224875 Bullies, 3160 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 201 to 210 of 401
Page 21 of 41 FirstFirst ... 111718192021 2223242531 ... LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. Ronin is offline

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    20,894

    Posted On:
    11/30/2005 7:46am

    Join us... or die
     Style: Shi Ja Quan

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    John, all you are doing is laying into Whiteshark and you are NOT answering any of his points.
    Insulting him and his profession has very little to do with the facts.
    Fact is he has a valid point.

    For the average MA, generalised fitness and training is preferfed.

    You should only engage in specific training when you get a sold foundation.

    As for MA practise, we are ALL in agreement that specific is better than general.
  2. JFS USA is offline

    Converter of Virgins

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Baltimore, Maryland Area
    Posts
    3,837

    Posted On:
    11/30/2005 8:13am

    Bullshido Newbie
     Style: H'ung Ga & SPM

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronin
    John, all you are doing is laying into Whiteshark and you are NOT answering any of his points.
    What points?

    [QUOTE]Insulting him and his profession has very little to do with the facts.[/QUOTE

    Yeah ... but it's great fun ... he continues to attribute quotes to me I never made, misinterprets what I have posted, and then gets whiny about it.

    Fact is he has a valid point.
    Which would be what?

    For the average MA, generalised fitness and training is preferfed.
    According to whom and in compliance with what standards. What is an "average" MA?

    Generalized fitness? Is that really the goal of the "average" MA? If so, they should **** can the MA stuff as it is an inferior approach. Swim, ride a bike, power walk or run, 3 times a week, 20 minutes for each activity.

    You should only engage in specific training when you get a sold foundation.
    Ever watch a house being built? The "foundation" only has to be so "strong" ... no one spends years building a foundation.

    A problem typically encountered is what I term the "Butterfly" effect. People get into a loop with the twisted notion that "someday" they will emerge in full bloom as a skilled MA. Bullshit. Ease into it by way of the general if you are clueless and/or an ex-couch spud ... and then quickly move to the specific.

    For every rep that entrains "wrong" ... it takes about twice that number to make it right. Hell of a thing to travel down a road only to discover you are on the wrong road ... made all the worse the longer you stay on it.

    I stated at the very start, I'm not out to convert or convince any one of any thing.

    ... MA practise, we are ALL in agreement that specific is better than general.
    That seems to be correct, however, it's a matter of terms. Kidspatula for one continues to advocate for speed bag work, skipping rope, and that rest of that silly ****. She's two years into her MA quest. Foundation building by way of the generalized? Just how fucking deep does the foundation need to be?

    BTW, if there was such "agreement" as you noted then the majority should have simply posted "Doing all those things all ready old Man." Didn't see a single post phrased as such. Read a few posts indicating some further thinking might be in order.

    I'll put up the URLs as promised and then I'm off this thread. Peeps can go on forever about the "benefits" of things that do not tie directly back into the target activity. Their life ... their choice and again ... I'm not out to convince or convert any one. Bit of food for thought for those so inclined and nothing more.
  3. Ronin is offline

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    20,894

    Posted On:
    11/30/2005 8:41am

    Join us... or die
     Style: Shi Ja Quan

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    [QUOTE=JFS USA]What points?

    Insulting him and his profession has very little to do with the facts.[/QUOTE

    Yeah ... but it's great fun ... he continues to attribute quotes to me I never made, misinterprets what I have posted, and then gets whiny about it.



    Which would be what?



    According to whom and in compliance with what standards. What is an "average" MA?

    Generalized fitness? Is that really the goal of the "average" MA? If so, they should **** can the MA stuff as it is an inferior approach. Swim, ride a bike, power walk or run, 3 times a week, 20 minutes for each activity.



    Ever watch a house being built? The "foundation" only has to be so "strong" ... no one spends years building a foundation.

    A problem typically encountered is what I term the "Butterfly" effect. People get into a loop with the twisted notion that "someday" they will emerge in full bloom as a skilled MA. Bullshit. Ease into it by way of the general if you are clueless and/or an ex-couch spud ... and then quickly move to the specific.

    For every rep that entrains "wrong" ... it takes about twice that number to make it right. Hell of a thing to travel down a road only to discover you are on the wrong road ... made all the worse the longer you stay on it.

    I stated at the very start, I'm not out to convert or convince any one of any thing.



    That seems to be correct, however, it's a matter of terms. Kidspatula for one continues to advocate for speed bag work, skipping rope, and that rest of that silly ****. She's two years into her MA quest. Foundation building by way of the generalized? Just how fucking deep does the foundation need to be?

