Discussion in 'Women's Self Defence' started by Metal_Kitty, Feb 22, 2011.
On them - sorry i thought I contextualised it correctly!
It's not a catch phrase....it's a term that we use in class. It's nothing fancy or complicated...just means to disengage yourself from a situation using verbal tactics. Don't make something out of it that it's not.
But I think simply being aware that men are bigger and stronger is not enough...I think they need to know what it FEELS like to be physically engaged with someone like that. From personal experience, it's a totally different feeling.
I hate to sound sexist right now (and corona's probably gonna kill me), but in all my martial arts experience, I don't think I've ever received as much benefit from training with a female partner as I have with a male.
I'm still unsure on the value of knowing HAOV.
It's something that used to play on my mind. Knowing how someone was likely to attack you. Learning how to counter that etc. It became a little bit too much like making a list and "collecting" in some ways.
But I've also been swayed by Iain Abernethy's views on self defence in as much as he doesn't care what HAOV you are doing because he's too busy smashing you in the head and neck.
Knowing the HAOV could play into being in an overly defensive mindset? Too reactive rather than proactive?
Currently I think I'm between the two.
I think knowing likely attacks and attack methods is useful. It can help answer those "what if" questions. It can help build confidence because you know you've, in some way, tackled the problem if you train to counter them. Take away that element of surprise.
But I also think you need to build up an attacking and aggressive style that doesn't give your opponent a chance to even do an HAOV.
But then we also have things like the SPEAR which seem to be founded on the idea that you don't need to know what the other guy is doing? Just SPEAR off the flinch and go from there?
On the topic of acronyms I do use plenty of them in my system as they are useful tools. They help regular students and instructors remember psychological concepts and physical principles relevant to the subject matter.
However, I generally don't use them on forums as you have to break them down and explain them, which rather defeats the purpose. Similarly I hardly use any in courses because the aim is to include not exclude the learner. I think the only one I do use is the SAS principle because of what it stands for and the imagery that the term conjures up in the UK.
and apply with
I used HAOV above since it is a fairly common term in the martial arts world these days (along with HAV and HAPV), however I wouldn't use it in a lay presentation.
Acronyms have to serve a purpose. I have met some people who have (I think) adopted acronyms for some things just because they think it's cool, rather than it serving a purpose as an abbreviation and/or a mnemonic.
I do sympathise with melb with regard to feeling acronym overload at work. The people I work with part time have acronyms for everything which can be a right pain if you don't know them, but I recognise that they're a useful time saver when you do.
I'm going to have to agree with that. Everyone pretty much knows males are generally stronger and it shouldn't need to be taught to anyone but knowing the theory without any practical isn't going to be good. I know if I spar full contact with some of my mates they will have a lot of power and reach over me because they're bigger and heavier but I know actually being on the receiving end is a lot different when you're feeling that power difference.
I like to think of myself as a pretty mature adult but seeing "SAS principle" did make me think "secret special forces stuff!!!"
JWT, where and how do you source your male bodies for the womens only classes?
The value of knowing HAOV...
Forewarned is forearmed.
In the days before people started flagging up HAOV the majority of martial artists trained against martial arts attacks. Even in their self defence classes people would chamber punches and attack just as they did in class.
So what did HAOV do?
HAOV changed everything. You get good at what you train for. If you just train against front kicks, roundhouse kicks and straight punches - you're not preparing yourself for the close range haymaker or headbutt. The whole idea behind knowing HAOV is that you train against the most common attacks which increases your odds on spotting, preempting and defending against them.
The viewpoint from Iain that you mention is okay... but in order to pre-empt and make that HAOV irrelevant you've got to have made the (right) decision to preempt or intercept, and one of the best ways to do that is to train against HAOV.
With regard to your comments on the S.P.E.A.R. System - I'm no longer a qualified coach with Blauer Tactical Systems S.P.E.A.R. System BasicsTM, but they have drills for Primary Initiation Attacks (PIAs) which they believe it is important to know as a focus for your training. PIAs are HAOV.
There is a universal acceptance that to train effectively you have to direct your training towards its objective. This is why increasingly modern armies (and armed police) use video game close combat trainers, blank firing tactical training, simmunition, and why Riot Police train against mock riots etc. These training methods have a proven track record of increasing the ability to respond effectively in real situations. When you think about it, all they are doing is applying what sports (and martial arts) coaches have known for years. You get good at what you train for.
