Concentration or Awareness

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Thu Mar 02, 2000 10:30 pm

I have a few comments to add here.

First of all, I have some respect for several of the authors Van quoted. Bruce Siddle in fact is someone I know personally. But the problem with sources like Siddle is that they are high on anecdotal content (very important) and not very rich in knowledge gained from carefully controlled studies or wisdom applied from proper background in physiology. So often then we are left with examples of what could go wrong, but are missing valuable information necessary to know how often, how much, and what level of control there is.

Anecdotal data from folks like Siddle are very important. There are no human investigation committees I know of that would allow researchers to put humans under the kind of stress that we are talking about here. Often one must take a number of both controlled studies and anecdotes to paint a picture of what really is going on. In the end we are all dependent on each other.

The following is a quote from Medical Physiology, 14th edition, edited by Mountcastle. It drives the point that I was trying to make that individuals can control autonomic function to some degree. <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Evidence that the cerebral cortex is involved in the control of automomic nervous system function has been accumulating for well over 100 years. Much information has been provided by observation of the effects of injury or ablation and by experiments utilizing electrical stimulation techniques. It is claimed also that a considerable degree of voluntary control over cardiovascular activities can be established by operant conditioning (Brenner, 1974).

Why is this important?? Well first of all, it is very valuable having experts like Van here to articulate the challenges facing the martial artist who encounters genuine deadly force. The tendencies are undeniable. But...the hope and vision for the martial artist is that there is a method or series of methods whereby the trained martial artist can manage or circumvent known challenges. If we understand these challenges, methods, and expected results, then we are ahead of those who merely perform rituals without knowledge of what they mean or how they are to be realized in practice.

- Bill

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Thu Mar 02, 2000 10:42 pm

Now....here is a practical question based on what has been discussed here by Van and myself.

In the past, there have been discussions about whether or not we should turn our heads first before turning in sanchin and other Uechi kata. There are purists out there who insist that one doesn't turn the head in sanchin. These discussions are often based on reasoning about the vulnerabilities created when moving the head out of the fixed, forward posture. Others like myself have offered that the cost/benefit is worth it. I even got into a discussion once with a "well known" martial artist about this, and offered that there were examples in nature (the Praying Mantis) where the fighting sanchin posture was present with considerable head turning and movement.

Now given what Van and I have discussed above, is there more light shed on the discussion? Think about it.

- Bill

Van Canna · Post by **Van Canna** » Thu Mar 02, 2000 11:45 pm

Interesting topic! We have discussed it at some length before!

Recall the “Auditory exclusion”? Nothing but a “tunnel vision” of the ears!

Siddle’s research suggests that as the brain has at least five direct perceptual senses which provide feedback about the environment, [sight, sound, smell, touch, and taste], the brain is in a constant state of switching from one or a combination of perceptual senses to provide feedback relevant to the moment.

The works of Easterbrook, Schmidt, Levitt, Gutin and others, are fascinating to study in relation to this scientific theory!

You wrote:

<blockquote> First of all, the depth of field goes down. This doesn't necessarily mean that you can't focus on the near</blockquote>

As you say, there is ongoing research on this fascinating subject! I am not familiar with all of it, but I tend to rely heavily on research which has been found to be extremely relevant in the modern view of professional lethal force instructors, such as Mas Ayoob LFI!

Focusing of the lens is a function of the parasympathetic nervous system. During sympathetic response, the eye cannot focus, thus one will see the front sight of a gun out of focus, which will result in a heightened state of stress! When a person is required to look at a near object [front sight], the pupils must constrict. This is an involuntary response to enhance the depth of focus. During sympathetic activation, the pupils dilate to allow the body to receive more light and information. Therefore trying to use the front sight of a gun during survival stress is counterproductive to the natural function of the eye. [Siddle]

I have agreed with you before that not all respond the same under debilitating stress, and my personal views on this are that it is more a question of genetics than training, although specialized training does help somewhat!