    BTW, if there was such "agreement" as you noted then the majority should have simply posted "Doing all those things all ready old Man." Didn't see a single post phrased as such. Read a few posts indicating some further thinking might be in order.

    I'll put up the URLs as promised and then I'm off this thread. Peeps can go on forever about the "benefits" of things that do not tie directly back into the target activity. Their life ... their choice and again ... I'm not out to convince or convert any one. Bit of food for thought for those so inclined and nothing more.

    While I agree with many of your points, I have come to the conclusion that the vast majority, perhaps 99% of people that "do a MA", do it for fun, for a hobby and for exercise.
    Very few wanto be fighters, much less "real" Martial artists.

    So, while your points are valid for fighters and Martial Artist, I think that Whitesharks are valid for the vasy majority of people that "do martial arts".
  4. JFS USA is offline

    Converter of Virgins

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Baltimore, Maryland Area
    Posts
    3,837

    Posted On:
    11/30/2005 9:15am

    Bullshido Newbie
     Style: H'ung Ga & SPM

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Let's take a look at something common and perhaps it will more clearly frame why Sacred Cows should be slain.

    I'll use a formal sports comp setting ... a boxing match as an example.

    We have two fighters ... one is an experienced Pro and the other is a relative noob just breaking into the Pro ranks. I'll leave the Rocky bullshit out of it.

    The Tale of the Tape has both Men fairly equal across all physical parameters. They fight, and is more times the case than not, the more experienced Pro wins. Why? The TV Talking Heads go on forever speaking in vague terms as if they were somehow "magic" and really hit the salient features.

    Physically, the two Men were about equal ... one was not considerably stronger, faster, in better condition, etc., than the other. Yet, the seasoned Pro (typically) pretty much controlled the fight from start to finish.

    I suggest that if we were to take the two hypothetical boxers and subject them to a number of tests designed to quantify their hand speed, foot speed, functional strength, cardio & muscular endurance, etc., the numbers would pretty much match up. The primary discriminator would not be found in the realm of physical attributes.

    Talking Heads speak of "ring experience" ... of the seasoned Pro having "gone the distance X number of times in the past" ... of having "gone against a similar opponent before" ...

    What is really being said is this: The battle tested Pro had spent more time in the target activity. It wasn't that he had skipped rope more times, or played rolly hands on the speed bag more, or slammed the heavy bag more, ... he had "done" the target activity more. Period.

    This ties directly into the thread. How does a person "get there" quickest with "getting there" being defined as acquiring as much target activity skill as possible as fast as possible? By way of "doing" the target activity.

    What I find curious is that at least some peeps would expend precious time doing any thing and every thing not to be found directly in their target activity for a considerable amount of time. Time is NOT a renewable resource … once spent … it’s gone.

    Are adjunct training protocols of some value? Yes, and it's a matter of degree. I suggest that the matter of degree is highly specific and hinges on transference to target activity. If a person enjoys making the speed bag dance ... so be it. If they are seriously pursuing excellence in their activity of choice, and said activity is not to become the best at working the speed bag, then they need to indulge their speed bag preference in a very limited fashion.

    Rather than defend Scared Cows a person might want to chart their work-outs carefully for a month or so and then sit down when they have the time and inclination to seriously look at how their time is being spent.

    If they discover they are spending a lot of time in the generalized realm then they might consider shifting to a more specific based regimen. You can do ab crunches from now until Hell freezes over and still get hurt by a good body shot. The steady state contraction and generalized area of the exercise does not mirror getting struck hard. The speed of force loading and the area experiencing rapid force loading are not the same.

    Some keep arguing in favor of the generalized approach as a necessary means to develop the "raw" components that are to be plugged into the specific. For the sake of argument, I'll state this is a sound and correct approach. The question then becomes a matter of "For how long?" or "What constitutes an adequate amount of activity specific raw elements?"

    If we use functional strength as a parameter then we know some things about gains to be made in a generalized approach. Most untrained people who take up a Power Lifting based training regimen experience the greatest gains within about 12 months. After that, the radical gains tend to drop off and it has been suggested that any additional gains are primarily a function of skill set specificity ... a person becomes more skilled in the athletic event of performing a Dead Lift. Their muscle fiber recruitment patterning becomes more efficient. For those who have or are seriously weight training I encourage you to take a good hard look at how your poundages increased within the first year in contrast to the gains made thereafter.

    Gaining is difficult ... maintaining is fairly easy. The trap is the allure of work ethic ... put more ass to it ... really bust it out ... work hard, work long, and work often. Not a bad approach if applied in proper context ... the target activity. Spinning your wheels burning daylight if it's geared towards the general.

