Covering the Cover

Please stop posting links to adult sites here. From Admin

Jamie

So how does your version of the cover stand up in real situations?
How effective has it proved to be?

I don't know if I would call it my version of the cover. It's a tactic as opposed to a technique and I don't like impressing on others what works for me. I'd rather help find out what works for them under pressure.

The cover has proven to be very efficient under pressure.

I agree - training under pressure is important - but surely, showing people what has worked for yourself or another individual in a real situation has as much, if not more validity than the student learning what works for them in a contrived situation that, no matter how pressured it is, is still far from reality.

Don't get me wrong - I am all for trainign under pressure and pressure testing, as I'm sure you're aware. I just feel it's good to start with a base of techniques that already have proven success in the field - so to speak.

I was just wondering if the cover strategy had that. I've not seen it employed by anyone I've fought or fought with - so I would like to see if anyone has more experience than I

Good discussion, Al.

I see the cover being used all the time when it comes to survival. When a multitude of objects is coming at you, you will do some variation of the cover. I have even seen John Anderson apply it without addressing it when he taught that first seminar for me. I wouldn't be suprised if you haven't done some variation when stuck in a melee. As, I said before it is a concept not a technique - at least that's the way I look at it. As soon as we get into convuluted variations of the cover then we can really pick it apart as we can with any technique, but as a concept for covering and moving in it is not without its precedents. Geoff taught the peek-a-boo guard (although how much he considered it applicable to self defence or as an attribute tactic I am not sure), Panantukan has the wing block, Steve Morris actively teaches the cover, obvious Keysi has their pensador, Crazy monkey has it version, Iain Abernethy actively teaches the cover in Nianchi and so on and so on. Even without these arguably trained references it's such a base instinct when involved in multiple attacker situations.

If I taught purely techniques that I found worked for me in real life situations I would be presenting a very poor and irresponsible collection. They would include right crosses (a fist can easy be broken and not everyone is naturally inclined to hit straight, but prefer hooks) and right roundhouse kicks to the head. They would also include grabbing fistfuls of someone else's clothes and upper cutting them. The high roundhouse kick is not advisable, attribute based and a low percentage/high risk technique for most people. I believe in finding out what works for the individual and not imposing on them what works for me. Everyone has their own baseline of self protection hard skills and it is that baseline that I want to draw from.

I am very aware of the appeal to authority logical fallacy argument in martial arts and self defence, and I am trying to be very careful that I don't use it myself. I want to find out what an individual will do rather than show them that works for me. Obviously experience does lend a lot to it and we use it to help guide our students, but I much prefer to create situations that promote realistic responses. I hope that explains it.

Nice response Jamie

Sorry I missed your call earlier.

I accept all the references you have quoted and totally agree that we shouldn't just teach what has worked for us as individuals.
However, it is important that we teach functional skills and strategies that have been tried and tested and proved largely successful by at least someone that we regard as a valid reference point - such as the names you have offered above.

This is why I raised the question initially - to prompr for more info on this strategy because, actually - I honestly can't remember doing a strategy like this for real - and I have been in a few scrapes where the fight was against multiples and wasn't over within the first couple of punches.
What I do remember was going crazy - hittign anything and everything that moved and the result being that I didn't really have time to work an active cover - I was too busy bashing.

But that is just me - and the guys above will no doubt have other situations they can draw from which offer alternatives such as covers, pensador guards, etc etc

And don't get me wrong - we teach alot of panantukan now - the JKD arts are firmly in our syllabus and the more arts we study the more our syllabus will grow. I am just very careful about how we teach those and suggest how they fit into "real situations", if they do at all.

I wonder if anyone else on the forum has worked similar covers and can give us some feedback

Cheers Jamie - thanks for your continued contribution on here

No problem, Al. I hear what you say with the multiples and it is generally the preferred approach. The cover is a recovery position. Essentially it happens once you receive, you almost don't choose it but through good time management (and solution opportunity our mutual friend Richard Barnes might say) we utilize it once we are there. I guess it is comparable with grappling. We only grapple when we have to. The same goes for the cover.

I am also very careful what I teach. If you have read any of my mumblings in my diary entries you will see that everything is continually tested - even supposed givens in our little community like pre-emptive striking. We have a high percentage technique warm-up, but even these are supposed to be considered concepts and suggestions as opposed to set in stone. As you know, I don't have a single technique in my syllabus for several reasons. However, the cover stands up to the test time and again, but it is far from infallible as my article points out and I do feel it has been over-used a lot these days.