The below article was originally written as an appendix for “Left of Bang” that we decided to take out during the editing process. However, when looking at the dynamics that exist between the time and space that protectors try to maintain from attackers, the concepts discussed below are why we start analyzing those approaching us.
Reflecting on training, the desire to identify threats at a distance has been emphasized. However, it seems like training for reaction based response, "Right of Bang", is more readily practiced. Disciplining mind, body, and skills for reaction seems to be an easier mindset to adopt and develop. Proactive/preemptive/"Left of Bang" training is key to identifying and addressing threats at a distance. How are preemptive and response training balanced? How is a mind trained to adopt a pre-event posture, as easily as it accepts reaction? Is mentoring an important part of proactive training? The "Left of Bang" training is addressing these questions, but I wonder about connections I'm missing. Reflecting on my past experience, I've proven to be hardheaded, slow to truly adopt and function with the unfamiliar, like an efficient and effective proactive mindset. Writing the previous sentence, I was mentally listing measures to respond to an active threat, rather than, reviewing measures designed to identify threats and prevent action!
Joe - thanks for the comment. In my experience, training to be right of bang is more practiced than the other side of the timeline, which could be a reason why you default to it.
I’ll say though, even though we want to be left of bang, we should still be ready for the events that couldn’t be prevented or weren’t prevented.
It isn’t an either-or scenario, but something we want to do both of to be balanced.
That being said, it often just takes time and repetition to begin re-wiring your brain to consider both. With each successful repetition applying the concepts, it will become a more natural complement to the right of bang work you’ve mastered in your career.
Reflecting on training, the desire to identify threats at a distance has been emphasized. However, it seems like training for reaction based response, "Right of Bang", is more readily practiced. Disciplining mind, body, and skills for reaction seems to be an easier mindset to adopt and develop. Proactive/preemptive/"Left of Bang" training is key to identifying and addressing threats at a distance. How are preemptive and response training balanced? How is a mind trained to adopt a pre-event posture, as easily as it accepts reaction? Is mentoring an important part of proactive training? The "Left of Bang" training is addressing these questions, but I wonder about connections I'm missing. Reflecting on my past experience, I've proven to be hardheaded, slow to truly adopt and function with the unfamiliar, like an efficient and effective proactive mindset. Writing the previous sentence, I was mentally listing measures to respond to an active threat, rather than, reviewing measures designed to identify threats and prevent action!
Joe - thanks for the comment. In my experience, training to be right of bang is more practiced than the other side of the timeline, which could be a reason why you default to it.
I’ll say though, even though we want to be left of bang, we should still be ready for the events that couldn’t be prevented or weren’t prevented.
It isn’t an either-or scenario, but something we want to do both of to be balanced.
That being said, it often just takes time and repetition to begin re-wiring your brain to consider both. With each successful repetition applying the concepts, it will become a more natural complement to the right of bang work you’ve mastered in your career.