Core Combatives in Ireland - 2009 seminar

davidlewis

Lads & Lassies,

Apologies for being off the radar for the last while, I was tied up with training and organising some quality training events for 2009... watch this space!!

Just to let everyone know, Mick Coup is back in Cork in April (25th and 26th), for what can be only described as our most dynamic seminar to date, for those who have trained with Mick previously, this can mean only one thing.... loads of fighting...

Details are as follows:

This 2-day event will lead-in with the initial Foundation Elements Seminar on day
one, serving as a refresher for those continuing their training and an introduction
new participants, covering the essential and proven skills, drills and tactics
utilised within the C2 concept-model of self-protection at the emergency level.
DAY 1
Full focus will be on the functional development of simple, efficient and
instinctive applications of dynamic physical force that can dramatically increase an
individual’s ability to survive personal attack. The aim is to examine and confirm
usable, realistic spontaneous skills, not just set-piece scripted drills that belong
on the screen, not the street. All material will be addressed from a combative, not
sportive, perspective - however the base training methodologies are identical within
the C2 approach.
DAY 2
Day two will push this development, applying the basic tools, skills and tactics of
day within various training environments, ranging from innovative equipment-based
drills to isolate and improve essential attributes, to intense force-on-force
engagements against fully resisting single and multiple adversaries. Physical
conditioning to enhance performance will be addressed from a learning angle, for the individual to utilise as part of their personal continuation training.

COST - 1 day €75-00, 2 day €120-00
Price includes event T-shirt and light lunch

Due to the current economic climate, I have kept the cost to the minimum, and I believe this is excellent value for money given the calibre of the instructor, subject matter and level of training/instruction received.

I would ask that if you are interested that you book ASAP with a deposit as to eliminate time wasters and keep slots available for the genuine students.

Any questions or help, I can be contacted on mobile 087 9376069 or email info@kapap.ie.

Thank you all,

David.

davidlewis

I think this is a great article written by Jon Fell, who along with Robbie Miller graduated as the 1st C2 instructors. Anyone who has trained with Mick knows that his instructor training is not a show up and walk away event but one that was hard earned. Well done lads..

http://selfprotection.lightbb.com/q-a-with-mick-coup-f5/article-stress-compression-t6698.htm

Stress Compression.

November 2008.


This weekend just gone I watched the UFC 91 main event pitting Randy Couture against Brock Lesnar for the UFC heavyweight championship.
In the second round of the contest Couture gets dropped and Lesnar leaps into position to finish with a unilateral ground and pound attack of hammer blows, fists and elbows until the referee halts the action to declare Lesnar the winner by TKO.
Watching that final ground and pound attack you can observe how stress causes technique compression and what should be big full range shots degenerate into small, rapid, compressed shots.
If you happen to be a 280 pound monster with arms stretching the tape past 20 inches then you probably can get away with it, but imagine what damage could be done with big full range shots!

In highly stressful situations technique compression occurs.
As heart rate increases the adrenal glands pump greater endogenous hormones into the body preparing for fight or flight and in a combat situation your only intentions should be hitting the other guy(s) thereby nullifying any offence on their part!
In this crazy mix of chemical messengers, rapidly elevating heart rates and brown lumpy stuff is it no wonder in attempts to hit hard, fast and repeatedly that what are big perfect techniques in the gym environment become far shorter, less powerful and less accurate when the chaos of reality hits.
What occurs is akin to a positive feedback mechanism, where you strive for more and more output but the techniques become shorter and shorter.
Technique output and volume is all well and good, you may be able to throw eight chain punches in one second but if those punches are lacking capability due to little travel, poor leverage or not even impacting at all then they mean nothing!
Technique input and capability is really where its at.

The question that remains is how stress induced technique compression can be overcome in training.
Time spent on full range skill development is undoubtedly a crucial factor.
When I look at sports I see a similar pattern in the training methodology used consistently, this is low stress initial skill development before anything else.
I have no doubt what so ever that the Welsh rugby team will be working basic handling skills after the errors made against Canada just a few days ago.
The basics are done over and over and practiced continually throughout the players career.
From my time spent in boxing gyms I see good trainers teaching the jab first, then the cross is introduced and so on. It is only in poorly run gyms that you spar straight away, normally months of basic skill work is in place before you get to try light sparring and certainly many months before you get to fight!
Ever notice how good boxers manage to throw decent full range punches even when fatigued or under the stress of an exchange?
The reason- that is how they train!
Compare this with how lots of RBSD training is performed, insufficient attention to technique development and time spent on the latest ways to turn you from mellow to monster in a second!
Guys perform very physically demanding training and drills but at the end is there any emphasise on where the techniques fell down?
Don’t get me wrong, hard physical training is a must and I always enjoy putting on the safety helmets to get stuck in to some active drills but at the end I want to know where my techniques were not up to the mark and set about training to improve them.

