Keep It Simple…Stupid?

Most of us have said it, at some point. The phrase is ubiquitous in self-defense circles, and when uttered, it is generally received with head nods around the room. However, I don’t think I’m stupid, and I doubt that most of the people I train are. So, is this a mantra that should be embraced by the “reality” self-defense world? I often try to make a distinction between the synonyms, “simple” and “easy”, as they relate to self-defense. Just because something is technically simple (very few moves/ movements) does not mean that it will be easy to perform against someone intent on doing bodily harm. It is like weightlifting: if you want to make strength and size gains, you need “time under tension”. For self-defense and fighting, you need “time under pressure”. The more you do it, whether it is simple or not, the more likely you can perform it under stress (if you are progressing the pressure at a rate that allows for growth). So, does “simple” trump everything else (as the mantra implies)? The entire KISS concept assumes that humans are not capable of performing complex (or more complex) tasks. We have to look no further than a skill that most of us begin acquiring in our mid-teens: driving. Think about all of the things that happen while driving: steering, braking, accelerating (perhaps shifting), using turn signals, tuning the radio, operating windshield wipers, checking of three mirrors, talking on the phone or to passengers, following directions, checking road signs, checking the speedometer, noting vehicles or other hazards, et al…all while moving at 60, 70 or 80 miles per hour. Further, most seasoned drivers perform all of these tasks (many simultaneously), without even thinking about them, though one wrong move could mean serious injury or death. Recently Fit to Fight® started studying potential problems with the typical gun defense as it relates to a revolver: While there has been no official change in our approach as of yet, a typical inquiry has been, “so, are we expecting students to make a determination of revolver or semi-automatic under stress?” Now, we are certainly hesitant to add anything, but the idea that this is somehow prohibitive just defies logic. We ask students to analyze many things under stress and usually under attack. At the very least, with a gun threat, the student generally has more time to analyze and respond as the situation dictates. So, what’s the conclusion? In my opinion, simple may be better, if it actually accomplishes the task at hand, but something more complex should not be culled just because it is more complex. Humans are capable of functioning at very high levels, physically and mentally. Self-defense instructors should recognize this and find a reasonable balance between offering solutions that are not overly complex (but are still effective) while offering a training methodology that properly prepares the student. The system should be integrated in a way that there are common threads throughout, so that if some moves or movements are slightly more complex, they are built on familiar points of reference that students build on throughout the curriculum.