Can perceptual narrowing and the degradation of processing skills be prevented through training? Possibly, but we must keep in mind that perceptual narrowing is a result of high stress, and very, very difficult to overcome for the average and or highly trained policeman or martial artist!

As you know, confrontations occur in varying degrees of fear intensity.
The resulting sudden high anxiety can produce unusually immediate high heart rates, and anything above 145 BPM will engender a very pronounced perceptual narrowing!

Controlling the heart rate seems to be the key, but for most of us it will remain a very elusive concept!

------------------
Van Canna

Post by **gmattson** » Fri Mar 03, 2000 1:19 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Turning head before body:

I see no benefit in doing this. If we are turning into an action situation, delaying the body turn while the head 'checks' to see what is happening doesn't make sense. What good will it be for the eyes to see danger while the body is facing in the wrong direction.

Sanchin seems to teach us to move our body into the 'action', leading with a squared stance and prepared for whatever. . . For instance, when we begin the 180 degree turn, we pull the heel of the rear foot inward. Our body naturally follows this movement. When moving at a forward angle, the lead leg will naturally pull our body along in this direction.

Turning our head while leaving our body remained fixed in place is for me an uncomfortable and unnatural action.

There are a few other negatives involved with turning the head before the body, but I'll save those comment for others to make.

------------------
GEM

[This message has been edited by gmattson (edited March 03, 2000).]

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Fri Mar 03, 2000 1:43 pm

But aren't you presuming that you want to turn in the first place? What of just scanning the horizon first? My thought was that if the perceptual field is pathologically narrowed, that head turning would be necessary to view the entire horizon. This may or may not result in a turn, depending on whether or not any danger was detected from another direction.

You wrote <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Turning our head while leaving our body remained fixed in place is for me an uncomfortable and unnatural action.

Funny...I feel uncomfortable and unnatural locking my neck in place. Maybe it's my boxing experience.

Hopefully by the end of the day I'll get the name of the kata that has the distinct left and then right neck turning. Perhaps Evan will have some thoughts on it.

- Bill

student · Post by **student** » Fri Mar 03, 2000 2:57 pm

In re: turning head first

[QUOTE]Originally posted by gmattson:
I see no benefit in doing this. If we are turning into an action situation, delaying the body turn while the head 'checks' to see what is happening doesn't make sense. What good will it be for the eyes to see danger while the body is facing in the wrong direction.

[quote]

I feel very funny disagreeing with Mattson-Sensei, but with all respect I must. I believe there were some hidden postulates in his answer.

The problem, as I see it, is that at that time one does not know whence comes the attack. If it is coming from a direction other than where you face how can it help you not to be aware of it? Yet if there is an apparent danger in front of you and you feel a need to be sure that you're not being set up for the ambush from behind, how does it help you to turn your back to your known opponent?

The tunnel-perception (sight, sound, concentration) problem is one that we are tring to overcome, aren't we? Because of the automatic operation of the sympathetic (if it were really sympathetic, why won't it let me do what I want to?) nervous system we cannot expect our bodies/perceptions to operate as in Condition White or even Condition Yellow. Scanning, which means moving the head (either alone or with body) seems necessary to me. Whether to move the body or not at the same time seems a tactical decision which will change as the situation does.

The phrase I learned to hate and expect most in law school was: "It depends." Seems to fit here.

student

[This message has been edited by student (edited March 03, 2000).]

BILLY B · Post by **BILLY B** » Fri Mar 03, 2000 4:16 pm

Gentlepeople,
Good discussion here.

Some thoughts;

Scanning the horizon for a soldier carrying a rifle may be a good idea. As soon as he sees the enemy he can instinctivly engage them with his rifle. I was thinking this may not apply to close-quarters hand-to-hand fighting. Distance and weaponry are factors.
In hand-to-hand the guy is not a threat to you unless he can hit you. Tunnel vision seems to be a good thing.

