I bite my tongue (but not for long...)

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Wed Nov 13, 2002 10:59 pm

Today I did something I have rarely done in the past. I deleted two of MY OWN posts... The reason is because sometimes in this world it is necessary to deal with less-than-perfect situations in order to achieve the best end. It makes no sense to find fault when doing so squelches learning and fellowship.

Nothing on these WebPages has stirred more controversy than the kyusho/tuite/torite/dim mac/pressure point business.

To start with, I will once again define the subject: targeted, sequential striking. Implicit in the definition is the concept of a force multiplier. In other words, proper execution means I magnify the effect of my force beyond what simple Newtonian physics would imply. People respond in a way that would suggest that physiology has been undeniably and significantly impacted.

Just what is it about this field that stirs up so much controversy? I'll suggest a few reasons.

1) There's little "hard evidence" that any particular technique is both safe to practice AND reliably effective in the field.

When I say "hard evidence," I speak to the gold standard of the randomized, controlled trial. What works beyond placebo? A national healthcare system does not pay for placebo effect. A police officer that risks his/her life and must protect the public cannot depend on the placebo effect.

When I say "safe," I mean it is possible to work with the technique repeatedly in the dojo without significant risk of temporary or permanent harm to the practitioners.

When I say "effective," I mean that the person is able to achieve the desired end. That end may mean killing someone. That end may also mean an officer or prison guard using the right level of force to control a subject without causing any unnecessary harm. And the ability to achieve that end must not be unreasonably variable from subject to subject, and situation to situation.

When I say "field," I conjure a scenario where both the good guy and the bad guy are not in a "classroom" state of mind. It's very different when catecholamines, endorphins, and enkephalins are coursing through your veins. The field may also imply that the bad guy (and maybe even the good guy) are in a pharmacologically altered state (alcohol, prescription drugs, illicit drugs, etc.).

Yes, that point number 1 is a mouthful...

2) The credentials of the people teaching are... well... not uniform. Just what is a proper certification anyhow? What is a Ph.D. in martial arts, and why would a martial artist call himself "Professor?" Is there a standard of certification that should be met for people teaching and working with acupuncture concepts? What is a proper martial standard, and what are the reliable accrediting organizations? Is some degree of education and/or certification in modern medicine (MD, DO, RN, Ph.D. (the academic kind...), NP, PA, Masters in PE, trainer, etc.) appropriate for someone teaching and/or working with this material?

3) Everyone agrees that experience is important. In order to teach, you must hit/manipulate, and have both done to you. How much is necessary? How much is safe? What do you do with people that have lots of experience hitting people for effect but are unsafe and/or have no idea what risks they are dealing with?

4) What is a fair means of reimbursement in this field?

5) What do you do when one of the first four items is lacking - particularly when that's USUALLY the case? People must learn what is useful in this body of knowledge. Learning must start somewhere...

- Bill

2Green · Post by **2Green** » Thu Nov 14, 2002 3:50 am

Couldn't help noticing...is it "safe" to even knock people out the good old fashioned way "repeatedly without risk of temporary or permanent harm"? !NM!

M. Keller · Post by **M. Keller** » Thu Nov 14, 2002 5:24 am

Hello all,

Bill-sensei: You're right on all counts about the science (or lack thereof) regarding pressure point striking. As a self-defense art, people are anatomically too different to make kyusho effective for the passing martial arts student. That point made itself abundantly clear at the seminar.

If one wants to go the dillman route and devote a decade or more to study the art, then very well. However, even in this case, the issue of training and whacking away at a partner's nerves is simply not a good idea, especially given the lack knowledge of the long-term effects of whaling on these points.

I view kyusho like I view sword fighting. I own a carbon steel blade, and I love taking it out and working with it a bit. However, the odds aren't very good that I'll have it on me if and when I get jumped in the shady sections of charlottesville.

