Private Investigations and Personal Security/Author
QUESTION: Hey Marc. I have read very many books from Geoff Thompson and have a very good understanding about his approach to fighting and selfdefence. I've always been interested in reading books and train with the "real experts" like you and geoff Thompson, Richard Dmitri and so on. Because I've read and implied so much of Geoffs training methods and his approach too selfdefence I would like to hear from you what your opinions is of his approach and how it differs from yours?
ANSWER: Actually I don't know his current training methods, so I can't exactly comment on them.
I read his book 'Dead or Alive' years ago and my thought was "This is British jurisprudence." That is an important legal distinction. In England, Australia, Canada etc., IF you reasonably believe someone is about to attack you, you can attack preemptively. Here in the States, that is called 'starting the fight' and it's frowned upon. Like, you'll be arrested and charged 'frowned upon.'
Still he had a lot of good insights into the nature and cause of violence -- especially with drunks.
I also know that Geoff has worked his way out of the street fighting market and has focused more on the self-help field -- especially with people who have violence issues.
What I've been working on is taking my work towards understanding the nature of conflict and social status/dominance games. About 99% of what people think is 'self-defense' is more about social status and emotional motivations than actual 'there is a physical threat that I must counter or being hurt' that is actual self-defense. By understanding primate status displays/dominance strategies and the social purposes of violence, it allows someone a LOT more options than just to bust someone's head just because someone looked at you cross eyed. What I'm trying to teach people is that while there ARE times that you'll need to drop someone like a prom dress, those times are MUCH rarer than people who study reality based self-defense systems want to believe. Most of the time, violence can be avoided.
---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------
QUESTION: Okey I see. Now for another question. If you find yourself confronted against someone who acts aggresivly and he maybe will try sucker punch you, how much of value is the so called "fence"? With the "fence" I mean how you move your hands to try and trap the opponents arms without him sensing it. Also the when you do so you try keep him at some distance and it will disable his ability to, headbutt, knee and kick you effectivly.
It's hard to explain someting like this it's need to be visual, I post two links about it if you have the time to check them out it'be great :)
The answer is "It depends."
Overall I like the idea of the fence, although I do it differently.
The problem with how most people do the fence is they're actually in a fighting stance waiting to sucker punch the guy ... and it shows. You can't be seen as pretending to be reasonable while setting him up. Speaking as an experienced fighter, my reaction to that kind of behavior would be to piss me off and I'd attack harder and faster.
I personally recommend dropping the hands lower as if you are trying to calm the guy down. I've personally found if you wave your hands in the guy's face it can get him more aggressive, but chest height (or lower) is considered less of a challenge.