Can you over-come the tunnel vision effect? The facts don't seem to be out yet. But even if you can, do you want to? Even if you are surrounded by multiple attackers you are going to have to "take them out" one at a time.(unless you plan to do jumping split kicks like Jackie Chan or something) Turn towards an attacker maybe take one step, then strike or kick hard. Usually you won't have to turn. Then again, I know that I usually turn my head in sparring if I find my opponent suddenly off to the side of my sanchin turrett. (as I am trained to lock onto his/her eyes.)

If we can figure out the facts here.... it would really help my training.

What do the Okinawan/Chinese masters say? What did the Samurai say? I was originaly trained to turn the head, then one day an American senior-senior-senior came to my dojo and said Kanmei had told him not to turn the head. The explaination I recently heard which makes the most sense to me was: keep the head aligned with the spine when turning. So as you start the turn with your back leg and your shoulders start to move your head stays with your shoulders throughout the turn.

Turning the head first to "see" seems like a tactical advantage only if you are inclined to back up or move out of the way of an attack. Easy to see why the different personalities are inclined to take different views. Mr. Canna does not seem to be someone who practices much yielding. I see the benefit of yielding sometimes, and in fact practice it in class a lot. It can really suprise people when you absorb and redirect their force. However, in a highly charged do-or-die situation(where you are facing a "real" attacker hell-bent on hurting you) it seems the straight-in simple attack would work best.

SEAN C · Post by **SEAN C** » Fri Mar 03, 2000 8:01 pm

All,

Re the head turning controversy; might as well add some more fuel to the fire! My girlfriend is dance teacher. She explained to me that the first thing a student must internalize in order to do spinning movements is to focus on a point with the eyes while turning the body. It's called spotting. When you watch ballet dancers or figure skaters you can see how they keep their head pointed one way while spinning, and then quickly whip it around to the same spot again. It's not just the position of the head, but the focussing of the eyes on a point in space, which acts as an anchor to maintain balance. I'm not sure how or if this would apply to the discussion.

------------------
sean

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Fri Mar 03, 2000 8:15 pm

Maybe...maybe not. The technique gives a visual reference for the person and allows the vestibular system some degree of stability inbetween spins. Another interesting and similar phenomenon is watching a bird that has landed on a branch or power line that is moving up and down. The bird will tend to hold its head at the same point in space while letting the body go up and down with the perch.

Is it related? I don't know. It does suggest that dancers and birds are willing to let the eyes and vestibular system do something independent from their body.

- Bill

[This message has been edited by Bill Glasheen (edited March 03, 2000).]

Post by **gmattson** » Fri Mar 03, 2000 8:53 pm

body and head turning together does not mean, to me, that the head/neck is rigid.

In the kata, when we change direction, all emphasis shifts to the new direction. I would submit that moving the head to the point of seeing what you are facing before moving the body is not the most efficient, fastest or smartest way to confront the enemy.

At no time is my head or neck or body locked into a rigid posture. . . even while doing Sanchin.

I find that my head is able to move a little faster than my body and in fact my eyes are on target before my body finishes its move.

I don't think Bill or anyone else turns his head completely, then follows with a body move.

------------------
GEM

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Sat Mar 04, 2000 5:00 am

Van

I keep reading this again and again <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Focusing of the lens is a function of the parasympathetic nervous system. During sympathetic response, the eye cannot focus, thus one will see the front sight of a gun out of focus, which will result in a heightened state of stress! When a person is required to look at a near object (front sight), the pupils must constrict. This is an involuntary response to enhance the depth of focus. During sympathetic activation, the pupils dilate to allow the body to receive more light and information. Therefore trying to use the front sight of a gun during survival stress is counterproductive to the natural function of the eye. (Siddle)

This doesn't make phisiologic sense to me from several standpoints. With all due respect, Bruce has got it all screwed up. He should have had a physiologist review his manuscript before letting this one out.

* The degree of pupil constriction and dilation is involuntary, and controlled by a number of functions. This changes the depth of field, but it does not change the ability to focus. A photographer (anyone out there) would know exactly what I mean by that.

