Strategic Engagement of Force: A Field Guide for the use of Martial Arts Strategy and Tactics

By Scott Gehring

Strategic Engagement of Force is a compendium of martial arts strategy and tactics. Packed with content and abound with illustrations, it provides a timeless road map on thinking, acting, and executing with meaning, rather than applying raw force and the

• Language: English
• Publisher: AnewPress
• Release date: Aug 9, 2021
• ISBN: 9781970109405

Scott Gehring

Scott Gehring is a modern-day enlightenment warrior who delights in adventure, free-spiritedness, creativity, tinkering, travel, and an insatiable love for constructive conflict. An acclaimed expert in multiple art styles, Scott, for over 35 years, has passionately pursued understanding, performance, health, discipline, truth, morality, and the purity of combat.

Book preview

ISBN 978-1-9701-0939-9

eISBN 978-1-9701-0940-5

Copyright © 2021 by Scott Gehring

All rights reserved, including the right of reproduction in any form, or by any mechanical or electronic means including photocopying or recording, or by any information storage or retrieval system, in whole or in part in any form, and in any case not without the written permission of the author and publisher.

This is a work of fiction. Names, characters, places, and incidents either are the product of the author’s imagination or are used fictitiously. Any resemblance to actual events or locales or persons, living or dead, is entirely coincidental.

Published July 2021

DEDICATION

To my lovely wife Michele, who has been extremely supportive of my 35–year martial arts journey. To my two kids Alex and Graham. To my three most significant influences in martial arts – Larry Tatum, for inspiring me to get started. To Paul Vunak for providing me a bridge for a deeper understanding of the true nature of combat. To Joe Lewis for teaching me the strategic mindset.

Contents

Chapter 1 – Introduction

Chapter 2 – The 4th Layer

The Getty Five

John Boyd’s Snowmobile

The Multi-Doctrine Approach

A Snowmobile Ride

The OODA loop

Lost in the Loop

Strategy, Plans, and Tactics

On-the-Spot Plan

Preprogrammed Plan

Emphasis on Planning

The Hierarchy of Decisiveness

The Decisive Six

Scaffoldings of Motion

Chapter 3 – Force

The Time and Distance Theater

The Actors

The Initiation Actor

The Receiving Actor

The Opposing Actor

The Staged Event

Combative Energy: The Basis for Everything

Kinetic versus Potential Energy

Energy and its Relation to Force

The Two Combative States

Energy Gain versus Loss

Biomechanical Energy

Force and the DNA of Combat

Force Mechanics

Firepower

Movement

Communication

The Physical versus Holistic Force Matrix

Attributes and Performance

Expressions of Force

Technique

Motion and Force

Multi-actor: A Force Multiplier

The Seven Bases

The Two Forms: Offense versus Defense

Pure Offense against Pure Offense

Pure Defense against Pure Defense

Offense against Defense

Unification of Defense and Offense

Position – The Force Initiator

The Five Components of Position

Positional Recognition

Impact of Position on Set Points and Transitions

The Space Around us

Depth as a Strategic Priority

Height and Width

Depth’s Zenith

Alignment of Opposing Forces

Positioning across Dimensions

A Playing Field of Lines and Zones

Line Theories

Zones

Centerline versus Center path

Fields of Engagement

A Field with no Lines

Zones versus Range versus Fields

Fields are Multi-Dimensional

Accordial Fields of Engagement

Lateral Fields of Engagement

Putting Accordial and Lateral Fields Together

Vertical Fields of Engagement

Range: What Scale do you Use?

Bruce’s Four Ranges

Ed‘s Four Ranges

Ed and Bruce – The Best of Both

Weapon Ranges

Ground Ranges

Ranges of Firepower versus Ranges of Movement

A Different Way

The Nine Gates

Multi-actor and Range Distortion

Impact of Projectiles

Recap: Zones versus Range

Pivot Point Angulations

What are Pivot Points?

The Five Pivot Point Theory of Self-defense

Primary Pivot Points and Firepower

The Frame

Frame Angulation

Position of the Frame and Fields

Secondary Pivot Point Angulations

Positional Shells

What about Time?

Chapter 4 – Engagement

The RAT

The Three Phases of the RAT

Time as the 4th Dimension of Combat

Bruce Time

The Curve of Attack

The Accordion of Motion: Penetration versus Clearing

Movement across Time

Accordial Fields applied to Four-dimensional Combat

Alternate Curve of Attack

Accordial Fields unified with Range

A Four-Dimensional Centerline

Position and Timing

Beats

Tempo

Rhythm

Harmony

Flow

Einsteinian Corrections on Newtonian Thinking

The Motion Amendment

4D Position

Phases of Engagement

The Staged Event and the Force Engagement

Ownership of Phases

The Emphasis between Sport and Street

Vectors

The Vectors of Attack

Accordial Fields, Phases, and Vectors

Emotional Intensity Relating to Vectors

The Circular Lifecycle

The Attack Start and End

All or Nothing?

The FAVOR Matrix

Tactics Within the Staged Event

The Three Tactical Approaches

Engagement Phase 1 – The Approach

Vector Zero – Positioning

Vector One – Entry

Engagement Phase Two – The Delivery

Vector Two – Pressure

Vector Three – Objective

Engagement Phase Three – The Close

Vector Four – Clearing

Back to Vector Zero – Positioning Again

The Prologue and Epilogue

The Prologue

The Epilogue

The Force Engagement Genome

The Eight Tactical Paths of Action

The Complete Genome

The RAT +

Vector Sequence Variations

Preprogrammed Game Plans

The RAT+ – A Sparring Plan

The Fence – A Quickdraw Plan

H2C – An Assault Plan

Defang the Snake as an Objective

Chapter 5 – Strategic

The Heart and Soul of Strategy

The S.E.F. Trinity

The Complete Three-Legged Stool

The Objects of Neutralization

The Person

The Place

The Thing

Summary of Neutralization Objects

The Reporter Questions

The Swanky Nightclub Bouncer

The OAD Triangle

Fast Transients

Quantum Uncertainty

The Meatball – OAD Redux

OODA + OAD

Advantage

Strong

Neutral

Vulnerable

Ambiguous

Disadvantage

Desperation

Deception

The Six Deceptions

Circles Versus Lines

The Awareness Deception Duality

The Strategic Playbook

The 6 x 6 Approach to Strategy

The 36 Stratagems

The Table of Plays

Chapter 6 – Parting Thoughts

Martial Arts and the Internet

The Physical versus Mental

The Progression

People, not Styles

Appendix 1 – The TD-theater and the Second Law of Motion

Appendix 2 – The Three Behavioral Constructs of Force Expanded

Table of Figures

Reference Material

Index

About the Author

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

I believe in the discipline of mastering the best that other people have ever figured out. I don’t believe in just sitting down and trying to dream it all up yourself. Nobody’s that smart.

