Is My System Actually Good for Self Defence? - By Sensei Liam Musiak

This is a question I’ve spent years asking myself — not out of doubt, but out of responsibility.

Anyone can claim they teach “real self defence”. Anyone can show techniques, drills, or war stories. What actually matters is whether what you teach reduces the chance of someone becoming a victim, and whether it helps them survive without destroying their life afterwards.

So I want to answer this properly and honestly.

What I Mean by Self Defence

Self defence is not about winning fights.

It’s not about dominance.

It’s not about ego.

Real self defence is about:

• Avoiding danger before it becomes violence

• Making the right decision under stress

• Using force only when necessary

• Stopping when the threat stops

• Being able to live with — and legally justify — what you’ve done

If a system doesn’t address all of that, it’s incomplete.

Why I Built My System the Way I Did

Most martial arts systems focus on what to do once violence has already started.

That’s important — but it’s late.

The reality is that most violent encounters:

• Begin with behaviour, not fists

• Involve manipulation, deception, or testing

• Happen when someone is isolated, distracted, or polite

• Escalate because warning signs were missed or ignored

That’s why my system spends so much time on:

• Pre-attack indicators

• The “interview stage”

• Distance and positioning

• Verbal control and exit decisions

• Understanding how offenders actually choose victims

If you never recognise danger early, your physical skill may never get a chance to help you.

The Physical Side (Because It Still Matters)

I don’t ignore fighting — but I treat it realistically.

• The ground is dangerous, not a goal

• Weapons are a reality, not a theory

• Multiple attackers are chaotic, not cinematic

• Fatigue, panic, and confusion are expected

The goal is never to “win exchanges”.

The goal is to create space, break contact, and escape.

That’s what keeps people alive outside a dojo.

Control, Ethics, and the Aftermath

One of the biggest failures in modern self defence is the lack of control.

Teaching aggression without restraint is dangerous — legally and morally.

That’s why my system places huge emphasis on:

• Aggression on / aggression off

• Proportional force

• Ethical decision-making

• UK self defence law

• Explaining your actions after the event

If you survive a violent encounter but end up in prison, traumatised, or unable to explain yourself, the system failed you.

Self defence doesn’t end when the threat drops — that’s often when the second battle begins.

Is This Approach Unusual?

Yes. Very.

Most karate clubs don’t teach criminology.

Most self defence systems don’t test ethics or legal reasoning.

Most gradings don’t require students to think, explain, and justify.

I’ve chosen a harder route deliberately.

I would rather produce fewer black belts who are:

• Calm

• Aware

• Hard to manipulate

• Legally informed

• Ethically grounded

Than many who can fight well but think poorly.

So… Is My System Good for Self Defence?

Honestly?

Yes — if it’s taught properly and taken seriously.

It’s not for everyone.

It’s not designed to be comfortable.

It’s not built around fantasy or bravado.

It’s built around reality.

My aim has never been to create fighters.

My aim has been to create people who are difficult to victimise, capable of defending themselves when they must, and wise enough to stop when they should.

That, to me, is what real self defence actually is.

— Sensei Liam Musiak