so they can give themselves permission to become aggressive is something a few of our trainers have seen with some female recruits. I'm not being negative (hey, I'm female too), only saying 'hallelujah' about the open mindedness of trainers to recognize that different people need different methods of training.
Great blog, BTW - I've just found it.
One of my friends commented this morning to the effect that people are in denial about gender differences in violence. men and women don't attack in the same way and rarely for the same purpose... and different attacks are commonly used on women than on men. Might be interesting to follow up.
Thanks for joining, Sandra. Nice website.
And Tiff, are you using that name in the writing class?
Post a Comment