    The main thing I'm trying to stress with regard to the "general" ... with the "adjunct protocols" … the Sacred Cows is that peeps might want to seriously consider "How much is enough?" and by this I mean two things: How much is enough to build a reasonable baseline of whatever nature/value? How much is enough to maintain the gains?

    None of these things really apply to the casual MA peep ... for them ... it should always be a matter of doing what they enjoy as that is what is going to keep them in it. For those truly pursuing excellence the rules of the game are much different as the ONLY way to become a "seasoned Pro" is to stay in the season. The generalized might be regarded as a vacation ... spend as much or more time vacationing as you do working and you are wrong.
  5. JFS USA is offline

    Converter of Virgins

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Baltimore, Maryland Area
    Posts
    3,837

    Posted On:
    11/30/2005 9:29am

    Bullshido Newbie
     Style: H'ung Ga & SPM

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronin
    While I agree with many of your points, I have come to the conclusion that the vast majority, perhaps 99% of people that "do a MA", do it for fun, for a hobby and for exercise.
    Very few wanto be fighters, much less "real" Martial artists.

    So, while your points are valid for fighters and Martial Artist, I think that Whitesharks are valid for the vasy majority of people that "do martial arts".
    Sure, I've never stated otherwise. I don't hold out my rationale for pursuing MA as a "standard" of sorts. It's how and why I do it and nothing more.

    In fact, my experience has led me to conclude that the "mainstream" person's reaction to my continuing to pursue MA at my age is probably correct. Namely, I'm a Freak. It can't be the case that everyone else is wrong in this matter and only I am right.

    However, it doesn't have to be an "all or nothing" approach. If someone is doing MA for any reason other than striving for excellence in destroying the Human Form then they can dabble a bit with some of the things I've suggested. Perhaps dedicate 1 week out of every month to really dialing in heavy with regard to application based activity.

    I like to play tennis ... as a hobby ... for fun. I don't find it all that much fun to constantly be fetching the ball out of net or searching for it after hitting it over the fence. I like to get a decent rally going ... maybe even volley some ... and "play" tennis ... not ball boy.

    So, even for the hobbyist ... refinement of skill sets has some advantage. It allows them to enjoy "doing" more of their hobby activity.

    The reason I phased in this thread in "scortched Earth" terms was to rattle the cage some. If I just came out flat ... then bullshit like what Kidspatula posted would have "made sense" or come to be the accepted way by the majority of readers ... the "This is the way guys in my Gym do it and they ..." mentality.

    Regardless of "why" a person does MA the real question is: Why be a lemming?
    Last edited by JFS USA; 11/30/2005 10:20am at .
  6. Ronin is offline

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    20,894

    Posted On:
    11/30/2005 9:54am

    Join us... or die
     Style: Shi Ja Quan

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by JFS USA
    Let's take a look at something common and perhaps it will more clearly frame why Sacred Cows should be slain.

    I'll use a formal sports comp setting ... a boxing match as an example.

    We have two fighters ... one is an experienced Pro and the other is a relative noob just breaking into the Pro ranks. I'll leave the Rocky bullshit out of it.

    The Tale of the Tape has both Men fairly equal across all physical parameters. They fight, and is more times the case than not, the more experienced Pro wins. Why? The TV Talking Heads go on forever speaking in vague terms as if they were somehow "magic" and really hit the salient features.

    Physically, the two Men were about equal ... one was not considerably stronger, faster, in better condition, etc., than the other. Yet, the seasoned Pro (typically) pretty much controlled the fight from start to finish.

    I suggest that if we were to take the two hypothetical boxers and subject them to a number of tests designed to quantify their hand speed, foot speed, functional strength, cardio & muscular endurance, etc., the numbers would pretty much match up. The primary discriminator would not be found in the realm of physical attributes.

    Talking Heads speak of "ring experience" ... of the seasoned Pro having "gone the distance X number of times in the past" ... of having "gone against a similar opponent before" ...

    What is really being said is this: The battle tested Pro had spent more time in the target activity. It wasn't that he had skipped rope more times, or played rolly hands on the speed bag more, or slammed the heavy bag more, ... he had "done" the target activity more. Period.

    This ties directly into the thread. How does a person "get there" quickest with "getting there" being defined as acquiring as much target activity skill as possible as fast as possible? By way of "doing" the target activity.

    What I find curious is that at least some peeps would expend precious time doing any thing and every thing not to be found directly in their target activity for a considerable amount of time. Time is NOT a renewable resource … once spent … it’s gone.