Best,

Mike

jorvik · Post by **jorvik** » Thu Nov 14, 2002 1:44 pm

the problem with using a term like professor
is that it conveys to the general public a level of knowledge and practise and the assumption that they have studied for 3 to 4 years at degree level, a year for a masters degree, a doctorate, and then been chosen from amongst their peers to be a professor.
One should also be aware of what university gave the credential maybe Yale or Harvard?
If that is the case they should indeed be called professor........my suspicion is they are not as well qualified as somebody like DR.Kelly............and in an area which as we have already discussed is a potential minefield.

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Thu Nov 14, 2002 2:53 pm

Good points made by all.

By the way, did anyone notice that I didn't even take the "c" word in vain?

In an online kyusho group I participated in over several years, "chi wars" were the kinds of things that sent the group into monthly tailspins. The only thing that rivaled that as a source of venom was the personality wars. It is possible to get a lot of mileage and learning without worrying TOO much about the existence of certain first principles concepts or the reputation business. Taken individually, working with points of vulnerability on the body - even if only targeted without stimulated in prearranged kumite - has much value and can be studied without controversy. But one cannot get past the ground floor without digging deeply into physiology and being concerned about safety, accreditation, and reputation. That's when things can get testy.

I'd like to draw some of the concepts mentioned above out a bit more.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote

As a self-defense art, people are anatomically too different to make kyusho effective for the passing martial arts student.

How would this be different without any consideration of kyusho, Mike? How confident are you that a handful of students that studied from you for a "reasonable" length of time would be able to protect themselves from an average individual that accosted them on the street? What about their ability to do well against a white belt vs. a Roy Bedard, Gary Khoury, Mike Murphy, Raffi Derderian, or a drunk and angry lineman on the U.Va. football team?

This is the point I'm trying to make... Are we as fair with our assessment of kyusho as we are with other martial concepts?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote

I view kyusho like I view sword fighting. I own a carbon steel blade, and I love taking it out and working with it a bit. However, the odds aren't very good that I'll have it on me if and when I get jumped in the shady sections of charlottesville.

I have something to share here concerning this. In the fourteen years that I taught karate classes at U.Va., I always enjoyed the introductory session talks I gave to new students every semester beginning. I would finish with a Q&A session. Inevitably someone would ask the question: "How long will it take before I can defend myself?" My answer of course was not a simple one. I would start by saying it depended a lot on how athletic they were, how hard they worked, and how badly they wanted it. I would tell them that the only guarantee I could make was that they would be more capable leaving my class than they were when they walked in the front door. But in the end I would share one of my little secrets. That is, I would tell them that the people who worried about coming in to defend themselves probably weren't the ones who would walk out highly skilled. "It's almost easier to get beat up than it is to learn how to defend yourself" I would tell them. "In the end, the ones who walk out as capable martial artists are the ones that learn to love the practice of the art, and not the ones that obsess over the goals of their work."

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote

in an area which as we have already discussed is a potential minefield.

How dangerous is this art compared to other things that we are familiar with? How does it compare to playing football? How does it compare to amateur boxing? How does it compare to having an average person go to the gym and work with weights? How does it compare to letting an average person buy a chainsaw and cut his own wood?

What is it that gives pause? Is it the known dangers, or the unknown? If this were no less dangerous than some known activities, than why would society shun it any more?

By the way, I don't have all the answers here. I just have a lot of interesting questions.

- Bill

Ted Dinwiddie · Post by **Ted Dinwiddie** » Thu Nov 14, 2002 4:13 pm

Inevitably, when a kyusho/tuite seminar is conducted for the benefit of folks not familiar with the "theories" behind the "principles", the event becomes, to some degree, a display of "tricks". These tricks do not always work on every person and they cannot be good for the uke if repeated too many times. The tricks are intended to illustrate the validity of the theories and principles, but they seem to wind up as the central theme for many of the participants, many of whom then go home and bang, press, torque and squeeze any and all unsuspectingly willing victims. Still others become so enraptured by the desire for big effect with little effort that they lose sight of all the other factors involved in being a capable fighter.