~ Charlie Munger

Last night I wrote again. Deep into the night with little sleep, the burning desire to capture these ideas was insatiable. The ideas are not mine. They flow through me like an electrical current, I am purely a human conduit. A conduit the universe chose, for some inexplicable reason, to transcribe these thoughts. So, I am dutifully surrendering to the energy of the universe, and I write.

The theories developed in this book are wholly the work of thousands, maybe millions, of people that have come before us and contributed to the world of combat. Some famous, some unknown. Many of the most lethal persons that have ever lived have died in anonymity. Thus indirectly, we have inherited their contributions to what today is the modern martial arts. This writing is designed to aid in understanding the toil of these extraordinary individuals as it pertains to the realm of conflict strategy. This work is a collection and progression of ideas. If something in this book I have written strikes you as novel, I assure you, it is not. Someone in the hundreds of thousands of years of collective human thinking has thought of it before somewhere along the way. I simply took the time to write it down and express it, albeit, maybe, in a unique manner.

Hand-to-hand combat has been around since the human species has walked the earth. Thousands of generations, and millions of people before us, have already figured out what combat practices are useful and what are less efficient; this work has been done. Unless people suddenly evolve by sprouting another head and neck, or a third arm springs forth from our chest, biomechanically, we have been the same for hundreds and thousands of years. There is no new technique; there is no new way of applying force to the body.

While biologically, people are still by in large the same creatures as thousands of years ago, what has evolved is information flow. So, while there is no new technique, by way of information sharing and data explosion, there has been the rediscovery of ancient methods of doing things that may have been lost or forgotten. In addition, there has been a progression in the manner these ideas are communicated, organized, and learned.

This book provides a road map on a traditionally convoluted and incomplete topic: the strategic engagement of force. This work is not a volume on martial arts techniques. You will not find a single self-defense technique in this manuscript unless used to exemplify a strategic use case. This book is a field guide for strategic force engagements, not a tome for herd mentality topics, such as ground versus standup, trendy versus traditional fight styles, gi or no gi, or systems with fancy patches. This book is a clinical road map on fighting with a plan, regardless of style, system, or trend; this is a book on martial arts strategy.

While modern martial arts have reached maturity in the way of technique development, this does not mean the arts are not still evolving. Like the English language, while all the nouns, verbs, and adjectives have been identified and defined, new ideas are still expressed in the way sentences are written. Also, we see the destruction of many of the older forms of communicating condensed into shorthand, quicker, expedient methods. Case in point: text messaging. This evolution is no different in martial arts. Will there ever be some martial art emoji technique? Every act of destruction becomes an act of creation, and through this evolution, what will we see? The answer as it pertains to the martial arts is consolidation.

To illustrate how mature systems consolidate, we need to look to other fields and use the past as a guideline. The history of how ideas grow and mature repeats itself, regardless of the field. Let’s wind back the clock to the field of Physics circa Scotland 1860. With Newtonian physics in place and widely adapted for two centuries, the force of magnetism and electricity were considered at the time entirely different physical phenomena. In comes James Clerk Maxwell (1831–1879). James Maxwell is deemed by many one of the greatest scientists who have ever lived. He is rightly acclaimed as the father of modern physics and has made fundamental contributions to mathematics, astronomy, and engineering. To him, we owe one of the most significant discoveries of the modern age – the theory of electromagnetism. His equations published in 1861–1862 proved that electrical and magnetic forces were the same force – they were just different sides of the same coin. James Maxwell combined the two forces into what is now consider electromagnetic theory. He consolidated two forces into one. This idea of consolidation within sophisticated systems is no different in martial arts. With maturity comes the advantage of established and repeatable patterns. Recognition of patterns creates efficiency gains in how complex systems evolve. This progression of efficiency is the natural way. This natural way applies to martial arts today. Many systems rebrand, replace, and espouse ideas that at the core are the same. People get lost and distracted in vernacular, politics, and ego. This book seeks to help consolidate the martial arts’ most exceptional strategic concepts into a unified trainable model. One that helps crystalize the ideas, thoughts, and contradictions of those that have come before us – not focused on branding, politics, and system promotion, only the true nature of reality.

There are many great works of combat strategy, but three of the most influential individuals arguably are Sun Tzu, Carl von Clausewitz, and Colonel John Boyd. The work of these three men was conducted at different times throughout history, in different eras, and in different cultures. Sun Tzu lived an estimated 722–481 BC in China, von Clausewitz 1780–1831 in Prussia, and Boyd 1927–1997 in the United States. Sun Tzu and von Clausewitz were not even aware of each other’s work (Boyd had the distinct advantage of coming last and living in the information age, thus having access to the work of both prior men). Translation of Sun Tzu’s famous Art of War did not occur until 1905, well after von Clausewitz’s death. Between the three men’s works, this gives one a baseline for modern-day combat theory and strategy.

Information evolves like a pyramid. The foundational blocks create the base. From there, blocks are further stacked, layer after layer, forming the shape of a triangle. It is no different from the flow of information and ideas. Men such as Sun Tzu, von Clausewitz, and John Boyd helped formulate the base of strategic thinking in general. These are the tier-one thinkers. Specifically, to the field of martial arts, people such as Bruce Lee, Ed Parker, Joe Lewis (to name a select few of the Western thinkers, there is a myriad of others) have layered blocks upon the base of strategic principles in a specific domain of combat, e.g., martial arts. These gentlemen are our tier-two thinkers. The men from tier-one and tier-two have helped shape the pyramid of information that we stand on today in modern martial arts.

