A shock I know: The strategic use of backing up

[Rick Wilson]

A shock I know: The strategic use of backing up

Okay I think what some of the readers, or lurkers as they have been dubbed, may have missed is that pretty much everyone agrees on many things when it comes to backing up.

There are some disagreements that is also clear, such as what to focus training on the most etc.

This thread is not for discussing those differences, there are more than enough.

What I would like to focus on is where we do agree.

Backing up has been described as creating space, controlling the distance and disengaging.

All of these descriptions are correct.

I am coming to prefer the term disengaging.

Something happens.

You are attacked.

You might have been surprised.

You may be in a poor strategic position.

You may not be sure how serious the situation is.

You may not even be sure it isn’t a friend jacking around.

For whatever reason you decide (usually instantly) not to engage at that moment.

So you back up.

You distance.

You create space.

You disengage.

The purpose is to gain some control and what you want to gain control of is the timing of the engagement or reengagement. If YOU decide it should happen. This is the control you want to get.

You may disengage and do it in a manner that leaves the person not wanting to continue and therefore you can verbally defuse the situation.

You may disengage and make an escape. Highly recommend when facing multiple attackers or armed attackers.

However; most of the time you can only come out of a self protection situation by winning (or rather surviving) the engagement.

So you back up to disengage because you decided engaging at that time was not in your best interest. Keeping control of that space (distance) you can decide if and when you will time the reengagement.

I once saw a show where the head of the Hong Kong police was being interviewed after he successfully defended himself against about 18 attackers.

When asked what he did first, he replied “ran away.”

The interviewer (this was in the height of the Bruce Lee movies) was shocked.

The police chief said, “There were 18 of them, of course I ran.. I ran until I reach a very narrow alley then I stood my ground where they could only come at me two at a time. After I finished about nine of them the rest ran away.”

This has always been a good example for me of strategy and the strategic use of distance to time your engagement with the enemy under better circumstances.

To me, and I am sure all the others, backing up or distancing is used to disengage because (for whatever reason) you have decided the time for engaging was wrong. You use the disengagement to either escape the threat or time your reengagement so that you win.

When you are successful in gaining that control the disengagement is successful.

So for all those reading the arguments over backing up I would like you to also know that there is actually a great deal we all agree with, but there are areas of strategy or frequency that may differ.

Since Jim has a good post going on going forward I thought I would start one for the strategy of disengaging or backing up.

This thread is for posting the areas of agreement on backing up.

[jorvik]

Many years ago I used to sparr with a guy who liked to kick, in fact that was all that he could do...and what he used to do as soon as you started sparring was back off.so that you would rush in and he would have gained space to counter kick ......one day I got fed up with this type of thing so I didn't attack....I just waited..and he didn't know what to do ...the Sensei started telling us to sparr, and became quite angry when we didn't....but hey I wasn't going to give him his fight, he could fight mine .......now as to "real" fighting my ideas have changed a lot over the years. I now train for a short sharp burst with maximum power.so I have started to lift heavier weights and for fewer repetitions, there are tremendous benefits to this type of training.one of them is I spend far less time in the Gym and I only go once or twice a week

[CANDANeh]

For whatever reason you decide (usually instantly) not to engage at that moment.

So you back up.

You distance.

You create space.

You disengage.

The purpose is to gain some control and what you want to gain control of is the timing of the engagement or reengagement. If YOU decide it should happen. This is the control you want to get.

Should add it is often instinctive to back up in order to widen the field of vision especially when “tunnel vision” strikes.

Certainly you can shift as you back up but not sure this is the idea of this thread.

I prefer not to back up but when it occurs I don`t consider it a mistake (anymore) just a change in situation and therefore not thinking “retreat” although that may be an option depending on how engagement goes. However, this is may also be an option if you don`t back up initially.

[CANDANeh]

Watching Shinjo sensei I`m sure he has the mindset of backing to set up, not actual retreat from fear of the initial attack...just a thought.
I do think there is advantage to train in some aspects of backing up, although a few Months ago I would not have thought so. Many I think may back up at sometime and do so unplanned, if your mind accepts it as another strategy then chance of success increases.

[MikeK]

Rick excellent summary and very good point about gaining some control!

And welcome to the fold.

[Rick Wilson]

Mike: Just visiting.