There are NO shortcuts! Bill's repeated characterization of kyusho/tuite as a "force multiplier" is right on. Mr. Moneymaker (how ironic) is fond of using the term "players to the game". Each element of one's art: proper stance work, coordination of movement, body positioning, striking surface, focus, power delivery, mindset and intent, and on and on and on... brings more potential to your ability. But, each depends on the others. Some are fundamental, without which none of the others matter. When the body alarm response hits you, because some bad guy is hitting you, it is your execution of fundamantals that will determine your fate. Knowing how to hold Heart 7 and Lung 9 while striking Gall Bladder 20 is not going to mean sh*t.

If we go back to the initial "history" of this relatively recent interest in Dim Mak, Kyusho/tuite and the like. We find the search for answers to why things were done the way they were done in traditional MA. Many people had been practicing for decades with only part of the picture. There are many reasons for this, but some of these people had become pretty good with what they were realizing was an incomplete understanding of what they were doing. Through their devotion and honest abilities they had become trusted students of very knowledgeable instructors of "the old school". The "old school" people had not to this point seen any reason to give any clue to the rest of the picture. Many of these "old school" guys may have only had a partial view themselves, though undoubtedly bigger than these "new" guys. Never-the-less, some clues were given and the lights were turned on in a place that had never been lit before.

A whole "new" way of looking at traditional techniques was opened. Vast areas of very old understanding became reinvigorated. Add that with communication and travel capabilities that did not exist when these techniques were developed, not to mention marketing, and we have the current state of things. Hopefully, modern science will continue its progress into the haze of folklore, ego, and greed and we will benefit.

Where I personally see the biggest benefit to understanding old paradigms of physiology, philosophy, and spirituality is the information about why certain things were done the way they were done. From there we can be more certain of doing them properly. This then gives us a starting point from which our modern understanding may advance. Simultaneously, we can maintain a reverence for tradition and continue to stay within its glow such that our understanding may be complete.

------------------
ted

"I learn by going where I have to go." - Theodore Roethke

Post by **gmattson** » Thu Nov 14, 2002 7:29 pm

I hesitate making any comment here, for fear Evan and others will interprete it as an attack on their art.

For that reason I did not follow through on a planned test at camp on what I considered to be a self-induced knockout technique.

What kind of "interesting" knockouts were demonstrated at recent seminars? Does anyone who attended these seminars believe that every technique demonstrated, resulting in a knockout, qualified as a legitimate self-defense technique?

And please don't take my asking this question as a "knock" to the art or people studying it. I question Uechi-ryu techniques in the same manner.

------------------
GEM

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Thu Nov 14, 2002 7:57 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote

{pick a name} and others will interprete it as an attack on their art

Perhaps some may be a bit presumptuous in assuming "the art" belongs to them. This is another point of concern to add to the list.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote

don't take my asking this question as a "knock" to the art or people studying it

The mere act of questioning is not an act of criticizing. In my world, it is a necessary part of the process of discovery and validation. Where it is deemed as criticism, then someone must carefully evaluate why it is interpreted as such.

- Bill

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Thu Nov 14, 2002 9:19 pm

As a follow-up to my quick note, George, I want to comment that I think we both waited a bit to give some old issues time to die a natural and proper death. This was necessary in order to proceed on a constructive path.

The work that the Charlottesville-area group is doing (DSI, U.Va., Ted et al) as well as our newly-found contact with Dr. Kelly are great opportunities to proceed forward on a fresh foundation. This is not to imply that this is an exclusive group in any fashion. All are invited to participate on whatever level it makes sense,, and whatever amount they desire - or not.