* The ability to focus is a voluntary function - period. It is controlled not by the shape of the iris, but by the constriction or lack thereof of the lens. One focuses separate from the function of changing the depth of field. This is the exact same thing you do with a camera lens. Unfortunately most people who use point-and-shoot and autofocus/programmable cameras never learn these details. I spent years with a fully manual camera (Nikon FM). I know what I'm talking about here.

This is a subtle argument, the differences I'm suggesting. But it is an important one. Yes....sympathetic response will give you "belladonna eyes", which will dramatically drop your depth of field. But you can still choose to focus short vs. far field. Yes....if you are trying to shoot someone, a stressed person will either have the sight or the target in focus. But (s)he can still make the choice!! I have done shooting in late evening before. You can reproduce the situation somewhat with that.

Now as for the head turning.... Two comments. This is a case where I believe you either have to bow to what Van says and admit you can't control your visual range (THIS I can believe, as distribution of retinal blood flow is not a voluntary function), or you convince yourself and train to be able to be aware of all that is around you without turning the head. One assumption that so many people make here is that it's always a one-on-one encounter. Most of my rather sticky situations in live have involved multiple opponents. While I may or may not have used my actual vision to account for where everyone was, I surely wouldn't initiate an attack without assessing the situation. And I can turn my head a lot faster than I can move my mass.

I'm not saying there is a "right" answer here. I'm merely pointing out the sticky situation that Van suggests, and asking "So what now??" I presume we do something better than resign.

- Bill

Van Canna · Post by **Van Canna** » Sat Mar 04, 2000 6:35 am

Bill,

You bring up some good points, but there are divergent views! I am not sure which are correct!

According to Siddle, Sports optometrist Hal Breedlove states that the visual system in high stress will narrow the field of vision on the specific threat __ i.e., the knife or handgun wielded by the assailant__ [thus reports by combatants that the gun was a BIG GUN. … Clarence]!
Under high stress, the pupils will dilate to gather more information and depth perception is diminished. The axillary muscle is inhibited which results in the inability to focus.

In the context of lethal confrontations with weapons, Siddle writes that large portions of the sympathetic alarm response become stimulated simultaneously, a phenomenon called mass discharge, which is automatic and virtually uncontrollable.

“ In situations where time is short, the brain will demand more information and pull the head square to obtain binocular vision. This gives the brain more information for target selection and reduces response time. PART OF THE REASON THIS OCCURS IS BECAUSE THE EYES CANNOT FOCUS DURING SURVIVAL STRESS. “ __Siddle__

Siddle’s papers [1998] reflect that “ Cannon studies [1915] found that SNS excitement triggers pupil dilation leading to loss of near vision. The SNS also disrupts the ability to focus, a function controlled by the tension of the ciliary muscle. This muscle maintains the convex shape of the lens which is necessary for clarity and focus.

But when the SNS is activated, the ciliary muscle relaxes and the contour of the lenses changes from a convex to a flattened state. This results in a loss of depth perception and the ability to focus on close objects. Therefore, the ability to focus on the front sight of a handgun is not possible when the SNS is activated.”

“ Siddle research validated what Fairbairn [Kill or be killed] learned the hard way in the hundreds of gun fights he and his officers were in!”

Siddle’s research also discusses a 1997 study conducted by Bill Burroughs an instructor at the Smith and Wesson Academy, and the former assistant director of Sigarms training Academy.

The study involved 157 police officers in 188 life-threatening scenarios.
Most of the participants were so shocked by the suddenness of the events that they focused on the threat and not their weapon.

------------------
Van Canna

paul giella · Post by **paul giella** » Sat Mar 04, 2000 12:24 pm

I must vote with Sensei Canna on this issue. The natural hard-wired instinctual reactions take place under extreme duress. These are the mind-body reactions that have their origins deep in the midbrain (the limbic system, the amygdala) and are really not accessible to retraining by conscious methods. The training we do in the dojo does not carry the real threat that a true street confrontation does, hence no primitive psychophysiological response. Much better to train to go with the body (meaning the entire mind/body)natural response, which does involve the narrowing of focus and reversion to basic, overlearned, gross-muscle movements.