In addition to world-class military and martial arts thinkers, the greatest scientists’ ideas can also be used to help how we study combat strategy. These men have been interlaced into our pyramid as well. This book aims to build the pyramid one step higher than it was – to focus on the tip of the triangle. The martial arts pyramid has been around for many thousands of years; its base is enormous. Thus, the pyramid that exists is high.

The first goal is to baseline a standard set of ideas to help articulate the strategies and tactics of hand-to-hand combat. I am not married to a single style of martial arts. I am poaching strategic elements and ideas found in almost all the major martial arts systems to provide a clear, concise, and standardized framework so that in the subsequent chapters, we are all sharing a standard set of language and principles. The goal is to paint the clearest, the most accurate, and most logically sound picture possible based on the best information available. My ambition is not to dwell on the differences that the martial art systems share, but the commonalities. It is through the commonalities where the truth will be discovered.

Modern martial arts today are comprised of five primary layers illustrated by the following diagram:

Figure 1 – The five general layers of modern martial arts

These five areas are like the progressive strata layers of a rock formation. When one starts in the martial arts, it usually begins with learning how to kick, punch, lock, throw, choke, so forth. The basic tools. The fundamental understanding and application of force. Subsequently, this is the first area we call basics. Basics are the 1st layer of the strata. Basics are the core of all fighting: standup, ground, weapons, and empty hands. A good understanding of basics is the cornerstone of any good martial arts program. As represented in the diagram, martial arts is a layered effect; if an individual has weak basics, it is no different from an apple with a rotten core.

As people get more competent at their basics, they start to hone these fundamentals with increased attribute development and technical refinement. It is the development of attributes and techniques that compose the 2nd layer. Attributes are what make the basics work. These are the athletic qualities of speed, power, coordination, and timing that allow the tools to perform and have meaning. Techniques, on the other hand, refine, smooth, and polish the basics. They teach targeting, angulation, position changing, proper sequencing, and efficiency of motion. Basics act as the hub that harmonize attributes and techniques. Each is reliant and build upon each other. It is not a linear progression; instead, all three work together.

The 3rd layer is that of sparring and functionalization. This is the actual free-form application of basics, techniques, and attributes. Sparring and functionalization allow the fighters to express themselves, to find out what works for them in each scenario. The term sparring can mean many different things to different people. Some focus on the sport aspect of martial arts. Sport may mean one-on-one in the ring. A duel, if you will. UFC. Others focus on reality combat in the street; this may mean contact response training, mass attacks, or escape to gain safety, digging your way out of potentially harmful situations, and concepts of breaking the freeze. Regardless of the exact semantics, all these examples fall into the bucket category of sparring and functionalization. Sparring and functionalization is the ultimate method of pressure testing what works and the functionality of your force expression without being in a real altercation. It is functionalization of techniques, attributes, and basics.

Once a fighter reaches the point of executing fundamentals and techniques with proper attributes, combative motion starts to feel natural, and it becomes functional. The movement patterns are a regular part of the person’s biomechanical wiring; it becomes no different than walking, breathing; it is just something that is performed without thinking. This point of natural and functional performance allows the martial artist’s progression to evolve into the world of tactics and strategy. The learning of tactics and strategy is the 4th layer. The practitioner evolves past the physical game into the mental game. Chess rather than checkers. Rather than just exchanging blows mindlessly with opponents, one starts to put together meaningful game plans to help reduce damage and maximize the fighter’s force engagements’ effectiveness. To not just fight, but to fight smart and injure to degree. The paradigm is the mental game; this is the chess player.

The final stage, and 5th layer, is the emotional and spiritual plane. The final stage evolves once the physical and mental have been unified. This stage deals with morality, value systems, the management of fear, rage, and learning to come face to face with these emotions. The 5th layer is also about giving back, working on violence prevention, participating in local communities, evolving beyond yourself, and empowering people not to be victims. How to become so combat-capable that there is no longer the need to fight, to the point where it gets downright dull and inconvenient.

Of these five areas, the first three are the centrifuge of most martial art study: basics, attributes and techniques, and sparring and functionalization. 90% of what most people do in martial arts is a combination of these three layers. Some systems put more weighted emphasis on one versus the other. Nevertheless, people rarely deviate or progress beyond these three strata, and there are thousands of different training methods and styles built around them. Methods and styles are not what the focus is here.

This book is not for you if you are interested in fundamentals, technique, attribute training, and sparring drills. The focus here is on the 4th layer of Figure 1: strategy and tactics. How to strategically exert force using cunning and calculation. I seek to solve the dearth of information on this topic. Strategy and tactics are where most people who train martial arts spend the least amount of time. For individuals who are looking to expand their martial arts knowledge out of the world of the physical and into the mental, then this book is for you.

If this is a topic that interests you, please read on. If this is not a subject that interests you, feel free to use this book as kindling, toilet paper, or any other functional value you can think of. If you are looking for basics, techniques and attributes, I suggest you head out to the Internet. Short of working with an instructor, video is the best medium to learn basics and techniques. Books are the best way to convey tactics and strategies (there is no right way to learn to spar other than to do it).

As modern-day physics progressed from Newtonian to Einsteinian, to then Quantum, so has the martial arts information flow. We will layer the principle and concepts in this same sequence of evolution. By following this progression, it will help the principles and concepts become more accessible to the uninitiated.

Let us begin our journey together.

Chapter 2

THE 4TH LAYER

…you cannot kiss an idea, cannot touch it, or hold it... ideas do not bleed, they do not feel pain, they do not love... but 400 years later, an idea can still change the world.

~ V for Vendetta

The essence of all martial arts training comes down to the strategic engagement of force. Strategic engagement of force does not bleed or feel pain. It’s an idea, one that is not to be confused with merely the raw engagement of force as with someone untrained or without martial arts experience. Any person can exert raw force, but not all people can deliberately exert force that applies strategy and tactics, one that systematically dismantles an enemy. It is the strategic engagement of force that gives modern martial arts the edge. Strategic engagement of force is known as the 4th layer. It is the 4th level of progression one goes through in martial arts training: Layer 1 is basics. Layer 2 is attributes and technique development. Layer 3 is sparring and functionalization. Layer 4 is the development of tactics and strategy.

