Ghosting/A-dumps

Alan Bec Sat Aug 26, 2006 3:45 am

An archive question from Chris
--------------------------------------------------

by Chris:

Hi Dave,

I've had a question about dealing with the unique nature of each a-dump nagging at the back of my mind for a while. Apologies if this turns out to be a long one!

If we can say that the one thing that never changes about an adrenal dump is that each of them is entirely situational. If that's true then any and all of the infinite number of variables inherent within a conflict can promote an un-expected a-dump?

One tiny difference between situations (which there will invariably be) can potentially mean the difference between a successfully resolved conflict and un-controlled adrenal response?

As a result, does it logically follow that with the infinite number of possibilities, and subsequent responses it is impossible to train for EVERY eventuality. The kicker being that failure to train for each and every type of conflict leads to certain failure. There is an in-built failure waiting to happen?

If that is the case and we say that each a-dump is depedant and its effect is dependant on un-knowable factors then we logically only have two options (I think!),either;

the situation is moulded or,

the opponent is moulded to fit a scenario that you have trained for.

If we manipulate the variables of the conflict to fit a pattern trained for then this will require a huge amount of emotional and mental awareness as well as an exemplary knowledge of yourself and your trained or inherent responses. There would have to be a conscious decision made that "This situation fits scenario b that I trained for" The point of failure comes in the time taken to associate the situation with the trained scenario?

If we go down the other route and manipulate our perception of the opponent to make them fit a trained set of responses then we have different problems. This would seem to require the ability to de-humanise your opponent and remove from them the factors which make them an individual. Their physical appearance, facial expressions, psychological triggers, verbal skills are all stripped away to leave an opponent who has none of the humanising features which assist in promoting an adrenal reaction. I think this is what some refer to as ghosting? Failing to see your opponent as a human being and thereby removing human considerations from your perception of them and the threat?

I'm not sure mate, I'm stumbling around a lot of this stuff but how did you deal with the fact that each situation is different and you can't possibly train for EVERY eventuality?

Apologies for the long and winding post I've just dumped on you!

all the best
Chris

by Dave Turton

Chris Hi

Thats a well thought out post, you have an enquiring mind.. however with all thing 'natural' (using the word to mean "as nature designed"), there is a degree of un-enforced simplicity that over-rides mental complications.

The deer doesn't give a toss if it chased by a lion, a tiger, a jaguar or a leopard, or even a David Attenbrough.. it simply recognises PREDATOR. then the survival mode which is accompanied by adrenal 'dump' kicks in.It then has pre-knowledge of the actual environment it is in.. so it makes 'automatic' allowances.

You are almost correct in the word 'ghosting' but I suppose a better description would be 'downgrading' the danger.

A human attacker will always only have the same attributes as just about every other attacker.. i.e normally two arms two legs etc
This means that certain ABSOLUTES exist, and cannot change..i.e he cant FLY at you, or swim as fast as a shark and attack you at 25mph underwater.

so we'see' each attack scenario as not an individual unique experience, but as a general ..
like every football match has the same starting line ups of 11 a side, one ball one ref. Now what would be the odds on say after 15 minute splay, to have EVERY player in the exact same place on the field as another game 100 miles away.. infiite odds.. 20 zillion to one or something.

BUT the overall knowledge of the game of football allows players to not worry about such TRIVIA, but to concentrate on the WHOLE.

By having catagories that have 'generalisations' such as one unarmed attacker facing.. then the variable on THAT scenario are superfluous to a degree.. the only real concern is teh ONE unarmed attacker.. then we can sub divide into smaller catagories, which could in theory end up with a myriad of possiblities that are rarely PROBABILITIES.

You dont need 1000 answer to 1000 problems.. The fire brigade use water, foam or blankets etc.. but dont have 1000 variable extinguishers .

You dont need to overcomplicate adrenaile dumps.. just know they will come an dthat they will AID not inder you.. trust in your tariningt o find teh right answers .. it will..