As a matter of information, I am doing more than attending the occasional local pressure point function. Out of curiosity as well as a degree of respect I gained from reading his book, I just joined Dr. Michael Kelly's Dim Mak Online group. It's been quite a while since I've been part of such a group. I'll share my thoughts as I pick up experience with them. While Dr. Kelly will certainly add rigor to his own particular view of the field (based on medical science as well as his personal experience in law enforcement), it is worth mentioning that he sells a lot of Earle Montaigue's material. Interesting...deep in the Chinese internal arts, the chi domain, and TCM (from an as-is, antropologic perspective). Always, always strange bedfellows in this world...

BTW, Van, you might find it interesting that Dr. K's site is now selling LaFond's knife book.

- Bill

M. Kelly · Post by **M. Kelly** » Tue Nov 19, 2002 5:54 am

Hello to all,
I also don't understand why people get in such an uproar when it comes to the subject of dim mak/kyusho/ pressure points/ whatever. Is it due to the relative uncertainty of using them in combat or it is due to the relative insecurities of those debating the issue?

It would be great to use a "gold standard" to test the points and techniques, but I think this is a difficult task given the safety issues and difficulty “blinding” someone. However, I do think we are on the right path.

I have had my share of hair-raising experiences when I was a police officer, and I can tell you from personal experience that hitting a vital point is much more effective than hitting just anywhere. Although this is nothing more than anecdotal evidence, any technique described as proven “on the street” can only be anecdotal evidence. There are no laboratories or standards in such settings.

Does this mean we should just disregard modern science? Of course not, but we should keep our training in perspective. Using modern science and the points, we can improve our probabilities of causing more damage with a given technique.

I find it sort of amusing when people argue against using the points because we cannot be 100% sure they are effective on the street. Since when is a reverse punch or front kick 100% effective? The way I see it, if I have to strike someone, I would prefer to improve my chances of causing maximum damage by targeting a vulnerable area. After all, punching a nerve hurts more than punching muscle or bone. This seems like common sense to me.

However, hitting a point and expecting a “knockout” or using a fancy technique learned from practicing on a non-defending opponent is a recipe for disaster. In actual combat, one has to expect the unexpected and fight like hell to survive.

Learning to fight requires more than knowing anatomy, physiology, acupuncture or kata. Strength, speed, aggressiveness, and experience are all attributes that need to be developed. There is no one martial art, trick, or piece of knowledge that will make one invincible. Striving for such a ridiculous goal is a complete waste of time. Rather one should concentrate on being that best he/she can be and pray that they never have to use such skills.

I put Lafond’s book for sale on my site because I liked content. I have not seen any other books on knife fighting that were based on actual events. If anyone knows of any similar books, please let me know. Also, if this book has been discussed in this forum, please let me know where because I would be interested in seeing what was said.

I found Erle Montaigue’s writings on dim mak interesting and helpful, so I chose to sell them along with my own book. They are also published by the same publisher as my own book so it is really easy to sell them.

(By the way, I only go to bed with my girlfriend.)

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Tue Nov 19, 2002 7:26 am

Nicely put.

I also don't understand why people get in such an uproar when it comes to the subject of dim mak/kyusho/ pressure points/ whatever. Is it due to the relative uncertainty of using them in combat or it is due to the relative insecurities of those debating the issue?

I think both can be the case. However there are other issues. Have you ever seen the "no touch" KOs? Not all work in this field is created equal. Clearly there is a need to separate the wheat from the chafe; otherwise the nonbelievers indict the entire body of work.

But bringing such issues up is wasting bandwidth when good work is being done. It's refreshing to see such a total lack of attitude and agenda.

BTW, glad to hear your nightlife is in order...