    Are adjunct training protocols of some value? Yes, and it's a matter of degree. I suggest that the matter of degree is highly specific and hinges on transference to target activity. If a person enjoys making the speed bag dance ... so be it. If they are seriously pursuing excellence in their activity of choice, and said activity is not to become the best at working the speed bag, then they need to indulge their speed bag preference in a very limited fashion.

    Rather than defend Scared Cows a person might want to chart their work-outs carefully for a month or so and then sit down when they have the time and inclination to seriously look at how their time is being spent.

    If they discover they are spending a lot of time in the generalized realm then they might consider shifting to a more specific based regimen. You can do ab crunches from now until Hell freezes over and still get hurt by a good body shot. The steady state contraction and generalized area of the exercise does not mirror getting struck hard. The speed of force loading and the area experiencing rapid force loading are not the same.

    Some keep arguing in favor of the generalized approach as a necessary means to develop the "raw" components that are to be plugged into the specific. For the sake of argument, I'll state this is a sound and correct approach. The question then becomes a matter of "For how long?" or "What constitutes an adequate amount of activity specific raw elements?"

    If we use functional strength as a parameter then we know some things about gains to be made in a generalized approach. Most untrained people who take up a Power Lifting based training regimen experience the greatest gains within about 12 months. After that, the radical gains tend to drop off and it has been suggested that any additional gains are primarily a function of skill set specificity ... a person becomes more skilled in the athletic event of performing a Dead Lift. Their muscle fiber recruitment patterning becomes more efficient. For those who have or are seriously weight training I encourage you to take a good hard look at how your poundages increased within the first year in contrast to the gains made thereafter.

    Gaining is difficult ... maintaining is fairly easy. The trap is the allure of work ethic ... put more ass to it ... really bust it out ... work hard, work long, and work often. Not a bad approach if applied in proper context ... the target activity. Spinning your wheels burning daylight if it's geared towards the general.

    The main thing I'm trying to stress with regard to the "general" ... with the "adjunct protocols" … the Sacred Cows is that peeps might want to seriously consider "How much is enough?" and by this I mean two things: How much is enough to build a reasonable baseline of whatever nature/value? How much is enough to maintain the gains?

    None of these things really apply to the casual MA peep ... for them ... it should always be a matter of doing what they enjoy as that is what is going to keep them in it. For those truly pursuing excellence the rules of the game are much different as the ONLY way to become a "seasoned Pro" is to stay in the season. The generalized might be regarded as a vacation ... spend as much or more time vacationing as you do working and you are wrong.

    Excellent.
  7. daGorilla is offline

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Seattle, WA area
    Posts
    1,043

    Posted On:
    11/30/2005 9:59am


     Style: Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    "You must spread some reputation around before giving it to JFS USA again."

    -daGorilla
  8. Steve Richards is offline

    Lightweight

    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    139

    Posted On:
    11/30/2005 11:15am

    supporting member
     Style: Hap-Gar Si-Ji-Hao

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Great stuff as ever John. I like your point about skill and its effects on the person developing same.

    About drills and the approximation to the target activity - that reminds me of the Roman military tactician Vegetius writing in 'The Epitome of Military Science',when he comented that at its peak of efficiency Roman military training was: "Their drills are like bloodless battles and their battles are like bloody drills" - as close as possible to the intended acitivity and outcome.

    Cheers,

    Steve.
  9. JFS USA is offline

    Converter of Virgins

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Baltimore, Maryland Area
    Posts
    3,837

    Posted On:
    11/30/2005 11:44am

    Bullshido Newbie
     Style: H'ung Ga & SPM

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Richards
    Great stuff as ever John. I like your point about skill and its effects on the person developing same.

    About drills and the approximation to the target activity - that reminds me of the Roman military tactician Vegetius writing in 'The Epitome of Military Science',when he comented that at its peak of efficiency Roman military training was: "Their drills are like bloodless battles and their battles are like bloody drills" - as close as possible to the intended acitivity and outcome. Cheers, Steve.
    Thanks, Steve. I find it strange that people in MA tend to wrap around in, and get trapped in, so many things that are far removed from the activity proper.

    Rope skipping is just flat out wrong across all parameters. Wrong body configuration, wrong angles of force loading, wrong pace-tempo-rhythm ... wrong.

    Why spend time-energy entraining keeping your hands down by your sides most of the time while twirling your wrists?

    Why bounce relatively up and down when you will be driving forward, backward, and laterally most of the time?

    Why get into a groove established by a twirling rope when the opponent isn't going to move or appear anything like a twirling rope?