To learn to punch, kick, take someone down, or apply a lock, means one is learning to use tools of force correctly; this is the first stage of learning the fighting arts, i.e., basics. Basics would be the equivalent of learning how to shoot a gun. However, just because one knows how to shoot a gun does not mean one knows how to coordinate an enfilade or defilade maneuver against an opponent’s position to achieve strategic victory. While they leverage the core skills of shooting a gun, an enfilade or defilade is a sophisticated compound attack that requires the use of strategy, tactics, and gunnery coming together as one. Put differently, gunnery’s fundamental practice teaches you to shoot; the practice of strategy and tactics teaches you how to defeat an adversary. This distinction cannot be overemphasized.

When applying strategic engagement of force in the martial arts, the grand overarching objective is quite simple – to neutralize. No matter whether the person is a mixed martial art fighter, a cop, a civilian walking to their car who has just been jumped, a Jiujitsu Blue Belt, or a Gung Fu master; if the martial art must be used, the formula is the same – the objective is to neutralize in some form or fashion using strategically exerted force. There can be different vehicles on how the neutralization is obtained, direct, indirect, political, environmental, distinctive goals, and sub-objectives, so forth. However, the overarching grand objective of neutralization is constant. When faced with an assailant, neutralization in an altercation can be as simple as screaming and running away, or it could be more sophisticated as a triple jab, front kick combination. Both examples have the capability of ending an altercation, and both can yield neutralization. The best stratagem to acquire the objective of neutralization is determined by the situation at hand.

Thus, based on the philosophical concept of neutralization, the definition of the S.E.F. (strategic engagement of force) principle is articulated as such:

S.E.F. Principle

The objective of neutralization by way of strategic engagement of force

The objective of neutralizing by way of strategic engagement of force will be referred to as the S.E.F. principle, or S.E.F. for short. This principle can be visually represented in the following diagram:

Figure 2 – The S.E.F. principle: the strategic engagement of force to neutralize

Put another way, to neutralize, there needs to be an element of strategy, an element of engagement, and an element of force. These three elements create a firm stool from which to sit. Remove one of these legs from the stool, and the seat becomes weak and wobbly.

Neutralization, as a general concept and an objective, is a decisive and clinical concept, devoid of emotion; it does not feel pain, bleed, or love. It gets the job done across a broad cross-section of combat scenarios that people are involved in. So, therefore, if neutralization is a standard, general overarching principle objective, then the question becomes: what does one neutralize, and how does one neutralize? What is the context of the neutralization? Consequently, to give the concept of neutralization perspective and practical meaning, a game of fill in the blanks on the following statement is required: neutralize ________ by way of _________.

Without the blanks filled in, the idea of neutralization is simply an abstract philosophical construct. We have a why, but we do not have a how or what. The blanks add color, meaning, and perspective to the grand objective. The blanks fill the cup with water and answer the how and what.

The objective of neutralization can have a different situational context for different people. To use an example, for a bouncer at the local pub, the neutralization objective may mean throwing the offending patron out of the bar onto the street. Once they have successfully removed the offending patron from the premises, their job is complete. Opponent neutralized. To a police officer, neutralization may be when the cuffs are slapped on a perpetrator’s wrists. For the military, neutralization may mean when the opposition ceases to exist on this planet. For a civilian involved in an attempted mugging on the corner of 3rd and 8th, neutralization may mean to hit the eyes and run, causing the attacker to flee. All these examples have a common thread: neutralization. While neutralization is a constant overarching philosophical objective, the flavor of neutralization can vary. No different than ice cream. Whether it is chocolate ice cream, strawberry ice cream, or Cherry Garcia ice cream, they are all still ice cream, no matter the flavor. There are three general objects of neutralization in the strategic engagement of force: persons, places, or things.

The development of the first three layers of martial arts: basics, technique, attribute development, sparring and functionalization, mostly fall into the S.E.F. leg of Force. Force is what is being executed, ergo what type of energy is used, and how it translates into an effective operational form in combat. The type of kick, the type of punch, the type of weapons implemented, the type of choke, so forth, and so on. How techniques are executed, the development of the supporting attributes of those techniques, the training methods, and the exercise of getting the skills to work for real are all examples of the S.E.F. stool’s force leg.

The 4th layer, tactics and strategy, move to the second and third leg of the S.E.F. stool. The Engagement leg is specifically focused on the tactical implementation of the first three layers. Tactics are how best to apply basics, techniques, attributes, ergo, how energy is put to work in the most proficient means, how efficiently it is applied, with what best practices and procedures. Based on the distance between our opponent and us, what is the most effective approach used at that precise moment in combat to maximize damage or control? Engagement is the sphere of tactical application.

The third and final leg of the S.E.F. stool is Strategy. A strategy is the guiding, overarching framework of the tactical force engagement. Strategy answers the basic principle reporter questions: who, what, how, why, where, when, and how much? To exert force without strategy is simply raw violence. A good strategy helps avoid the arbitrary bombardment of blows with an opponent, reduces the amount of force required to achieve an objective, and mitigates receiving damage.

The following chapters of this book systematically address each one of the S.E.F. legs in detail. Before delving into the details of how the three-legged stool of S.E.F. works, the focus will be put first on some key overriding principles and combat philosophies that apply directly to shaping strategic thinking. The story begins with the billionaire industrialist J. Paul Getty.

The Getty Five

Rather than comparing war to art, we could more accurately compare it to commerce, which is also a conflict of human interests and activities

~ Carl von Clausewitz

In the business world, ideas applicable in war, such as military strategy and tactics, are commonly applied to enhance business effectiveness. The ideas of Sun Tzu, von Clausewitz, Boyd, Jomini, and Napoleon, have been used and applied in a myriad of different ways in business, from sales to operations, to dealing with competitors, even in marketing. However, now and then, in rare cases, the inverse comes to be true – combat strategy can be evolved from business practices. After all, business practices are a form of engagement, and while the application is different, conflict is conflict. Business and combat are different facets of the same phenomena. The classic idea of war being for political aim, and the classic idea of business for financial gain. There is no better case of this inverse applicability than with the Getty Five.

