How do you employ stress inoculation in your training?

[Darthwing Teorist]

Nice post, Bruce.

[meeks]

My first and longest sifu, who also teaches CQC, weapon retention, etc. to NYPD, had an exercise he called "the gauntlet". I'm sure many of you have experienced something similar.

for my guys, the first level of fighting we do an exercise where they call out the attack they want (give 'em a break - it's day 1 of training). For the 2nd belt level (essentially a yellow belt) there's 1 guy in front 1 guy behind. You don't get to call what attack you want - they have an attack ready the moment you turn to face them - how you respond to it is your call. 3rd level is just 1 on 1 free sparring. from there we just add an attacker each level and they can gang up as they see fit.

[Bhassler]

Nice post, Bruce.

Yes, thank you.

[Chris McKinley]

Bruce,

In looking back over the years of posting on this and other forums, and I'm left with no choice but to conclude that changes in method from the orthodoxy that are as transparent, congruent and (most importantly) challenging to the insecurities of the shared cultural beliefs in these arts as your methods are, simply represent too much change for the average practitioner to accept.

To adopt such methods, including some of the ones I promote as well, requires a very personal and very powerful choice already be made by the individual....namely, to forego the shared cultural rapport and group identity that comes with accepting a position as a faithful, unquestioning adherent to the traditions in order to strike out on his own as an objective observer and evaluator, usually alone and without the comfort of relying on generations of tradition for what to do next, and almost always including having to face the wrath of the majority still unwilling or unable to face up to their own cognitive dissonance or to break from the group identity.

At least in my own case, I'm not asking them to simply exchange one subjective paradigm for another. If that were the case, they'd be wise to remain where all the group rapport is already built-in. I ask them to abandon subjective paradigms altogether and begin to evaluate their training and training needs objectively. In the majority of cases, that is far too much to ask.

Still, there may be the hope of achieving some positive influence, even if it occurs at first at a frustratingly slow pace, and only in disappointingly small pockets demographically. Over the entire time you, I, and certain others have been posting, we have seen a few enterprising souls dare to stretch out and not so much provide open defiance and rejection of the status quo, but at least to begin to be willing to listen objectively to other ideas. Some have gone further and more or less adopted some of those ideas into their training regimen, or at least allowed them to influence how they now evaluate traditional admonitions and practices. Generally, I think that's all we can hope for in the shorter term.

[BruceP]

Teo and Bhassler, it's just preaching to the choir with you guys. Thanks all the same.

Chris, I don't know what to say to all that. The approach I've taken is nothing new or unusal, as we both know. The influences of John Dewey, and to a lesser degree, Jeremy Bentham, have played a major role in my own model, but it doesn't matter where a person draws those philosophies from. I read some of their works about 30 years ago in books a relative left me in their will, and I found those books at the bottom of a box the other day. Some of the stuff I'd bookmarked back then made me laugh as I thought of how I'd hung on to those ideas all this time without realizing it. But Karlheinz Stockhausen is the guy I blame for my own perfunctory manner of sharing those ideas. His basic philosophical principle is something I've parroted here many times, and that principle is the remedial point of entry to the 'problem' you talk about above.

Dewey didn't believe in rote or standardization. He viewed it as a trap in which people are turned into sheeple.

Bentham believed in the greatest good for the greatest number. That idea points to the fundamental flaw in much of the thinking in MA, and especially TCMA. All you have to do is look at the Evasive Footwork thread to see that...or some of the sentiments in the Old Vs New thread. That kinda talk drives me crazy.

Stockhausen's belief in an individual's ability to learn in a 'vacuum' is still way out there for most rational people, and it's understandable. But his properly structured methods of exploration lend it great credence...at least in my experience.

Thanks for the kind words. Much appreciated.

Bruce

On Topic, the freeze/brain-fart is an advantage if it's allowed to be. Not something to avoid or innoculate yourself against. It's that little, You Are Here, X, on your map to recovery.

[grady]

Many of us know that -- even if you are very skilled -- you can freeze in a life or death encounter if you don't train properly for stress.

I was wondering what form of training you do, concerning stress inoculation. I guess this is more common amongst those involved in military training, but it's a vital skill for a "real" encounter nonetheless.