    I look at the generalized approach and it reminds me of a "wager" I use to make with Iron Junkies. I got so tired of listening to their endless stream of bullshit about how they were in such great shape. Sure they were, for pumping iron within the ranges, at the speed, and with the resistance they normally used. Outside of that, they were in no better "shape" than a couch spud.

    Simply challenged them to go outside and sprint as hard as they could for as long as they could or to get into a pool and pull out laps as quickly as possible for as long as possible. Never took more than a minute for them to "get" it.

    Shape - Condition might as well be regarded as a skill set when it comes to applicability to a specific activity ... highly specialized.

    We both know people who would be well advised to keep their shirt on when down at the beach who can just pound the snot out of most other people. None of them are a threat to be on the cover of GQ or Men's Fitness ... but they can damned sure make it happen within the target activity.

    I think what I'm seeing is a response to all the media hype ... brain washing ... regarding the "body beautiful" ... it's the goal, the standard, and a lot of marketing money is spent pushing this view. I know of young guys, still in High School, who are doing 'roids in order to mirror their Hero of choice.

    None of them are engaged in any organized sport where superior strength would be an asset. I had one tell me he didn't play football because he didn't want to bruise his body. Oh, I see ... perfectly acceptable to alter his body chemistry at a critical time in his growth - development ... but don't get a bruise.

    I look at the MA folks who would rather die than surrender their precious (read idiotic) ab crunches ... got to have a 6 pack to be "real" ... and just wonder, wtf must go through their Mind when they consider what they are really doing.

    World Class Power Lifters, Champion caliber Boxers, etc., "look" they way they do as a natural byproduct of their target activity. They don't "work" to look that way and then emerge fully into the target activity.

    It's all really very simple. The body becomes its function.
  10. Mor Sao is online now
    Mor Sao's Avatar

    Nothing for Show, All for use

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Tampa, Florida
    Posts
    1,622

    Posted On:
    11/30/2005 11:49am

    supporting member
     Style: Jook Lum South Mantis,

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by JFS USA
    Thanks, Steve. I find it strange that people in MA tend to wrap around in, and get trapped in, so many things that are far removed from the activity proper.

    Rope skipping is just flat out wrong across all parameters. Wrong body configuration, wrong angles of force loading, wrong pace-tempo-rhythm ... wrong.

    Why spend time-energy entraining keeping your hands down by your sides most of the time while twirling your wrists?

    Why bounce relatively up and down when you will be driving forward, backward, and laterally most of the time?

    Why get into a groove established by a twirling rope when the opponent isn't going to move or appear anything like a twirling rope?

    I look at the generalized approach and it reminds me of a "wager" I use to make with Iron Junkies. I got so tired of listening to their endless stream of bullshit about how they were in such great shape. Sure they were, for pumping iron within the ranges, at the speed, and with the resistance they normally used. Outside of that, they were in no better "shape" than a couch spud.

    Simply challenged them to go outside and sprint as hard as they could for as long as they could or to get into a pool and pull out laps as quickly as possible for as long as possible. Never took more than a minute for them to "get" it.

    Shape - Condition might as well be regarded as a skill set when it comes to applicability to a specific activity ... highly specialized.

    We both know people who would be well advised to keep their shirt on when down at the beach who can just pound the snot out of most other people. None of them are a threat to be on the cover of GQ or Men's Fitness ... but they can damned sure make it happen within the target activity.

    I think what I'm seeing is a response to all the media hype ... brain washing ... regarding the "body beautiful" ... it's the goal, the standard, and a lot of marketing money is spent pushing this view. I know of young guys, still in High School, who are doing 'roids in order to mirror their Hero of choice.

    None of them are engaged in any organized sport where superior strength would be an asset. I had one tell me he didn't play football because he didn't want to bruise his body. Oh, I see ... perfectly acceptable to alter his body chemistry at a critical time in his growth - development ... but don't get a bruise.

    I look at the MA folks who would rather die than surrender their precious (read idiotic) ab crunches ... got to have a 6 pack to be "real" ... and just wonder, wtf must go through their Mind when they consider what they are really doing.

    World Class Power Lifters, Champion caliber Boxers, etc., "look" they way they do as a natural byproduct of their target activity. They don't "work" to look that way and then emerge fully into the target activity.

    It's all really very simple. The body becomes its function.
    I gave up traditional iron to use kettlebells. I pick them up and walk around, then extend them over and behind my head and walk around. I move back and forth online and around in circles while moving the bells along the paths of my arms when I would be using them to block, strike, lock and throw.

    Who cares how I look as long as Im healthy and able to rip someone open when needed.

    Good analogy of social conventions(the certain look people are told to strive for) that most of the sheep follow.

    Thanks, brother for always giving us more than we deserve.







Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.