Tool VS. Techniques - Clarification/Definition

[malevolent preacher]

A few definitions to help the lurkers and newbies to understand Senshido. We do not teach techniques int he general martial arts sense of the word. We teach tool and target development, strategies and tactics. As it says on the Senshido website:

"Rather than provide technical aspects for people to use in particular situations, we provide analytical skills that will be useful in any situation."

Tool: A punch, kick, lock, guard, whatever... executed properly in an alive manner according to the tactical environment and with maximum leverage/power required for the success of the move.

Technique: "Pak sau the punch and counter punch..." or "when he grabs here, pivot, twist and... " An impossibility... no way you can match a move for each possibilty, and if you do... you won't be able to "access" the info in real time, since the cognitive process of selecting the right response will always be slower than the attack you want to counter.

So... a hammer is a tool. We can drive a nail, fix a dent in a car, drive in tent pickets, remove a nail with the claws, use it as crow bar, a paper weight, to cave in someone's skull etc.....


So yes, we are finicky about proper execution and biomechanics, we spend the time needed to hone your tools, and then we learn application through very alive drills and personal experimentation.

[Richard Dimitri]

The following comes from another thread but I cut and pasted my reply as it adds to the differences between tools and techniques.

Hey Ville, thanks for the question. Mal'akhi gave an excellent response however I would like to add to it.

Here's an article I wrote on the subject:

BEYOND TECHNIQUES

"The conventions of language reveals the ways in which we see the world." - Dan Millman

Techniques as described by Webster's II New College Dictionary goes as follows:

Technique: 1. The systematic procedure by which a complex or scientific task is accomplished. 2. Procedure, system, routine; method. 3. The degree of skill or command of fundementals exhibited in a performance.

All 3 of these definitions do not relate to personal protection as we all know that fine or complex motor skills go out the window. Tool and target development based on strategies and tactics is NOT a "systematic procedure".

In martial arts today, the term "technique" is expressed as a physical response to an attack. For the most part, it is looked as "If someone does this, you do that." If we're to take a look around at the majority of martial arts forums, you'll see threads like (the following are actual threads found on various popular martial arts forums)

- "Which technique would you use against a grappler?"
- "What's your favourite technique?"
- "Best self defense techniques."

Etc. Etc.

The problem with 'techniques' in the contexte provided above, is that those who use them look to them for a specific result (in order to establish their next technique) as opposed to the reaction from their attacker as the consenquence of their chosen action. The problem lies within the lack of ability to see the 'fight' outside 'the box', outside of the technical applications, since the individual using it cannot choose if the technique worked or not (especially the way it was designed to function). Your opponent will always dictate what your next 'move' is going to be based on their reactions... behaviour, state of mind, state of being, will dictate.

The mere term "technique" conjures up the image of memorized sequential tactics as a response to a given attack. Take boxing for instance, they don't teach techniques, they teach tools. Imagine if in Boxing, they taught that everytime your opponent jabs, you do an outside slip and counter with a left hook. That would be a technical application.

We all know that there are countless ways to counter a jab, and what does it depend on? Position, distance, momentum, mind set, delivery speed etc. So, we teach personal protection and hand to hand combat within the similar frame that Boxing is taught. Tool and Target development, Strategies and Tactics.

Marc Ste. Marie (MP) went on to explain it as such:

"Trying to memorize a solution for each possibilty is ridiculous. Pre-planned scenarios applied to situations affected by multiple variables are useless..."

And I couldn't agree more. Everyone looks at it from a purely physical perspective. They have a difficult time understanding the holistic approach behind the contexte in which the technique should be used such as the behavioural aspects, the emotional aspects and the variables that surround the situation.

Here's a question I ask every martial artist who walk through my doors to illustrate my point. I ask what would you do if someone grabbed you by the neck and pinned you to a wall? The response? Always and without fail, a physical response. "I would wrist lock and jart kick" - I would parry and punch" - I would grab the hand and kick" etc. etc.

Then I ask: What if the person grabbing you is a pissed off waitress who mistook you for the asshole who just pinched her butt at the diner? What if it was 6 foot 4 biker who's friends were standing behind him and they were armed? What if it was a drunk guy in a bar and 2 of his friends were standing at each of his side? What if at the same time, you were with your girlfriend who was a little drunk and began to mouth off?

The Point of the matter is, is that techniques are incidental. Techniques relate to fixation. Tools in contrast offer diversity and diverse ability. Techniques are easily dismissed in certain situations. Tools aren't. A tool will be used when it is called upon allowing for creative spontaneity moment to moment, a technique will not due to the faction in which it was created. For instance, a hammer is a tool. Primarily designed for hammering in nails but the diversity of this tool is widespread and its functions exceed 'the nail'. A technique will fixate an individual on its use and they will hinder creativity.

