2/20/2007 5:28pm, #111Originally Posted by Nuck Chorris
As for opening a can of whoop-ass, I've heard a number of stories of how that was how things would have been handled back in the day. There's would be no ambiguity with the outcome, would there?
2/20/2007 6:45pm, #112
So what is your School's fee structure for classes?
2/21/2007 6:25pm, #113Originally Posted by Samuel Browning
2/21/2007 8:45pm, #114
Originally Posted by Samuel Browning
- Join Date
- Jun 2005
- TKD, MT, KEMPO
2/22/2007 1:42am, #115Originally Posted by Nuck Chorris
2/22/2007 12:50pm, #116Originally Posted by Nuck Chorris
As for your comment in another post about being taught "forms and dead pattern style self defense drills" is okay, if that's what you like, I do have a response. That is what we teach here but regardless of the system, that certainly can't be all that is taught. If the underlying concepts that are being taught in the form, or pattern are not extracted, explained and reinforced, then I think the student is being done a disservice. If someone has a punch thrown at them and thinks "gee, I'll do Flashing Wings", they're toast because by the time that thought goes through their head, they've already been hit. The goal of the system, even though it's taught primarily through forms and SD techniques is to get the student past that point so that in an attack situation, they just react. A student has to be taught to adapt to the situation and be trained well enough that they don't have to rely on a set technique. I think that should be the goal of all martial arts, regardless of what path is taken to get to that point.
2/22/2007 2:47pm, #117Originally Posted by Nuck Chorris
As for your comments regarding teaching techniques with set responses and no resistance, that would be true if that's all we taught. Teaching the technique is only the beginning. However, we DO have students do techniques against each other with resistance. Once you're at the higher belts levels, free form becomes a much bigger part of the curriculum. Again, the whole goal is to get the student to the point where they know what they're doing, and not just in a staged, choreographed setting. Not everybody reacts the same way to the same technique and that's where it's deadly important that the student understands that and knows how to adapt.
On a side note, we have done the set techniques against each other with resistance and, properly executed, they do work. Where modifications have been made is where it was felt that they wouldn't work. It would be pointless to teach them, otherwise. Where the distinction has to be made is that although the technique would work, that's not the way you would necessarily respond to an attack. That's where it's important that the concepts within the technique be extracted and taught in addition to the set pattern. Although I know a couple of hundred different set techniques, if I can't take out an attacker with one, or two moves, then I haven't been paying attention and haven't learned a damned thing. If I come up against somebody who does know what they're doing, then I'm glad I know how to extend my response beyond those one, or two moves if necessary. In other words, we pretty much agree on what needs to be taught for someone to be able to take care of themselves. Where we disagree is how to get to that point. To each his own. That's why we teach a cross section of material to perspective students. If they like what we teach and how we teach it, great. If they feel as you do, that's fine too. There are plenty of fine MA schools out there with a number of different teaching methods. To me, quality and comprehensiveness is much more important than a specific method to achieve to overall goals.
Thank you for the intelligent, well thought out discusson.
2/22/2007 4:48pm, #118
On a side note, we have done the set techniques against each other with resistance and, properly executed, they do work.
- Join Date
- Sep 2006
- North Florida
- Ke?po, MMA ultra-newb
Our of curiosity, have you ever tested the technique by taking two people, giving them both a technique to do (without the other knowing about it), and told them to try to perform that technique against the other person?"Reason is a choice. Wishes and whims are not facts, nor are they a means to discovering them. Reason is our only way to grasping reality -- it's our basic tool of survival. We are free to evade the effort of thinking, to reject reason, but we are not free to avoid the penalty of the abyss we refuse to see."
- Terry Goodkind, "Faith of the Fallen"
2/22/2007 6:29pm, #119Originally Posted by Nuck Chorris
I won't deny that it's pretty much impossible to practice some things at full resistance and full speed. We would all look like Igor after a bad night in a mosh pit. In those situations during resistance training, the strikes need to go to nonlethal targets, i.e., instead of driving my knee into your groin, I'm going to put it into your stomach, etc. It's also just as important to know how to take a shot, just as well as it is to give one. To work on targeting certain areas areas, the speed is slowed down, or the technique is done at full speed and the strike is pulled, i.e, I'll stop just short of shoving my fingers deep into your eye sockets. This inability to 100% train with full resistance and full speed isn't unique to us, though. As an example, if a grappler is confronted by an attacker intent on doing major, if not lethal damage, is he going to lock out a joint to destruction, or is he expecting the bad guy to tap out? If it's the former, how do you train for that?
I'll leave you with an analogy from outside ma. I'm a Captain in the fire service. When it's time to train for a structure fire, we don't go light somebodies house on fire. We go to a drill tower, a scenario is played out and we go through our Standard Operating Procedures to deal with the situation and to train on our techniques for that particular evolution. Although the scenarios are varied, it's the same building, there's no fire and little risk. The setting is static. When we do respond to a real fire, the structure is nothing like the tower we trained in. All buildings are different, all fires are different, all situations are different. Yet our training at the tower acting out the various scenarios allows us to do our job quite well. Even though the way the emergency is handled is decided on the spur of the moment based on the particular situation, it's the underlying principles that we have learned by drilling in a controlled environment that allow us to handle the situation calmly and competently.
2/22/2007 6:38pm, #120Originally Posted by OnceLost
I've never done the drill you talk about. I like it though. I'm going to give it some thought and see if I can figure out a good way to do it.