I understand your point.
Actually one of my very first martial arts instructors was a woman. How much you can learn depends upon the woman involved. But to be fair, lots of women fail to reach their potential because men aren't tough enough on them. The best women tend to be the ones who have sought out and sparred with the better men.
If Dave Grossman is to be believed this may change. Already we are seeing an increase in female violence which the medical profession says has been caused by the introduction of violent female role models in children's TV. I don't want to derail the thread by going into an argument on media violence though.
I recruit male students and instructors who I have trained to be 'bad guys'. These are people who are prepared to get hit, but also prepared to carefully gauge and pace how much force and aggression they use so that the student is always put under pressure, but never too much.
TKDMitch has done this for me with one of his students.
Cheers John. That's made that a lot clearer for me.
Not an issue. The important thing about spending time collecting data is to use it! I agree with you that just knowing HAOV isn't so much use!
I guess it's a lesson in not only looking at what the information is telling you explicitly but also implicitly too?
Knowing a haymaker with the right hand is a HAOV also tells you that a straight lunging punch isn't (for example).
Yes. That's not to say that you don't occasionally get fights started with a jab, but it's uncommon. It's also worth pointing out that HAOV vary from country to country. For example I recall that a waist tackle is a common attack starter in the USA - almost unheard of here in the UK. By contrast a headbutt is a common attack starter over here, almost unknown as a 'first strike' in the USA. I'm pretty certain that there's a link there to USA football and wrestling taught as sports in school (not here in the UK) and UK Soccer (less common in USA).
Ultimately we need to inform our training to what we want to do. If you want to be a competitive fighter then you need to be able to fight against the techniques most commonly used in competitions. If you are purely training for self defence then training against HAOV will be more your thing. Depending on your areas of interest and your lifestyle you need to make the judgement as to how to balance your training.
Whilst I do think that HAOV training is important, I think that there is a another element that is possibly more important and is one of the differences between traditional martial arts training and modern methods.
I would suggest that as a rule, these days, class sizes are much larger. An old style traditional teacher (Kung Fu, Karate, whatever) only had a few students at a time. Now if you accept that premise...
An instructor needs to look carefully at the lifestyle, physical and psychological composition and expectations of EACH individual student and tailor the training that they receive to make that individual as effective (within the boundaries of the style or system that they are teaching) as possible.
I do feel that there is WAY too much 'one size fits all' training in most modern martial and self defence training programs.
And very interesting it was too.
That's a good point Robert. Training should always be tailored to the students' needs.
I agree that it should be tailored to people's needs. People are not averages. Some students might be very short, or very tall, or have low motor skills, or otherwise not suited to techniques developed for a generic Woman X.
I actually teach womens self defense, fighting is only part of it, you have to desenitize females to modesty and language, and then teach them how to properly beat the living snot out of someone, more later
OK,now I have more time to really write about this.
I have been teaching women SD for about 16 years, started out slow and careful, but after awhile, I and they figured out that they needed to be trained just like men. I spent about two years asking questions from my freinds who are female about what they think they need to learn. I think the most interesting thing was that they want realistic, tough, training. No ********, and they didn't care who taught it as long as they felt they could "trust" them. So I developed a course for females, a short and a long course.
Mostly, we do everything we would with men. I have turned out some serious she devils in the last 14 years. And they have helped me learn how to teach gals.
I think the biggest problem I had to get past was how close you have to be sometimes, and the language that has to be used. But, again, they showed me it was no big deal, I had thier best interest in mind, and I was as professional as I could be when teaching.
I have special sessions with the females I teach, one to introduce foul language, one to talk about modesty, these two things are the most dangerous weapons in an attackers toolbox when it comes to women.
Women are taught to be modest, and in a fight they will stop to put something away that popped out. That has to be trained out of them.
Language can be just as debilitating to a woman, attackers will say the filthiest things possible to shock and hurt a female, so they have to learn to disregard, and overcome that shock to be successful.
Kicking, striking, groundfighting, that's the easy stuff. It is the above two that are hard to do, along with changing mindset.
So, while it has at times been "controversial" I have not stopped teaching the way I do, anything less would be a dis-service to my students.
I know some of you think I may be nuts, others will think I am setting myself up for trouble, but this is how I do it, and have been very successful.
Separate names with a comma.