The Getty Five is a fantastic tool to measure how people deal with adversity. I first stumbled across the idea in an eclectic book by Dr. Haha Lung called Mind Control. I cannot vouch for Haha Lung, a pen name, whose real identity is unknown at the time of this writing. Also, I cannot vouch for much of the book’s contents, other than this shining star of an idea called the Getty Five. This one concept had a significant, lasting impact on me in assessing how people deal with adversity and how this translates to meaningful application of tactics and strategy.

The Getty Five was formulated by J Paul Getty, owner and creator of Getty Oil. Around the year 1957, J Paul Getty became the richest man in the world. J Paul Getty’s wild success as a businessman did not rest solely on his business knowledge. However, he was indeed very business savvy. What gave J Paul Getty the edge was his uncanny ability to read people. Business, the best business, is all about people. J Paul Getty understood this deeply. Over time, in his professional dealings, he recognized five ways in which people handled conflict. They are summarized as such:

The Getty Five

1. The Helpless

2. The Cowardly

3. The Flailers

4. The Hole-pluggers

5. The True Leaders

Since martial arts is combat, which is a form of adversity, the Getty Five has remarkable application in this realm. The Getty Five creates a scale. This scale provides an excellent assessment tool to measure and grade how we, or our opponents, deal with situational adversity.

Let’s start with the dregs of the Getty scale, The Helpless. These are people who freeze and do nothing when faced with conflict or adversity. The Helpless will choke under pressure. They put no actions or words into play.

The next level of the scale is the Cowardly – those who run away or avoid, rather than confront or deal with adversity. The Cowardly are one step above the Helpless since they put something into action. Run away, live to fight another day, the old adage goes. Still, the way in which they have reacted is not optimal.

The Flailers are people who just thrash at random, hoping for the best. The Flailers are one step above the Cowardly, as they do attempt to get into the fight. This is the person who wings it. Lack of planning or preparation is a common theme. Many times, people in this category are successful by blind luck.

Climbing up the scale, we now get to the Hole-pluggers. These are people who are effectual but reactionary. These types of people, while possessing strong attributes, are always behind the curve. They often create their own issues due to cutting corners, tone-deafness, not being organized, lack of awareness, or a deficit in attention to detail.

Finally, the True Leaders. These are people with similar attributes as the Hole-pluggers but who can get ahead of issues before they happen. They recognize problems or adverse situations before they fully metastasize and nip them in the bud. They intercept problems rather than wait for them. The idea of interception is the basis for true leadership.

The higher end of the scale, Level five, the True Leaders, is the top of the hierarchy. The top of the hierarchy is where we want to strive to be, whereas trying to avoid the lower end of the spectrum, the Level one or Level two. People all fall to different and varying degrees along this spectrum in life. No one is ever an absolute five all the time. Even the most extraordinary individuals in all walks of life have off-moments or bad days. This scale does not just apply in fighting, but in how people deal with relationships, business, and any type of confrontation.

Bruce Lee, arguably one of the greatest martial artists of all time, named his martial art: Jeet Kune Do. Jeet Kune Do in English means Way of Interception. The idea of intercepting things before they happen, before they fully manifest themselves, is the top-level on the Getty Five scale. When strategic engagement of force is applied, interception is the highest order and should be strived for. Tim S Grover was the personal trainer for Michael Jordan and the mentor of many great basketball legends. In his book Relentless, one of the best books on killer instinct ever written, he talks about the difference between the attributes of someone good versus great versus entirely unstoppable. Tim Grover defines high-performance athletes as coolers, closers, and cleaners, the cleaner being the highest order of performance; the cleaner is unstoppable. Often, the crucial difference between the cleaner and the other types is the higher degree of interception capabilities one possesses; the ability to get ahead and control problems before they ever occur.

Interception is the highest order of combat and the pinnacle of dealing with adversity. The best martial artists are trying to work the high end of the Getty Five scale. A successful martial arts training program supports the interception mentality. It’s when interception is not achievable, do people fall to the next levels of the Getty Five, to the reactionary state of hole plugging, or less. Logically then, the game plan for strategic engagement of force should follow suit to support the interception mindset wherever possible. Thus, for the purposes of this writing, there will be an adjustment made to the Getty Five scale to be more applicable to martial arts combat and the Bruce Lee mindset of interception. Rather than true leaders, Level five of the Getty Five scale for the aims of S.E.F. will be coined interceptors.

True Leaders = Interceptors

Throughout this book, the Getty Five scale will be used as a beacon to measure the tactical and strategic engagement of force. The goal in combat is to elevate one to the higher end of the scale, Level four and five, while placing the opponent on the lower end of the scale, Level three, two, and one. Interception is the goal, and creating helplessness in the opponent as an outcome is supreme.

John Boyd’s Snowmobile

John Boyd is such a prolific figure in the world of combat theory that there is no discussion of modern-day battle strategy that is complete without mentioning him and his views. He is one of the greatest modern military strategists and has worked his way up to the ranks of Sun Tzu and von Clausewitz. The three together: Sun Tzu, von Clausewitz, and Boyd, are the trifecta of strategic military thinkers.

John Boyd was a fighter pilot during the Korean war. He used fighter jet and aerial combat maneuvers as a base to formulate many of his broader strategies on asymmetrical warfare later in life. In martial arts, training is often conducted with weapons to heighten the practitioners’ attribute development. Like that of baseball, a batter puts weight on their bat to foster a more effective swing. After many swings with the added weight, heightened attributes are developed. Finally, when the batter removes the additional weight burden from the bat, the swing naturally will exert faster velocities. Weapons training in martial arts can provide a similar benefit in the arena of speed. When someone gets used to the speed of a stick, punches in retrospect seem slow. Boyd used aircraft as a tool to similar accord to develop theories on fast transient decision making during periods of high-pressure combat. The amplified speed that aircraft provide gave him a unique and heightened perspective on military strategy. A view that many of his predecessors were not privy to.

Boyd deserves a whole volume to himself; however, I will touch briefly on his ideas that affect the strategic use of force in the martial arts for purposes of this discussion. Boyd’s first idea that pertains to the S.E.F. principle is the multi-doctrine approach and what Boyd called snowmobiling.

