When teaching classes for IMPACT, we often encourage students to decide for themselves whether they want to talk about what they learned to people in their lives.
Some of our students might encounter friends or relatives who disparage the skills they have acquired training with us, even going so far as offering to “prove” that such material “does not work in the real world”. Discourse around the efficacy of martial arts and self-defense training has been fraught throughout the thirty years I have studied and the nearly two decades I’ve spent training others. It increased in acrimony with the advent of Ultimate Fighting Championship and became downright vitriolic in the age of social media. Martial arts discourse on TikTok and Instagram comes in flavors ranging from facile (“I’ll poke your eyes out” “I’ll just get my gun”) to sophomoric (“my coach can beat up your coach!”) to downright foolish (“Brazilian Jiu Jitsu is the best martial art in the world because Joe Rogan says so!”).
This problem is exacerbated by the martial arts world being rife with charlatans who run the gamut from mendacious fraudsters to people who sincerely believe in the falsities they peddle. I suspect, for example, that George Dillman really believes he brought his dead cat back to life with qì. People without training lack the tools to differentiate honest critique from the ramblings of poseurs and con artists. We who possess the requisite knowledge tend to approach online arguments as we do brewing bar fights. By calmly moving towards the exits. Competent and dangerous martial artists who indulge in such disputes are generally angling to increase exposure and draw new students, or trying in vain to reason with internet tough guys.
Given how much discussion of martial arts efficacy and fighting ability almost instantly devolves into ill-informed shouting matches among incompetents, it may seem impossible for new students to decide which systems to study and under which instructors. Fortunately, there are checks that can ameliorate that problem and do not require expert knowledge.
- It is important to recognize there are no “best” systems
- Learn “tells” that give insight into a potential teacher’s skill and ability to get their ego out of the way.
- Quoting Jason Winkle – one of the best coaches I’ve ever trained with- “there are no superior martial arts, only superior martial artists”. That is, the art is not as important as the artist who teaches it.
Most systems from “traditional” martial arts to Mixed Martial Arts have something to offer if the instructor is competent. In the early days of UFC, it became accepted wisdom that boxing and Gracie BJJ were the be all and end all of fighting because fighters who studied those systems tended to overwhelm, say, middle-aged Wing Chun masters. This only shows, however, that a 40-something Wing Chun master who knows only one system will likely lose to a 25-year-old in peak condition who is as comfortable on the ground as they are striking on their feet. A Wing Chun master is still a dangerous fighter compared to the average person.
Since there is much to be gleaned from almost any system the critical question is, “how do I find a competent teacher?” Look for instructors who can easily discuss their lineage and name their teachers. Someone who can say “I obtained my instructorship in Inosanto Kali under Guro [insert name of teacher]” or “I have not obtained an instructor rank in this system, but I am vouched for to teach it to this level by [someone who holds a full instructor rank]” is more likely to be trustworthy than someone who tells you “I teach my own blended system that I developed by reading Bruce Lee’s writings.” To be clear, competent people develop new systems all the time, but they can point to the lineage from which they draw their material, in contrast to those who claim to have “secret scrolls” no one else can see, or that they learned from Jesus – sadly, I’m not making up those examples. Do not train with people who always find excuses not to spar or pressure test their material (“pressure testing” is attempting a technique with a partner who is, within the limits of safety, doing their best to make the technique fail). Look for instructors who are willing to “lose.” I have very fast students who can “stab” me with training knives at close range before I have a chance to respond. I can set up drills so that those openings never present themselves, creating an ego-serving illusion of my invulnerability. I do not because I care more about refining my abilities and those of my students than proving how good I am.
Another distinction that IMPACT and other Empowerment Self-Defense programs proudly embody as compared to many martial arts programs is that we are trauma-informed. For example, we acknowledge that our students are entering our doors with varying trauma histories so we are transparent and clear with what to expect from a class, demonstrating and teaching skills before students try any of them out in a scenario. Here is a checklist to consider when checking to see if a martial arts instructor’s practice is similarly informed:
- Is there a mechanism for students to set boundaries about how they are touched? Are they welcomed and supported for voicing physical limitations?
- Do leaders expect to be followed just because they are the leader or do they give reasons for what they teach and invite students to think for themselves?
- Is payment straightforward and not surprising?
- Do teachers expect students to follow them in areas outside of martial arts?
- Are people who are historically excluded from martial arts (women, LGBTQ+ people, disabled people people of color, etc.) actively welcomed?
There is always more to learn. Until I began working at IMPACT, I was skeptical that any training program could give people usable skills without months of work at minimum. When I saw how well this system rapidly develops core skills and the mindset to handle the suddenness and ferocity of violence, I changed my mind. You will not come out of an IMPACT class ready to take on a skilled fighter who is focused, committed to the attack, and sober, but that describes such a miniscule percentage of potential attackers, it is a moot point. Our goal at IMPACT is not to make fighters; it is to give people verbal, social, cognitive, and physical skills to navigate and resist interpersonal violence in the most statistically probable scenarios. I trust IMPACT’s curriculum, and I’ve forgotten more about fighting and the dynamics of violence than Uncle Jimmy who watches MMA matches ever learned.