Thread: Relative complexity
11/01/2004 1:35pm, #11
The complexity of a fighting system should reflect the complexity of the range that it deals with. Inevitably, striking will then turn out simpler than ground grappling.
Even a complex system should have a hierarchy of techniques - simple, reliable bread-and butter techniques that get a beginner going quickly, and more complex techniques that you can add on when everyone counters your standard stuff. Case in point: judo - a small number of elementary, high-percentage techniques, hundreds of variations and whacko throws to learn if you feel like it. Learn o-goshi first, then harai goshi, then hane goshi, then... althogh o-goshi will work fine for most people in most fight situations.There are no wrong threats, only wrong answers. (Strategy game truism)
11/01/2004 1:42pm, #12
Okay, so any good system should be relatively robust, starting with simple stuff that [almost] anyone can get and then moving toward 31 flavours of complexity with particular variations.
No question there. And we haven't really discussed principles, but that's been an ugly can of worms in past. So . . .
Lemme ask you this: If you were introduced to a genuine prodigy--someone who could learn and perform anything at all with a high degree of proficiency and whose learning curve was off the charts--then what would it be?
And more to the point, would you teach them your style? If not, why?
11/01/2004 1:59pm, #13Originally Posted by Repulsive Monkey"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." – Voltaire.
11/01/2004 2:06pm, #14Originally Posted by Osiris
11/01/2004 2:09pm, #15Originally Posted by Thaiboxerken
11/01/2004 2:09pm, #16
11/01/2004 2:12pm, #17Originally Posted by Repulsive Monkey"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." – Voltaire.
11/01/2004 2:27pm, #18
Axe kick? WTF? You forgot basic knee and elbow strikes there.
Originally Posted by Repulsive Monkey
Training the complexity properly can overcome whatever that average practitioner had or lacked in the first place. Multiple repetitions and drilling will give the practitioner ability to understand and integrate more complex movements into their own repetoire.
Anecdotal example to ponder. (Styles listed just for reference and not to bash.) I had 'lots' of complex in close movements that we drilled in WC, then recently did a MT/Karate class where the movement was an outside brushing away block with an arm to counter a punch, block the other punch, then step in to double palm heel the body and face. I'd give that medium complexity. :) The MT guy I was working with said something along the lines of 'this is hard isn't it?' I got confused and gave a negative...
Let's see how many nutriders defend MT here...
My point? You should train the complex, of course with applicable movements and techniques, so the simple will be so much easier. One analogy I know is: It is so much easier to kick the leg when you can kick the head.
Edit: That top bit was for Os, didn't see all these responses between him and mine while I was replying...Surfing Facebook at work? Spread the good word by adding us on Facebook today! https://www.facebook.com/Bullshido
11/01/2004 2:29pm, #19
I like the complexity -- it keeps me coming back"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration." -A. Lincoln
Vote your conscience.... Vote Libertarian!
11/01/2004 2:32pm, #20