The Multi-Doctrine Approach

What is a doctrine? A doctrine is merely an idea or belief system adopted by a group as a fundamental truth. The group could be a government, an institution, an association, an agency, a church, a company, or even a martial arts system. Are doctrines good or bad? The best way to answer this question is to view doctrines as a baseball bat. Is a baseball bat good or bad? Neither. It is simply designed to provide a function. On the other hand, how the baseball bat is used can positively or negatively connotate. Hitting a home run is a positive, constructive use of the baseball bat. Bashing someone in the head is a negative, destructive use of the baseball bat. A doctrine is no different from a baseball bat: it can be used as a force for good or an instrument for destruction. In most cases, there is a big grey area between constructive or destructive outcomes, with mixed consequences, pros, and cons.

A good way of measuring the success of a doctrine is to measure its negative outcome. Why? Because in life, the negative form is stronger than the positive form. Nassim Nicholas Taleb, in his book Skin in the Game, illustrates the difference between the strength of The Golden Rule and that of The Silver Rule. The Golden Rule is treat others the way you want to be treated. The Silver Rule is do not treat others the way you would not like them to treat you. The Silver Rule deals in the negative and is more robust. Why? The negative is less prone to subjectivity, errors and is more genuine. It subscribes to the notion that it is not your business to decide what is best for others. This thought of the negative-is-stronger applies to energy, ideas, emotions, even buying decisions. An extreme positive outcome can be a broader, more subjective matter of debate. In contrast, an extreme negative outcome can be measured in terms of death, which is not superlative and is absolute.

So, let’s measure the negative outcome of a doctrine commonly known as Marxism. Marxism is named after its creator, the famous German philosopher Karl Marx. Marx put forth the idea of scientific socialism driven by economic equality and flattened social structures. Marxism was presented as an improvement over other forms of socialism, such as the kind employed by the French Revolution in generations prior. This improvement seemed logical since many heads were cut off during the Révolution Française. So, on the surface, Marxism seemed like a darn good idea. I mean, who does not like equality, especially without decapitation, right? Marxism seemed like such a good idea; in fact, the concepts were fully adopted by Russia and China on a mass scale as a political doctrine in the later 20th-century. The Marxism doctrine provided an alternative to the capitalistic approach dominating western Europe and North America at the time.

However, sadly, in Marxism’s mass scale adaption between China and Russia, this good idea killed an estimated 110¹ million people in a 50-year window. The death count is more than every war combined within the last 120 years. Thus, as it turns out, Marxism was a significantly destructive, measurably dangerous doctrine. No different than the head-smashing baseball bat.

At the time, Karl Marx’s breed of socialism seemed like a good idea to those implementing it. Many of the original architects of Marxism had a positive vision for a better world. A utopian earth where all people were equal and lived in harmony. However, while the Marxist theory looked good on paper, it was inherently rife with flaws. Most ideas are inherently rife with flaws, even the great ones. It’s just the measure of the degree of how imperfect. Ideas should never be accepted as binary right or wrong proposals; the good ones simply improve prior art.

Take Sir Issacs Newton’s theory of gravity, for example. This theory described the effects of gravity successfully for hundreds of years. Not perfectly, but successful enough to progress humanity forward, put men on the moon, launch satellites, and build fighter jets. It was adapted as a major doctrine of the scientific community. Then, along comes Albert Einstein, who provides an entirely altered perspective on the idea of gravity and overthrows Newton’s formulas with new, more accurate ones. He threw the scientific community topsy-turvy (disillusionment can be painful); the doctrine they had held onto for hundreds of years was just uprooted. A long story short, once the dust settled, naturally, Einstein’s ideas were embraced as the new doctrine. The question now becomes: how flawed is Einstein’s idea? Einstein’s theory of general relativity predicts gravity way more accurately than that of Newton. Still, it does not conform to quantum mechanics’ standard model, which is the most accurate predictive model known to man at the time of this writing. The two theories yield competing results. Therefore, prior improvement is still required.

Suppose all doctrines are based on ideas, and all ideas are inherently flawed. How do individuals protect themselves from the defective, negative aspects of doctrines while embracing the positive, successful aspects? Boyd’s answer was simple: adapt more than one doctrine. Adapt as many doctrines as you can. The more, the better. More doctrines broaden your perspective, give you more information to make informed decisions, and puts at your disposal the ability to compare, cross reference, and contrast, pros and cons of ideas. From a broadened base of information, you can start to cherry-pick the positive aspects of ideas, disregard the negative, and build something new. This process is what John Boyd called snowmobiling. Had the architects of Marxism taken the multi-doctrine approach and be willing to snowmobile, they may not have been blinded by the dangers of a single doctrine mindset. They may have fared a much better outcome, saving millions of lives in the process.

The implementation of Marxism exemplifies the perils of being blinded by a single doctrine. However, the same single doctrine mindset plagues most martial artists. There are so many different types of doctrines that people are exposed to in the martial arts world that it makes my head hurt. Some more negative, false, and counterproductive. Others more true, positive, and constructive. Yet, most doctrines are a mix of success and failure driven by the connotation of their implementation.

A Snowmobile Ride

The solution to prevent indoctrination is to apply the John Boyd snowmobile. Individualism is the ultimate anti-ideology. To frame the snowmobile solution, I will use one of Boyd’s examples: when you look at the US armed forces, the Army has a doctrine, the Navy has a doctrine, the Marines have a doctrine, and the Air Force has a doctrine. The question becomes, which one is correct? The answer is all of them, and none of them. Boyd’s solution was to understand as many doctrines as you can, deconstruct them, and reassemble what he called a snowmobile.