In a fight people are not easy to stop, full stop! I am not even considering any chemical enhancements that recreational drugs can give, make the assumption that you will need technique capability to stop a man.
If you spend no time fine turning your technique to get maximum power, leverage etc then you are missing part of the equation involved in capability.
Going back to the Lesnar example, check out footage of him on Youtube mounting and hitting a heavy bag using the resistance from a cable machine in the vertical plane.
No doubt this is a great way to train the mounted ground and pound but see how short the shots are, they should be exaggerated with the goal being that when that situation occurs in the fight the shots thrown will be sufficient- there will be some shortening but not as dramatic because they were practiced and the skill installed via a full range of motion.

In the C2 training classes the initial part is all spent on addressing skill issues, the technique is chased and the range of motion exaggerated.
Speed and power go hand in hand with technique expertise- its an exponential relationship.
When guys have some training behind them they can participate in the force on force active drills.
I assume most of you are familiar with the active drill basic concept- guys are fatigued, taken to the floor and after fighting their way up they have to get stuck in to the other guy before being pulled apart, exposures are short to prevent any attempt at energy conservation by pacing.
The guys perform the drill numerous times in an attempt to completely exhaust them but also to try different transitions etc.
This is where stress diagnostics are performed.
In the same way that it would be pointless getting your car on an expensive fault diagnostic machine and not following up the report data we look to how improvements can be implemented.
Technique compression is commonly seen, the diagnostic has been made and its time to go back to the skill portion and address the problem via the ideas discussed.

The skills, drills, tactical testing model can be applied to all aspects of training, so in addition to giving your training partner a pat on the back for getting through the session look to also give feedback on where he can get better!

RearNakedJim

davidlewis wrote: »

No doubt this is a great way to train the mounted ground and pound but see how short the shots are, they should be exaggerated with the goal being that when that situation occurs in the fight the shots thrown will be sufficient- there will be some shortening but not as dramatic because they were practiced and the skill installed via a full range of motion.

This section to me highlights the lack of knowledge this person has in the area of striking while on the ground, specifically in the mount. The strikes should be short and hard not exaggerated as he claims as when performed against a resisting opponent (ie in a fight) exaggerated punches would create poor posture and allow for the person on bottom escape IMO.

Mick Coup

The article is actually trying to make the point regarding the training of the strikes in this incidence, as opposed to the employment from the mount or elsewhere.

This 'stress compression' effect is fairly universal, regardless of experience and ability - but it can be addressed in training to offset it to a degree.

Any strike has an optimal execution mode, where it'll definitely 'do what it says on the tin' and this is generally how it is practised and drilled. Under stress, be it fear or excitement induced, this 'perfect' delivery noticebly shortens - and as a result its effect is reduced, requiring more output, which can trigger yet more shortening and reduction in effect - this can create a downward spiral that often results in blows having so little effect that the recipient can counter or escape.

Output is a wonderful thing, but 'input' is what truly counts!

No-one is suggesting using exaggerated blows of any dexcription during a live engagement - this isn't the issue of the above article, which looks at the training 'out' of the inefective shortening that occurs.

If you are going to lose a foot of travel in actual application due to the effect of stress, then simply add this distance during training so when the inevitable 'stress compression' occurs, you're still left with a full shot.

Train 'full' shots, deliver 'short' shots - train 'big' shots, deliver 'full' shots.

That's all it amounts to.

Mick

Scramble

I've trained with Mick a couple of times, and headed up to Belfast to a workshop there at the weekend.

My main base would be in BJJ and doing the odd bit of standup to try and keep my hand in. I''m not going to set the world on fire but I've trained with some good coaches and roll a fair bit. I think I've got quite a good filter for what Mark Rippetoe would call 'silly bull****' based on that and also because I'm in a job where I'd hazard a guess that I have more experience of controlling actual conflicts than most anyone else I know (apart from people in the same job).