Van Canna · Post by **Van Canna** » Sun Mar 05, 2000 12:29 am

<blockquote>Now as for the head turning</blockquote>

Another interesting concept.

Again I have a tendency to put my money on the research and experience of lethal force professional trainers.

In my “stressfire” combat study with such luminaries as Mas Ayoob and John Farnam, the concepts of head turning and “ Traversing” were forcefully brought home under realistically simulated survival “gun play” [like one mistake and you are dead, as in forever]!

We covered material such as stressfire point index, traversing upon sensing danger, the stressfire “star”, and pivot strikes!

When you are on the pistol range and you watch a “combat trained” individual, you will notice that even though he may be shooting at stationary targets, just plinking__no stress__
He will always move his head from side to side, before putting his gun down or re-holstering!

We were taught by Mas and John to “slap” our face from side to side after engaging a target in “stressfire” drills to program “scanning” __ i.e., searching for elusive, flanking targets which might be rendered invisible by tunnel vision!

The initial armed exchange is “condition red” i.e., the armed opponent has been detected___“flushed” __and you are in the “kill zone” fighting for your life!

The “scanning” before and after the initial volley of the gunfight, is more akin to “condition orange” i.e., your sensory antennae are out “scoping” your “kill” perimeter!

Once your threat has been identified in the critical range, you are now into the “traversing mechanism”! The body pivots on its torso in “tank turret” fashion, the concept popularized in The USA by Frank McGee, the legendary master firearms instructor of NYPD.

As you “sense” the threat, the turret requires the gun locked into position along with your neck and chest so that as you pivot to face it, what your eyes see is now automatically covered by your sidearm! This is especially important in night confrontations!

Jim Cirillo, a true modern day gunfighter of NY police stakeout squad fame, is one of the finest combat instructors in the world.
He teaches the “geometric point concept”, the weapon is held parallel to the ground and perpendicular to the shooter’s body at the height where we wish the bullet to strike the opponent!

If the defender is surprised by the “oblique” he teaches the student to pivot from the hips pointing to the target with his nose and bringing the weapon along locked parallel to the ground and perpendicular to the nose!

So what do we make of it??

------------------
Van Canna

Van Canna · Post by **Van Canna** » Sun Mar 05, 2000 10:59 pm

I think we have addressed this before. It is of course correct to say that a lot of research has happened since 1915, and that there is evidence that the autonomic systems do receive conscious control.

The question is how reliable is that evidence in the context of lethal confrontations, the only equation that holds my interest here on this forum.

The police / swat teams/ elite forces professional trainers, are constantly in the process of evaluating the many variables of survival performance, as well as the gross disparity in execution between the classroom and the field.

As I have said before, I have much more confidence in the applied concepts of master police firearms combat instructors, than any 10th Dan from Okinawa, Japan, Korea or whatever / whomever, when it comes to the combat mindset survival psychology.

If we took a course from LFI. Thunder ranch, S&W Academy, it would become very clear why catastrophic failures occur in cognitive processing and motor performance in the real world of lethal confrontations as opposed to the make believe “ I come to you with empty hands” Bull S**t of martial arts “ trip my lights fantastic”!

As I have said before, martial arts are a great vehicle, but it only works best when mated with the engine of modern scientific methods of lethal confrontations concepts!

Lets not forget that the works of Mr. Siddle have been received enthusiastically by the State and Federal police organizations!

His research has been extensive and he has studied much more modern works than Cannon [1915] before coming to his conclusions which carry lots of common sense, and have been validated by countless law enforcement agencies!

Another study works some of the disbelievers should peruse is: Whitesell, P., [1989] <blockquote>The psychology of intimidation and the physical conflict in the police profession</blockquote>

Lets face it, most of us, in spite of golden stripes on our extra long black belts awarded by an “August board”,
Are still a bunch of rank amateurs in the realm of “ for keeps” confrontations! And at times our denial is exceeded only by our arrogance!

------------------
Van Canna