This snowmobiling described in John Boyd’s own words:

Imagine that you are in Florida riding in an outboard motorboat, maybe even towing water skiers. Imagine that you are riding a bicycle on a nice spring day. Imagine that you are a parent taking your son to a department store and that you notice he is fascinated by the toy tractors or tanks with rubber caterpillar treads. Now imagine that you pull the skies off, but you are still on the ski slope. Imagine also that you remove the outboard motor from the motorboat, and you are no longer in Florida. And from the bicycle, you remove the handle-bar and discard the rest of the bike. Finally, you take off the rubber treads from the toy tractor or tanks; this leaves only the following separate pieces: skis, outboard motor, handlebars, and rubber treads. What emerges when you pull all this together? SNOWMOBILE.²

The more doctrines one can absorb and understand, the more parts are at your disposal to choose from to make your snowmobile. Throughout this writing, the idea of snowmobiling is embraced to its fullest. Strategic Engagement of Force is a giant snowmobile, and you, as the reader, are along for the ride of your life. This book takes a multi-doctrine approach and uses the parts that fit the best to the strategic engagement of force paradigm pertaining to the martial arts. In the spirit of Bruce Lee, take what’s useful, disregard what is useless.

Boyd and Bruce must have been kindred spirits, as they describe the same creative phenomena in different ways.

The OODA loop

The OODA loop is one of John Boyd’s most famous and embraced ideas. The OODA loop has been adopted as a standard in strategic thinking applied to military, law enforcement, and even business.

Rapidly unfolding circumstances and quick transitions, what Boyd called fast transients, lie at the heart of the OODA loop theory. At its most basic level, the OODA loop is a concept that codifies the mental decision cycles that occur during combat. It is a popular misconception that the OODA loop centers on speed. While speed is a feature of the OODA loop, as Chet Richards points out in his book, Certain to Win, speed by itself generates momentum, which works against the OODA loop.

The OODA loop is codified into four parts, and the term OODA is an acronym for each part:

Observe + Orient + Decide + Act = OODA loop

The OODA loop tells us that mental processes act as a continuous loop between these four aspects of the brain. For people to deal with adversity, they first need to observe what is going on around them. Second, they need to orient themselves to their observations. Next, they need to decide what to do once they have oriented themselves. Finally, they need to put something into action based on their decision. Every time people are faced with adversity, this cycle occurs. It’s how effectively the mind can navigate through this process and put something into action that will measure the degree of decision-making success.

The following depiction is the original John Boyd OODA loop diagram.

Figure 3 – The OODA loop³

There is a direct correlation between the Getty Five measurement scale and the OODA loop. The OODA loop defines the process; the Getty Five defines the various outputs that manifest from the process. For example, the difference between Interceptors and Hole-pluggers is that the Interceptor’s loop is more highly developed, more heightened. The Interceptors can observe, orient, decide, and put something into action more effectively than the Hole-pluggers. A myriad of mental, perceptual, and physical attributes work together to create an optimal decision cycle outcome. Attributes and how they relate to the OODA process will be discussed at length throughout this book.

The OODA loop and the Getty Five ideas will be referred to repeatedly, as they are critical to the strategic mindset.

What is the strategic mindset? In the next sections, we will start to frame the difference between strategy, plans, and tactics.

Lost in the Loop

Decisions without actions are pointless. Actions without decisions are reckless.

~ John Boyd

The OODA loop is an overall decision cycle. However, there are a series of sub-loops that can manifest themselves within this process. When people are placed under moments of enormous, unexpected pressure, they can get stuck between the observation and orientation stage of the decision cycle, thus never being able to decide and act. In other words, they get gobsmacked.

In more technical terms, when a person gets stuck between the observation and orientation stages of the OODA loop, this translates to choking, freezing, or seizing up under pressure. This seizing under pressure maps back to the Getty Five scale as the category of the Helpless. The Helpless never make it through the full decision cycle; they get caught up somewhere between the observation and orient phases and cannot put something into action.

There are several types of OODA manifestations of the Getty Five Helpless. The first is the person who gets lost in the orient cycle and does not get out in time. Have you ever heard the term paralysis of analysis? Paralysis of analysis breeds helplessness. Therefore, it should be no surprise why some highly intelligent and intellectually book smart people can be such lousy decision-makers. The orient section of their brain is so saturated with data it takes a while to sift through the extensive amount of knowledge, hence clouding and slowing their decision making. Decision making, especially when faced with conflict under pressure, requires decisiveness, and most of the time, is imperfect.

Another type of OODA manifestation that breeds helplessness is when a person successfully exits the orient cycle. However, upon exit, due to rapidly unfolding events, things have changed, and the original observations are out of date. Thus, re-observation is required to perceive the new events – this causes the OODA process to restart, going through the whole process of re-observing and reorienting. As a result, the person is never able to put a game plan into action. They spend all their mental energy thrashing between the observe and orient cycles. The final output renders them completely frozen.

There is a third type of helplessness that is worth mentioning, non-related to the loop. This is the person who makes it through the decision cycle process in its entirety and chooses to do nothing – conscious inaction. Conscious inaction explains the phenomenon of the good German, the phrase used to describe the pre-World War II average, seemingly respectable German citizen, who did nothing to hurt Jews but also did nothing to help them. Their conscious inaction allowed the Nazi regime to proliferate unchecked.

Strategy, Plans, and Tactics

The concepts of strategy, plans, and tactics are different. Strategy in the martial arts, in its purest form, is a general theme that facilitates the implementation of a plan to hit our objective. At least at a philosophical level, the objective in S.E.F. is consistently the same: to neutralize. Therefore, an effective strategy is designed to help increase our advantage over an opposing actor while putting them at a disadvantage to make it easier to achieve our objective. In other words, a good strategy will increase and capitalize on our strengths while exploiting and taking advantage of an opponent’s weakness.

Many people get confused about the difference between tactics and strategy. The strategic level is the most politically and socially influenced. Therefore the ability to translate combat victories requires alignment with the political and the social. To be triumphant in combat in the Martial Arts, without winning the social and political aim, is a tactical victory, but not a strategic one. To win the battle, as well as the hearts and minds of the observer, is the real strategic win.

Whereas strategies provide the direction, plans are the steps to implement the course. Thus, the following hierarchy can be applied: the objective is Level one, the strategy is Level two, and plans are Level three. Multiple plans can be used to apply a strategy; as such, it is a many-to-one relationship. For example, strategies may involve a single plan or multiple plans – Plan A versus Plan B. Plans could be a method of offense, a plan of defense, a plan of escape, a plan of rescue, so forth. There is a myriad of examples of plans that can occur in combat, depending on the scenario.