I don't rate most self-protection type training prinicpally because most of the instructors and their respective approaches fall down on three main criteria-

1. Conditioning usually isn't emphasised enough or excuses are made for why it is not so important.

2. An emphasis is sometimes placed on catering to Walter Mittys who want to do a lot of knife work or dodge bullets rather than what they actually could benefit from beginning with.

and the really big one

3. Compared to combat sports gyms there is often almost no ''alive'' training against a resisting opponent.

What I'd say is that based on my experience and having no dog in this fight beyond having gone to afew of his seminars, Mick's material doesn't fall into any of these categories. I kind of got drawn into training with him by a few of his articles, and (not being one of his instructors and not getting paid for this, bear this in mind) I think he's well worth training with if you've an interest in this area. If you don't, then fine.

Leaving the first two point asides for the moment, in relation to the 'training with a resisting opponent' bit I've got to say that on Sunday we did some pretty innovative force-on-force training. Groin guards, some head protection and no restrictions on what techniques could be used. The 'rounds' were kept short and there were a few specific small changes made to the way the rounds were run in order to encourage both parties to try and get the most out of them in terms of covering up and attacking aggressively. I don't know if anyone is familliar with the idea of ''milling'' or how it differs from conventional boxing, but it was along those lines.

My personal take: I'll continue to train the way I like to train now for enjoyment and relaxation (and yes, I think it's already a damn good base in any other context too), but I also like to still keep an eye out for innovative other approaches to training, and I think Mick's stuff is well thought-out and fit for purpose.

davidlewis

Thanks for your post "RearNakedJim", I hope Mick's reply and indeed the reply from "Scramble" answered your query:)

Here are some new clips currently on YOUTUBE of Mick Coup in action, see links:

Elbow technique P1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHh30QUnlkw
Elbow technique P2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnvQJixn0aE
Highline strike P1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoenPa8Stro
Highline strike P2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tM7egia-wLg

There is a load to see there, just to give anyone who has not trained with Mick a flavour of the quality of instruction.

I've said enough, see for yourselves:)

westhamutd

Hi

David can you post address please

Tks

davidlewis

Westhamutd,

I just sent you a PM

David.

davidlewis

We are literally only 4 weeks away from Mick Coups next Seminar in Ireland, If you are thinking about coming or have any questions, please feel free to ring me 087 9376069, as the seminar is nearly full!!

Here is another article from Mick Coup which, I know will get your head nodding in agreement, enjoy:

TOWERS & BUNKERS (Up or Down?)
2008

I'm a huge believer in traditional training practices - and all the truly effective training I have ever seen is traditional in approach believe it or not, no matter how 'modern' it purports to be. Unfortunately the mere word 'traditional' seems enough to send most 'progressive' types into shock - yet a great deal of them, the ones that get the best results anyway, are a lot closer to using these so-called 'outdated' methods than they believe.

Before getting into the meat of this article, let's establish exactly what I mean by the term 'traditional' lest there be any misunderstanding. It's actually easier to define what 'traditional' isn't - I feel that when many people hear the 'T' word they think of highly stylised and historically-orientated methods, which I feel is more accurately described as being 'Classical' in nature as opposed to 'Traditional'.

Traditional systems and methods, as I understand them, originated for a definite purpose, and when we compare them to our 'modern' efforts it must be considered that they were just as 'modern' in their day and possibly more practical due to their immediate requirements. Give what we do now a few decades to evolve and it will become traditional compared to future approachs will it not?

I'm guessing it will, so where is the actual benchmark? It obviously has little to do with time/date issues if the above is taken into account - that term would be 'vintage' I suppose - so what defines this traditional approach that I put so much stock into?

In a word - basics. Building foundations is the primary task, above all else - the majority of work is channelled into the perfection of the underlying core skills, the essentials that support all future endeavours. This to me epitomises the traditional approach, the repetition and constant drilling of the primary tools and skills, and - wait for it - everything is progressive in nature, structured and organised, each component building on the last in an integrated fashion.

Before I'm swamped with critics claiming how ineffective various traditional styles are, especially when compared to their ultra-modern 'combative super-system' (I actually teach one of these myself, so there is no bias here!) just bear in mind that truly traditional systems work - that's what they were designed to do - it's the ones that have become 'classical' that lose effectiveness, through becoming over-stylised and aesthetic.

Ultimately it's all about application in context, and about how the training is conducted, and finally about the person. If all three are on-track, everything will be effective - if not, then nothing - even the high-speed modern stuff - will fail.