8 notes on a scale .. 26 letters in our alphabet.. we automatically can find the right notes for "God save the Queen" .. or the rights combination of letters to convey our thoughts..

let your training take over your thinking mate

Hope this helps

Bloody good question though.. you owe me 2 aspirin, my head is now hurting Ha ha

by Chris:

Hi Dave,

Apologies for the head-ache

I suppose you can say that a well trained person will be able to "fill in the gaps" like a musician they have the experience and the skill to improvise within a specific format. (Your notes analogy hit home with me) within certain broad rules provided we have the basic tools our natural instinct will fill in the gaps?

The idea being that we aren't trying to practice and learn a thousand responses, we are training the building blocks to let us create our own unique responses in light of what we want to happen, the skills we possess and knowledge of where we should end up?

I think I may need those asprin soon myself!

by Lito

Hi Chris and Dave,
Chris, I know you wanted my opinion on this too and you know what? I completely concur with Dave. There's really nothing more to add to his brilliant reply. LESS IS MORE my friend; LESS IS MORE...

Take care and God Bless gents...

Best Regards,
Lito

by Dave Turton

Thanks Lito
Coming from you that is a real compliment

by JOHN SKILLEN

Being exposed to violence on a regular basis desensitises, a fight becomes just-a-fight(Adrenal dump can totally destroy you if you let it). I agree when it kicks off its all about improvisation. I have noticed; what I trained last usually comes out first. This could be coincidence or just that whatever technique I used was right for that situation.
PRE-PROGRAMMED!
Take care
John

by Dave Turton

I think its a bit of both John..
plus if you like a move .. it tends to like you

by Chris

Hi all,

I've got another question in light of the answers above.

The ability to improvise requires extensive knowledge of the framework you are within combined with practice. It ALSO needs the affective learning experience of actually DOING IT...that would pre-suppose that in real terms if you want to be that good you MUST fight in a real/live situation? Or at least handle many real live situations?

are we saying that unless we have conflict we wont ever be able to effectively handle conflict?

cheers
Chris

by Dave Turton

in a word NO..

What is required is FAMILIARITY..
Equate us with say the Fire Brigade..

they undergo training and simulated scenarios to condition both their pyhsical attributes and their mental ones.i.e. confidence in their skills etc.

Now naturally the more you engage in the reality, the greater your experience and AFFECTIVE learning.. however, as long as the situation when it/they occur isnt something totally alien to your learning, you will be able to feel 'comfortable' in it.

Take also a simple new problem for drivers from the UK..we go abroad and hire aleft hand drive car.. we dont need ten weeks instruction to drive it.. we just need a small period of adjustment.
our current skill base is sufficient to allow the change over,

I have only ever had to deal with one left handed attacker who came at me with a bottle in his left hand.. most of my training was against righthanded people.. but the transistion happened without thought, worry over my abilities etc.. I just made automatic adjustments to deal with this different attack

by Chris:

Thanks Dave,

I think I'm getting a handle on this as a concept now.

Is it fair to say then that the most successful people in the area of violence are those that "Don't Care" i.e. they have the ability to just ACCEPT the situation and deal with it?

cheers
Chris

by Dave Turton

I DONT THINK YO KNOW JUST HOW NEAR TO THE WHOLE TRUTH OF PROPER REALITY MARTIAL ARTS STUDY THAT STATEMENT OF YOURS REALLY IS,,

ACCEPTANCE .. A MASSIVE CONCEPT IN MANY WAYS

by JOHN SKILLEN

The more battles the more experience the more experience the more likely you are to handle the situation. You can train scenario after scenario but theres always new ones waiting to happen the beauty is they will all feel the same( just different degrees of intensity). A good reality instructor thats got experience will be able to get you to feel the feelings if you catch my drift. Therefore prepare you for the real thing whether or not you have any previous real experience yourself.
cheers
John

by Chris:

Thanks John,

I see what you mean about reproducing the feelings through scenario training. I suppose the affective learning experience of a "REAL" fight is always going to be the best teacher.. the difference between rehearsal and performance.

I'm still inclined to think though that ANY gym training has to run a far distant second to a real experience, even things like animal days.

Dave, you scared me for a minute then when I saw the capitals.. thought I'd finally pissed you off with my stupid questions!!! The more affective learning granted by situations that are WORSE than the one you are in and have been SUCCESSFULLY handled the better I suppose? That affective learning allows you to accept the situation and KNOW that you can come through it?

I think...

cheers, you've definitely got me thinking here.

Chris