The following diagram illustrates this relationship between strategy and plans.

Figure 4 – Strategy versus plans

General Dwight D. Eisenhower is famous for saying, Plans are nothing. Planning is everything. This seemingly inconsistent statement offers a more in-depth insight into the true nature of planning. What Eisenhower was communicating was that it is the process that is valuable, not the output. People have a lousy ability to predict the future. In large, the weather forecast is one of the most mature predictive planning processes people are accustomed to in modern life. Despite its maturity and sophistication, the weather forecast is only 50% accurate on a 10-day forecast⁴. Therefore, in turn, the output from a planning process in combat, which is a lot less sophisticated than a weather forecast, can be assumed to be equally inaccurate, if not worse. It comes down to a probability game. Whereas output is probabilistic, the process of putting together a plan forces your mind to focus, gets you into the details, deconstructs problems, and builds mental models that help you frame potential solutions.

The planning framework in hand-to-hand combat is broken into two main categories.

These are:

The Two Types of Plans

1. On-the-spot

2. Preprogrammed

Both types of planning frameworks have a substantial role in strategic exertion of force, and both can be learned. However, as with anything in life, to be effective in something only comes with practice and experience. In the famous book Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell estimates it takes 10,000 hours of practice to achieve expertise in a field. In martial arts training, not logging the proper training hours and attempting to apply either on-the-spot or preprogrammed planning in situations involving violence without the apposite basics, attributes, and technique can lead to severe missteps resulting in your demise.

Tactics are the next level down from plans. If the objective is Level one, the strategy is Level two, and plans are Level three, then tactics are Level four. Tactics are the methods in which plans are implemented. In other words, a plan in this context is tactical planning. Planning in this context is not to be muddled with strategic planning, which is a different concept. Relative to the strategic engagement of force principle, tactics apply to the engagement element. Tactics are how to exert force in the most efficient and effective means possible.

The topic of both strategy and tactics is the centrifuge of this book, which will be broken down at length throughout the remaining segments. In the next couple of sections, I want to zero in on the two types of plans and why they are so significant. I will start with on-the-spot plans.

On-the-Spot Plan

The on-the-spot plan is any kind of game plan formulated on the fly, either in the seconds/minutes before, during, or after an altercation. On-the-spot planning would be no different from that of the NFL when the quarterback calls an audible – the coach chooses the play and sets it in motion. The players take up position, but the quarterback notices something last minute in the field arrangement that renders their pre-programmed deck ineffective. The quarterback calls an audible and on-the-spot alteration of the plan to accommodate changing circumstances. Many times, in martial arts, practitioners have preprogrammed responses to everyday scenarios. Still, they also need to have the ability to adapt these plans on their feet when preprogrammed plans fail or do not fit the situation at hand. Trying to force an incorrect preprogrammed play into a circumstance can be detrimental. In football, it may be a loss of points. In hand-to-hand combat, it may be the loss of your life. In this moment, where the preprogrammed plan fails to meet the requirements of the situation at hand, on-the-spot game-planning comes in. On-the-spot plans can augment a preprogrammed plan or completely deviate if the solution calls for it.

Thus, the definition of an on-the-spot plan is:

On-the-Spot Plan

A just-in-time plan to augment or deviate from the pre-programmed game plan to more effectively match the requirements of a situation

As with any type of planning formulation, an on-the-spot game plan requires time. Depending on the statistics you read, the top people in the field seem to agree that the average street altercation in western societies can last anywhere from 3 to 30 seconds. Since there are many competing statistics on these numbers, it’s hard to tell fact from fiction. So, for purposes of S.E.F, let’s be safe and say less than a minute as a robust, reliable rule. So, assuming under a minute for a street altercation, conditions would not allow much time to formulate an on-the-spot plan. In the case of an assault, there may be no lead time at all; someone leaps out from behind a parked car, and before the victim realizes it, the assailant has their hands on them. The victim is taking punishment – at this point, they only have time to fire and move, or move and fire. Being in a firefight does not mean that one does not have to act in a non-strategic fashion. It is at this moment where the other type of game plan category kicks in: preprogrammed. All planning assumes a certain level of awareness. Geoff Thompson, acclaimed writer, filmmaker, and self-defense instructor, uses the term switched-on. Switched-on means you are in tune with your environment and are aware of the incoming danger or threat. You can have all the lead time in the world before a fight, but if you are switched off to what is going on around you, it is meaningless, and this whole conversation on planning becomes a waste of time.

On-the-spot planning in an altercation is a very high form of fighting, meaning it requires a considerable amount of skill and experience to make the right decisions, and let’s face it, there may be some bad judgments made along the way as well. When in a situation involving violence, it is very natural to experience a stew of emotions: fear, anger, confusion, adrenaline, and uncertainty. To think strategically and tactically on the fly, such as an all-star quarterback on the 4th down of the Super Bowl, one needs to be on the opposite side of this adrenalized, emotional, and uncertain state. To achieve the highest form of fighting and formulate on-the-spot plans, as martial arts legend Paul Vunak says, you have to log the flight time. As was mentioned earlier, it requires the human brain an average of 10,000 hours to be logged in a field to gain mastery. The good news is, to achieve the experience to be able to exert on-the-spot game plans with success, you don’t need to be a master. You just need to be good enough. Philip Guo, Assistant Professor of Cognitive Science at UC San Diego, espouses the 1,000-hour rule to be at least good at something ⁵.

Preprogrammed Plan

I could never, ever, engage myself in a confrontation or a challenge if I don’t have in my mind a preset strategy.

~ Rickson Gracie

A preprogrammed plan is a pre-configured set of tactics based on certain strategic assumptions practiced in advance, fortified with a proper training method. In a situation where you do not have time to assess, formulate, or think, you can fall into something viscerally preprogrammed into your body. Put differently, preprogrammed plans are a self-activating, pre-thought set of ideas. This type of training occurs years, months, and weeks before the fight. Just like its sister on-the-spot planning, it also can take many, many hours to develop the preprogrammed response to the point of being instinctual.

Preprogrammed Plan

A pre-configured set of tactics based on certain strategic assumptions that