..

So do you have any favorites?

Yes.

[maverick]

Would you give an example of how one might explore failure?

Bhassler, that monkey's too big to cage in just one post but I'l give it a go.

I dunno anything about cultivating awareness or whatever. My own experience in applying the idea to combatives is actually quite the opposite of the situation you described. It's quite a different paradigm than the one I see most folks following and talking about in their IMA training.

From my own experience, there can't be any of the "I train to win" mentality. It's more like, "I dunno what's gonna happen but I know what I'm prone to do whenever it does happen"

In a general sense, exploring failure is to address worst case scenarios in an honest and unprescribed manner. On an individual level, it's about a person developing an honest appreciation for what they do under pressure, when they'll do it, and, as alluded to in my previous post, why they'll do it.

So you see, what I'm talking about has absolutely nothing to do with awareness or avoidance. That shit's already gone through the fan. It's more to do with properly structured training which pertains specifically to the individual as they go through their patterns and habits once failure has overcome them. Exploring failure is an internal process as much as it is a tactical evolution in one's personal combat. It feeds off a neutral mindset where there are no preconceptions of what's proper or correct. That model is based on the premise that there are no techniques or trained responses for a particular situation. Everyone will freeze differently from everyone else. Their movements will chain together in accord with the infinite variables which arise during violent encounters - for better or worse. They become friends with failure by forgetting about 'success'. Introspection on the experiences in the training shows the true nature of that freeze-moment.

Recovery is a whole different ball of hair.

Bruce

Thanks for taking the time out to say this. It is one of the most thought provoking ways of looking at martial arts that I have heard here or elsewhere in a long time.

Peter

[BruceP]

Thanks back at ya, Peter

Bruce

[TrainingDummy]

Thanks Shooter,

for posting both a hint of your method and the sources you draw inspiration from.

I'll start a new thread on great educators, since I feel there's a few non-martial gems out there that we're not talking about very often.

[Void]

Shooter

Please would you mind giving a practical description of how you would guide your student to failure?

From reading your previous posts you are obviously very creative with how you interact with your students, influencing their environment to various effects. But for a simple mind like mine the diversity can be confusing in discerning the core of it.

It seems that you apply pressure, in a variety of ways, until the person can no longer continue as they are. And then as if clinging to that failed response freezes them - you encourage them to recognize what's happened - let go and move into a neutral gear - from which new possibilities will suggest themselves to the individual. They then try these and be honest about them. After some practice the new empowering responses becomes chained to the failed 'normal' ones - or perhaps they learn to unfreeze and move spontaneously on to new responses.

If that's anywhere near - then inkeeping with the threads original question I'd love to hear some practical examples of how you go about creating pressure to fail in your students?

Hope you don't mind the questions.

[BruceP]

Void, I started a thread a while back - 'Spontaneous Response and Natural Movement Patterns'. I give an example there. Apologies for my laziness. It's late.

[Void]

Thanks. I'll have a look.

[Adam S]

You can get a lot of stress by watching Bill O'Reilly or Glenn Beck on the FOX news (or listen to Rush Limbaugh on radio) and train at the same time. I almost smashed my own TV onetime (Thanks to God that I don't listen to radio).

I generally stay away from politics on these sites but that is an absolute classic JW!!!


PS How do I train for it Hunyuan taiji

[BruceP]

Void, just wanted to follow up on your summation. That's pretty much it, except I take a socratic approach to the chaining for as long as the person is able to find solutions on their own. All I do is try to ask the right questions end pay attention in the first few sessions.

...from which new possibilities will suggest themselves to the individual

Yes. 'suggest' is the best word. The intuitive landscape gets lit right up when the proper sugestions arise. Just gotta ask the right questions.

Re: the spontaneous responses thread. I remember getting goosebumps when I read Shawn's second post. The man gets it.

[Chris McKinley]

Agreed, Shooter. That whole thread was worth a re-read. It's also so beautifully pertinent to the recent discussion of "natural" versus "unnatural" movement in my Unimprovable thread. Instead of typing a response there, I should have just linked your thread.