The title of this piece? Not an attempt to be cryptic I assure you, but rather a parallel that can be drawn to illustrate my point - using the construction industry as an abstract analogy.

I prefer not to build upwards in all truth, but to dig deeper in the same spot. Once I have a basic structure that suits my needs and requirements in place, then I want to concentrate on the footings, the foundations - not add rooms I'll rarely use or decorate the place to make it look nice!

Everything to me is about function, the form is a by-product - have you ever seen an old Naval cutlass, a heavy plain blade with basic fittings? Nothing about it has anything to do with looking nice, just so long as it is manageable and durable in combat - the ornamentation is absent, it's designed to kill human beings with - nothing more. When it was no longer used for this purpose, replaced by firearms, it became beautiful, decorated and stylised to be pleasing to the eye - a modern officer's dress sword will still be bad for you if it runs you through, no doubt, but nothing like it used to be!

Sticking with the firearms subject for a little while, definite parallels can be drawn between ultra-modern 'high-speed' firearms training and traditional martial arts - again all hinging around the basic skills and the disproportionate attention that they should receive, compared to the more 'advanced' techniques.

I come from a military background predominantly, and I recall basic weapons training being a real anti-climax after all I'd anticipated - I'm from the UK and didn't grow up around guns, apart from what I saw on TV anyhow so I wasn't expecting what seemed to be so exciting turn out to be boring, or so it felt at the time!

Spending hours in the classroom, everyday for weeks on end just going through the motions - by rote - of handling and loading, making ready, making safe, unloading, stripping and assembling, clearing malfunctions, etc etc before going anywhere near a shooting range - what was all that about? When we were finally deemed competant enough to shoot real bullets, we only got five at a time, and practiced getting the holes in the target as close together as possible, lying in a comfortable position with a convenient sandbag for support - nothing more exciting than that!

Still the classroom lessons continued, learning how to transfer the basic skills from one weapon to another, using universal concepts that seemed more obvious the more we understood them, and this was the light-switch right there - understanding. Once you knew why something was happening, everything just slotted into place - no longer were you trying to remember, always one step behind - now you were doing the thing on your own. This was only possible because we started slow, worked progressively and concentrated on mastering the basics above all else. This all progressed into the 'high speed' exciting stuff I'd initially expected - but only when we'd done enough of the basics, and the intermediate, to enable us to not only perform the advanced material but actually get something out of it.

In essence we built a foundation, and getting back to the construction analogy this wasn't just having the ground cleared and levelled before building - that isn't enough, you have to then dig down and pour some concrete into the hole, and only when it has set properly can you even think about starting to build. The quality and quantity of the foundation determines many things, not least how high you can build and certainly how stable and long-lived the structure will be. It is the one process that simply cannot be skipped, or even rushed - it really is that important. I see a great many 'structures' on the horizon that don't have much depth in my opinion - lots of height at first inspection, but built too soon on ground that has only been cleared, and little more. Everyone, almost, seems to be in such a hurry to dive into the advanced training that the basics get little attention. Building too high, too fast, without a good foundation is never a good idea.

Like I alluded to earlier, personally I don't build 'towers' these days, I build 'bunkers' instead. I don't need, or want the extra rooms, and neither do the individuals and groups that I teach - function is everything, and this is where I concentrate my efforts. The 'structures' might look minimal above ground, but this is far from the case when you step inside and press the 'down' button in the elevator!

Do I get bored? Do I ever want more? To be honest - no. It's all there anyway, across the full spectrum. The only thing missing is the 'trim' that makes other pursuits only appear to be more comprehensive, and instead there is a more efficient and ergonomic user interface that makes the whole thing seem simpler and more accessible - just as technology is striving to achieve with even the most complex systems elsewhere. Complex does not, and should not, have to be complicated.

The only thing that ever gets 'boring' is the result, the end effect, the performance, and this is what I want more of, this is what I want to add to to change for the better - and it's truly a long time time in the making if you do it right!

Mick

davidlewis

Lads & Lassies,

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, the seminar planned for April 25th & 26th has been postponed.

Various factors outside of my control have forced me to take this decision.

Both myself and Mick are dissapointed, as I have tried and exhausted all avenues to try and avoid this. The good news is that we WILL re-organise this seminar for a later date.

Any fees paid, have been returned to students today in the post.

Any questions? feel free to contact me 087 9376069

David.

Musashi

Sorry to hear it's been put off David.

I couldn't make this one as the wife is going to be in San Diego that week, so hopefully I'll be at the rescheduled one