The Hazards of Mongrel “Systems” by Mark Hatmaker

 

Let’s illuminate our target for today’s essay in martial musings—by “Mongrel” System, I mean any fighting art that claims to be an amalgamation of the “best” of other systems creating a streamlined hybrid that is, in essence, superior to the wholes they were borrowed from.

Well known amalgamations such as jeet kune do and kajukenbo come to mind, but there are myriad professed “Best of’s” floating around in the combative universe.

Before we go any further, let me be absolutely clear—our discussion today is not targeting any “Mongrel” System in particular, or casting aspersions on the concept of wise amalgamations. Not at all.

Many “Best of” systems are indeed just that, very wise blends of desired elements that fit the carte blanche menu of the intended combatant at hand.

What we are addressing is the “choosing” of the elements. In other words, we must examine not just the elements that made the cut but go deeper and analyze the Chooser of the prime-cuts and any possible bias or potential deficits [i.e., blind spots] in the chooser’s eye.

Let’s leave the realm of individual combat arts and sciences for a moment and look  to combat writ large to make our point clear.

Me and You Choose “The Best” Way to Plan the D-Day Invasion

Let us pretend that you and I are asked to join the planning staff of this massive endeavor.

If we were entrusted to make the plans for such an invasion and tasked to analyze “Best of” elements that would go to maximizing our chances for success in storming Fortress Europe, we might assemble a list that looks like this…

·        Assess needed troop numbers for deployment.

·        Choose beaches and airdrops for maximal strategic advantage of said deployment.

·        Create a training template for each landing element that accurately realizes the environment and resistance they might expect to face and surmount.

·        Assign the precise armament for the precise micro-environment.

So far our “Best of” list is off to a rousing start.

Feel free to add your own “Best of” items to the list before you continue reading.

Finish your list?

Good.

Let us continue.

Did your list also include…

·        Weather reports for each of the planned landing and drop zones that must serendipitously coincide for air, land, and sea weather?

·        Did you factor in tidal charts and timing that ensure landing craft are not left high and dry or at the opposite end a spring tide so high that landing craft cannot make land leaving heavily weighted soldiers to drown in the struggle to make their watery way to the beaches?

·        Did you factor crosswinds, headwinds, tailwinds and visibility for drop zones to better coincide support and timing for the airdropped troops?

·        Did you examine carefully for inland terrain, so that we do not drop weighted soldiers into thick bramble, harsh mires, baldly open ground that will impede movement, eat energy and resolve, or offer too much exposure?

·        Did you consult the geologists’ reports that tell you this beach and its strand of silt will ensure that tanks and all landing vehicles become hopelessly mired, and rather find where the more solid ground for tire and tread lies?

Our “Best of” for the invasion could continue but, I ask, honestly, how many of these seemingly non-combat elements that are of paramount combat importance did you factor in?

·        I ask also, did you foresightfully employ resistance members well before the invasion and pore over the intelligence reports from these resources to find out who was successful and who was not in their endeavors? Such information is of utmost importance in choosing targets and force assignments.

To illuminate the point, I offer…

“A quarter of an ounce of sugar—just three lumps—dropped into the water of a concrete mixer, was enough to rob two hundredweights of concrete of its strength, for if calcium combines with sugar, instead of with carbon dioxide, a readily soluble calcium saccharate is formed. Thus, if a member of the French Resistance succeeded in getting himself employed by the Germans near a concrete mixer, he could cause extensive damage to the defenses by dropping quite small quantities of sugar into the mix or into the stored materials. The concrete shield of a gun-emplacement or the roof slab of a dug-out might be sufficiently weakened to crumble like sandstone if hit by a shell.”—Paul Carell, Invasion: They’re Coming [1963]

·        Resources and fire directed to these “known” weaknesses allows one to deploy resources accordingly.

The “Best of” list for Invasion preparation could go on and on. As we get deeper into “Best of” choices we begin to see how much the sexy visible facts of “Cool armament” and board game troop movement is actually bolstered just as much by myriad unsexy behind the scenes science and wisdom.

To Individual Combat

The Chooser of “Bests” reveals the expertise of the chooser. In our prior scenario, the Officer who proffered the opening bare minimum list would be drummed out of the Planning Commission, asap. Surface expertise is worse than no expertise in matters of violence.

The same may well hold true in the smaller sphere of individual combat.

Surface choosing of the “Best” will often fall prey to the extraordinarity bias, that is, park on the big event and elevate its importance while devaluing more common but perhaps more essential elements.

For example, in grappling was it the rear naked choke that finished the bout that excites our eye and becomes paramount in our new “Best of” system?

Or, was it the scrupulous bi-secting ride/scramble with “invisible” knee-checking that permitted the rear-naked choke to occur in the first place?

The Competence of our Chooser dictates our “Best.”

For a striking example, was it the highlight reel worthy lead hook that dropped the opponent in the third round that deserves our “Best of” attention or was it the off-the-rails foot positioning that consistently stole power from the opponent and set the stage for that lead hand?

The Competence of our Chooser dictates our “Best.”

In a weaponed example, was it the bad-ass battle-axe with the heavy head that finally did in the opponent, or was it proper “facing” of each swing that minimized wrist deflection and would have led to the same outcome if the axe-wielder had been using the display-worthy battle-axe or a cheap single-bit picked up at Home Depot?

I repeat, The Competence of our Chooser dictates our “Best.”

I repeat, “Best of” systems are likely the utmost in wisdom as they hack away the unessential and emphasize the essentials. The struggle is the intellect that selects the purported wheat and chaff.

Unfortunately, until we possess our own expert eye, it can be hard to tell what is solid concrete and what is soluble sugar.

The Black Box/Unleaded Training Warehouse

The Rough ‘n’ Tumble Raconteur Podcast