Semantics? Maybe. However just because everyone has the wrong definition of 'technique' doesn't mean I have to succumb to it and go along with it.

To add to this, yes we teach escapes, releases, strikes, as well as their proper biomechanical applications but we do not offer them as THE SOLUTION to a given problem, merely a tool that should be placed in the RBSD tool box and used when it is needed. Spontaneous imporvisation is critical, this cannot happen with preplanned techniques.

Ville, you wrote:

One thing that happened to my student:
He was choked in nightclub. He did the release but for some reason didn't feel comfortable with the knee kick (or forgot it due to stress) so he made just the release and immedietely grabbed the guys hair with other hand and stuck another thumb into eye and pulled the opponent down with a neck cranck.

This particular student was the exception to the rule. An average or less gifted student who would have 'forgotten' as you state, 'what to do due to stress' would have panicked because what was memorized as a technique and was ingrained into him by his instructors (people whom he deems with respect and put his faith in) would have failed him at that moment. The "uh-oh, this isn't the way we trained it in class" syndrome would have kicked in and caused hesitation. Remember, there are some people out there who can make Karate and Tae Kwon Do work in serious violent confrontations... doesn't make the arts functional for self defense though, it's the person, not the art that made it work.

These people are excpetions to the rule... the average citizen isn't like that, we must never forget that as RBSD instructors, our target audience is general population, not the gifted athlete, the already experienced brawler, the above average young male who can pick things up quickly... if that student of yours was a 45 year old mother of 2 housewife who encountered a violent confrontation and had the technique fail due to stress, I highly doubt she would have recovered like your student in question. Unless of course, you train them to improvise outside the technical content...

For example, when we teach in class, we allow the student to be creative. There are no patterns to follow, there are no physical guidelines. You may have 7 student work a knife defense and each will look entirely different from the other due to the moment. A student will turn to me and ask "Did I do that right?" and I'll reply "Did you survive?" He'll say "Yeah, but I'm not too sure I applied the right technique?" I'll reply that anything he did that allowed to him survive witht he minimal amount of damage done to him was the right technique.

The guidelines are the concepts and principles, the 5 principles of physical retaliation, the knife defense concepts, etc. Those are the guidelines. The physical choices made are the manifestations of the strategic and tactical implementations of the momenet dictated by the scenario and situation.

Hope this helped some.

[Celtil]

Sorry for my english, i m' french.

Two questions.

-Why prefer put the knees strike in the thighs rather than the genitals?

-Are there any kicks in the arsenal of Senshido?

[Celtil]

Thank's for your answer.

[Richard Dimitri]

Sorry for the apparent delay in replying

Why prefer put the knees strike in the thighs rather than the genitals?

It's not a matter of preference but of closest weapon to closest target, timing and opportunity, if the genitals applies to the conceptual aspects of the 5 principles of physical retlaiation (they're here somewhere, in a hurry, don't have the time to type it out now ) then genitals it is!

-Are there any kicks in the arsenal of Senshido?

Yes, many...

[Celtil]

It's not a matter of preference but of closest weapon to closest target, timing and opportunity, if the genitals applies to the conceptual aspects of the 5 principles of physical retlaiation (they're here somewhere, in a hurry, don't have the time to type it out now ) then genitals it is!

Okay.

Yes, many..

Because in your videos, I do not see kicks stand.

That is, before ending in close combat.

Otherwise I think the Senshido should be the basis of the self defense.

Before learning more complicated (krav, jujitsu...) do simple (senshido)

The most amazing thing is that I got to the same conclusion that you in practicing krav maga.

After one year to krav maga, I realized some things.

I found some aspects of krav maga illogical, not simple, too complicated, not instinctive an too directive in educational.
Like having to perform with technical accuracy to the millimeter

In the fire of the action, with stress, we blend ideas.

At that period, i take well realize to the importance of really focus on vital and sensitive areas of the body.

1 months after stopping the krav maga for the reasons stated above if I undiscovered your style on net.

You reassured me about my discoveries. I was very surprised to find someone who had reached the same conclusions.

(I also practiced the "grappling" for 1 year. And kick boxing 1 year also.)

Very good style Richard.
Besides, there are similarities with the fighting style of these animals:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAMmGfu_5gA

[Richard Dimitri]

Hey Celtil,

Thanks for your reply, if I may...

Because in your videos, I do not see kicks stand.

That is, before ending in close combat.

We abide by Senshido's 5 principles of physical retalition: Tactile Sensitivity, Economy of Motion, Non Telegraphic Movement, Closest Weapon to Closest Target, Primary and Secondary targets as well as the fact that your opponent always dictates what your next choice of tool or assault will be based on varrying possibilities of reactions therefor if you didn't see many kicks being used, then what was being used were the most advantageous of choices...

Thank you for your kind words.