[MikeK]

Just make yourself at home Rick and help yourself to what's in the fridge.

[chef]

Bill has been working with us in a variety of kumites. His approach has been not retreating but an immediate re-orienting of the body.....re-orienting yourself to your opponent upon being attacked, moving in response to face him. This appears as getting out of opponents direct line of fire, yet turning to protect the vulnerable side of the body....an 'Oh $hit, I am open' instinct. Bill can elaborate on this much better than I can.

Vicki

[MikeK]

I'm glad you mentioned that Vicki. I noticed that when you were teaching me Kyu kumite 1 & 2 yesterday that there was no real backup or running away. They had a different feel than when I was first showed them.

[jorvik]

Well when folks say backing up what do they mean?................When I spar I try to circle somebody and get behind them, so I guess part of it would look like backing up, but in reality I'n trying to get myself into an advantageous position, hwta I tend to do is throw two quick jabs while side stepping to the left, hopefully they will blink when I throw these.....this will put me in a different position ready to re enter and attack

[chef]

Jorvik, I believe we are on the same page.

Vicki

[Bill Glasheen]

The problem lies when people confuse the moon (the goal) with the finger pointing at it (the method used to get there).

What Vicki describes as my philosophy in teaching the yakusoku kumite is to understand where the lines and limits of force are and not to stand there in the first place. With Inoue's books on kobudo (in Japanese), this was one of his precepts. When you think of an "uke" not as bashing or blocking the weapon but instead as a feeler while you reposition yourself for optimal offensive engagement, you suddenly get a dramatic paradigm shift.

When you get two people doing this simultaneously with the idea that they also are setting up an attack with the movement, then things get very interesting. Person A attacks. Person B repositions, and leaves Person A vulnerable to attack. Person A suddenly experiences that same "oh schit" moment Person A got when first attacked, and responds accordingly.

The operational word here is mindset.

Another thing worth mentioning here with Rick's rules and Leo's excellent addition (field of vision under SSR) is the idea that the biggest mistake most people make in a self defense situation is engaging in the first place. I didn't make up that bit of wisdom; I'm quoting it from someone else. But when you put yourself in the real world of self defense and living in a civilized society, suddenly that concept becomes very painfully real.

It's different though if you are a LEO, a soldier, a prison guard, etc. In those instances, you get paid to engage.

I've always felt "you" will know when to engage or not - depending upon how threatening the situation is at the time. So far so good with me...but I still fear that over-response when the reptilian brain acts before the human one. Scares the &^%$ out of me really... Fine tuning that I'm sure is an art, but you'll never get it perfect.

- Bill

[jorvik]

I remember getting attacked by a drunk .actually it wasn't a real attack .the guy just wanted to kinda standup wrestle me ..but as I was in my saturday finery ready to meet my girl ..I was having none of it.........soooooo . I stepped my right foot slightly to the right........and as he launched his hugging attack I pivoted on my right foot.......classical Aikido, the Tenkan, and he went flying past me.......I didn't hit him, I didn't harm him, his inertia put him where he was ( on his arse )....put maybe you could call that back pedalling or moving backward..........or possibly better calling it "strategic movement"............I think tzun tzu would get off on that

And Vicki we are on the same page.....and women can do this stuff a heck of a lot better than men, when you have no strength to rely on you tend to use skill

[benzocaine]

and as he launched his hugging attack I pivoted on my right foot.......classical Aikido, the Tenkan, and he went flying past me.......I didn't hit him, I didn't harm him, his inertia put him where he was ( on his arse )....put maybe you could call that back pedalling or moving backward

And you say Aikido is a crock

[Stryke]

the idea that the biggest mistake most people make in a self defense situation is engaging in the first place

A crock of proverbial and I`m not afraid to say so ....

nothing to do with going backwards though ....

Engaging when you dont have too has nothing to do with self defence
It has to do with being a dickhead !!!!

Engaging when you HAVE TOO has everything to do with self defence , In fact it`s the meat and potatoes , it`s the only option left this is why bu definition you can claim self defence




Now therell all be lots of talk about de escalation and kumbaya , and NLD and interrupts , and all that other holding hands stuff .

But sorry folks that aint karate !!!

and it aint ring fighting ...

and I wont mention backing up because hey it`s sometimes good

So new rule of self defence


DONT BE A DICKHEAD