- Bill

Ted Dinwiddie · Post by **Ted Dinwiddie** » Wed Nov 20, 2002 2:16 am

The original point to the study of kyusho/dim mak and traditional paradigms of physiology in the modern context was to understand what the heck was going on in tradional kata. Learning to "break down" the kata has been the true advancement of these endeavors. Without an understanding of the way the body and spirit and mind were seen to function when these forms were developed, the understanding of them will be limited. The understanding of one's art is then limited. The carnival sideshow atmosphere is as much a result of people's desire to see "tricks" and try to learn them without any effort as it is anything. There is alot of ignorance shrouded in mysticism in much of the traditional material, to say nothing of crappy translation. There are people who have devoted as much time and effort to deciphering and sifting and learning the material from these myriad sources as some have to their more mainstream areas of expertise. Those that achieve mainstream expertise are allowed, even expected, to be compensated for its dissemination. The "marketing " of this expertise is largely handled by the "degree" they have been awarded. Those from other areas of expertise either receive no credit or compensation or they stand up and attract attention to themselves with demonstrations of their expertise. Both camps have their share of charlatans. The wheat and the chaff grow as parts of the same plant.

M. Keller · Post by **M. Keller** » Wed Nov 20, 2002 4:32 am

"I find it sort of amusing when people argue against using the points because we cannot be 100% sure they are effective on the street. Since when is a reverse punch or front kick 100% effective?"

Well said. I apologize if my stance earlier was a little too all-encompassing. My only doubts stem from the pinpointing of targets in order to get KO's from nerve strikes. Though I like to play with these strikes, I'm not confident in my personal ability to make them work on the street. I'm not saying that they don't work; god knows that I felt it when Bruce Witherall-sensei nailed me with a light neck strike during the regional. I'm definitely a believer

I just personally don't train this stuff enough to make it workable. Perhaps this will change in the future.

A good point was also made as to why we fear training nerve strikes versus standard fighting, which can also be fairly devastating when accidents happen. In fairness to the art, all fighting arts can be hazardous. I suspect that a great deal of this fear stems from the fact that kyusho is not yet mainstream like TKD, karate, or boxing.

Best regards,

Mike

Ted Dinwiddie · Post by **Ted Dinwiddie** » Wed Nov 20, 2002 3:12 pm

Kyusho is PART of TKD, Karate, and boxing. I watched George Foreman, in one of his last Championship bouts, set his opponent up perfectly for a right hand to the Stomach 5 point on the side of the chin. He hit the guy with the right several times with power on the side of the jaw. No effect other than the guy moved back a bit. It was obvious that the opponent was losing his fear of that right hand. The previous punches had been straight in, pure power strikes. The KO came when Big George put one in and down right to the side of the chin. The opponent dropped straight down. NOTE: On the previous strikes to that area the opponent had moved backwards when struck. One would figure, if knocked out by a strike similar to those, he would go backwards. The knockout strike was more precise, less powerful and had the definite downward and inward turn immediately following impact. The guy's knees buckled and he went straight down.

As far as being able to make it work in combat: I think it may come with time for those that keep working on the precision of their movements. I do not think it is ever going to be a 100% thing. If One could get 50% I'd say they were at a fantasy level. Joe is fond of expressing it as "Plan A" and "Plan B" and "Plan C" and so on. He can show a technique and give 10 places that can be kyusho strikes, all within the realm of a properly delivered basic technique. One will not get all of these points when executing the technique. But, if one delivers a reasonable faxsimile of the proper basic technique, the odds are better that something more than just power is going to be in effect. As Joe said, First there is good basic karate, the kyusho is the gravy.

The kyusho points are there, the basic movements we practice in our kata are intended to maximize our chances of finding them. Not many of us are good enough to overcome all the body alarm response chemicals to execute our techniques with the same perfection that we think we can in practice. That is the point of the zen-meditative endless repetition of the movements. Never perfect, always pushing and repeting and visualizing. We aren't supposed to think about hitting the points or the combinations, the kata we have done 5000 times takes care of that. How's that for the unattainable perfection that we strive for?

The study of kyusho and tuite is intended to inform our kata practice. As is kumite and kihon practice. We now have even more advanced methodology such as adrenal stress training. All of it comes back to informing the kata practice. Where we drill endlessly with mindset and focus, praying all the while never to need to really do what we are seeing in our mind's eye. Facing death in our minds with each kata, every day, with sweat and effort. We forge our spirits in this fire and are better people for it.