Training question-The "force' majore' " of fury...

[Aaron Pynenberg]

During an FBI shootout in LA in the early 80's the agents were all using wheel guns. On the firing range they always put the empty casings into thier pocket because the range master did not want the range dirty.....after the shootout 2 dead agents were discovered to have taken the time during the shootout, (as they were reloading), to put the empty casings into their pockets. One agent had three seperate reloads in his pocket.--the old adage of "be careful what you train you may become good at it", Aaron

[s_taillebois]

Sounds a bit like the earlier thread on qualities of a 'fighter'.
However, aggression/anger isn't always an clear advantage, albiet it can be useful at the beginning of a fight.
A good historical example would be the situation at Agincourt. Henry deliberately fired longbow volleys at the French, not necessarily expecting that at that distance they would be lethal. But, he had tired of the French delaying (and arguing all about who was to led the charge), and wanted to goad them into doing something stupid. It worked, the French got enraged, and their charge tangled up in itself. Essentially the French lost the tactical advantage, by letting their anger rule, that they had trained for most of their lives.
Another example, Hastings. The saxons got angry/overconfident, and broke the shield wall and pursued the Norman's out onto open ground. Where they gave the Norman's the ability to use the technical advantage they had with the stirrup and the lance.
And alas, a some contemporary examples from here on the reservation. Many of the assaults here are unbelievably violent (and there is a obsession with edged weapons here), but the drunk and crazed people (as bad as they are) are generally outclassed by those who can wait for the right tactical moment.
So as some of you have so clearly noted, training/tactics even at a basic level, do seem to outweigh anger/sheer aggression. Especially it seems, if the fight last longer than the initial confrontation.

[Hugh Long]

Hey Rod, all. I don't think rage is good for a fight. It may make you seem stronger, but I like John's term of "controlled aggression". You need to be very aggressive, but focused.

One thing I've learned in 20 years as a martial artist, is how to "flip the switch" and turn that killer mode on and off in a controlled fashion.

Many Martial artists I've worked with over the years don't even have a killer instinct at all, and spar, fence or whatever, tentatively. I think that's dangerous. And of course one of the reasons I admire our ARMA philisophy of fencing with intent. But intent goes beyond force, it's about focus, determination, and control (IMHO)

But the real trick is to be able to flip that switch and go from calm and peaceful, to killer, in a split second. Then be able to turn it off again when you're done. Otherwise, you're in that super alert adrenaline induced high which can be exhausting.

Anyway, just my senseless ramblings for the day <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" />

Hugh, ARMA DC
http://www.armadc.com
[color="red"] [/color]

[Jaron Bernstein]

Maybe. Today in waster free play I decided to "flick on the switch" and decided I was just going to take down my opponent no matter what he did. About half the time I overwhelmed him. The other half I got him also...at the same time as he hit me somewhere else for double kill. <img src="/forum/images/icons/tongue.gif" alt="" />

[Patrick Hardin]

And that's where the usefulness of training comes in, to minimize running yourself onto the other guy's sword, and to kill without being killed in turn. Thus, the aggression is controlled.

Patrick Hardin