6/26/2008 8:39am, #11
- Join Date
- Mar 2005
- kung fu
how is bioenergy measured? How is 25% quantified?
6/26/2008 8:41am, #12
1. % VO2 max/FEV1
2. It's roughly one-quarter.Originally Posted by Cullion
6/26/2008 10:52am, #13
Originally Posted by D Dempsey
- Join Date
- Feb 2004
- Seattle, WA
I also agree with White Shark in that the russian methodologies in themselves are not unique (clearly not based on the examples above). We are what we are and insightful coaches everywhere learn to work with us as we are. What, I think, is somewhat unique is the way these highly developed soviet training methodologies were institutionalized through Dynamo and the soviet training and education structure. Examples exist of organizations that implement extraordinary training - Ballet Russ at the beginning of the last century; Beijing Opera, or even Cirque du Solei and NBA coach Phil Jackson - but the soviet state did this at a national level.
This is because Soviets put tremendous top down investment and emphasis on refining education and training methodologies of all types. Interestingly there always seem to have been two branches between which there existed substantial tension; the process oriented scientific branch; and the inspirational/spiritual branch. Relevant to this discussion Kadochnikov represents the scientific branch and Ryabko the inspirational.
I must now qualify and say the inspiration branch certainly did/does follow the scientific method. Often they did so more rigorously then the process side because they knew they were on tenuous ground. For a fascination example of this read "Phsychic Discoveries Behind the Iron Curtain" by Ostrander and Schoeder. The difference tends to run along the rejection of things that cannot be explained/understood vs. the exploration (or even at the radical end of the spectrum, the embrace and pursuit) of things that cannot be explained/understood... and in that statement i reveal my personal bias.
I know that the inevitable fat guy jokes and budda comparisons are on their way, but as someone who has been training in the inspirational branch for some years now I can tell you for certain that just because we don't take the scientific/process oriented path doesn't mean we train less hard or sweat less.
As for Kinesiology... I purposefully avoided using that word because it is ill-defined. Even among universities in the US the kinesiology program at one school will be completely different from that at another. Some are all about mechanics, some are all about witchcraft.
Good thread - and it is now in the right location.
Last edited by EricH; 6/26/2008 11:07am at .
6/26/2008 9:29pm, #14
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- general mayhem
Lots to type.
So, I guess I'll sip my beer and not type.
Ok, few things - first off, in comparison to other arts. when it comes to mechanics.
Many arts teach leverage, etc. But, their names and their training of these levers are completely different than what you will find in the teaching and scientific methodology of what I like to call the 'efficiency' systems of Russia. For example, they might teach what is an arm-bar, but it is not taught as an 'arm bar.' It is taught from the theoretical view completely - in that it's studied as levers, fulcrums, what planes the arm is going through, etc.
When I teach a release from a wrist lock, I don't teach 'This is how to get out of a wrist lock' per se, but instead focus solely on the mechanics of the situation. These mechanics are transfered to other methods - defense against punches, knife thrusts, etc. THere is no real 'name' for what is being done, instead it is the application of the principles of mechanics...that application being in the relationship between two biomechanical machines, i.e., human bodies.
This is the 'pure' teaching of Kadochnikov System. Nowadays I'm not so strict, but if I am teaching purely from Kadochnikov's standpoint, which I sometimes do in a class, nothing has a name - it is only taught as the application of principle.
This is difficult with students from other backgrounds - so you have to call it what they know it as, then explain the exact science behind it, and soon it has no name, it's a principle. For a newbie, I never use a name.
We start saying, 'This is a lever - this is how a lever works - now, let's use levers in different scenarios.' Now the student has one principle he can apply to a multitude of situations - and the experience non-Pramek student just made his method better, more efficent.
If you study the mechanics, strictly the mechanics, from looking at diagrams, to reading the printed word, to application through creating what you might consider a hypothesis - you can create your own methds and become adaptable...instead of just looking to apply that move you learned on Thursday at class.
I have a great affection for all arts that work, hell even SCARS can come up with a decent move - but while in a class a kimora might be taught, I would never teach a 'kimora', because this limits the adaptability of the principles behind it.
We would study the structre of the arm, the machines taking place, the fulcrums, the lever that is being created - so we can use what is called a kimora in different situations with different body parts.
As for efficiency - let's talk about the difference between doing a pole vault, and fighting. First, I've never found, and I've read a lot of books on kinesiology, biomechanics, fluid mechanics, etc....never have I found a fighting book that breaks down the body in combat and studies it from a biomechanical view like someone would do for a class at Georgia Tech regarding a thesis on the biomechanics of a pole vault.
Until I found Kadochnikov System, which had the top-down investment to take that much fucking time to do it. I'm talking not one book, but volumes held at the Krasnodar Polytechnical Institude (KPI) where most of the scientific research was done on Kadochnikov's System. Now, that research is in the hands of Victor Zavgorodnij, who remains a professor of physical culture, because Kadochnikov left the KPI and the studies were property of the KPI. That's besides the point.
Yes, physiology has been studied since the dawn of biomechanical study, but combat was never really studied - in part because pole vaulting is not a nature thing to do, whereas base fighting skills are engrained in us through evolution. In the 60's Don Drager and Mr. Kadochnikov cooresponded on this subject, whether the indepth nature of Kadochnikov's system (what Mr. Kadochnikov considered a 'western art') was needed as opposed to the 'Eastern' occidental styles that did not study this type of stuff, or explained it in a non-scientific manner.
Now, for exercise - everyone has their own exercises. Some more efficient than others - but the biomechanically efficient exercises are different than most in other arts. The reason being is all that studying of pole vaulting taught the Russians they needed to look at exercises that focused on biomechanical efficiency, using every system in the body as much as possible, putting in the least exertion with the most effect. So, our exercises are focusing around using the science behind biomechanics and kinesiology in order to make our body's exetremely efficient from a scientific stand point. A push up is not a push up to make you strong, a push up is means of making your bodies systems, let's take musculoskeletal, work to it's peak level of effiency.
I don't care about being strong and doing 100 push ups, I want to do 1000 push up and never get tired - so I can either build up to it, or I can find the most efficient way to do it using my body's systems to do it.
Once you become biomechanically efficient, and you learn physiology of the body, and the mechanical interaction between two bodies, you begin application methods that make the body malfunction or superfunction quickly, and you are doing so with a body that is geared for this type of combat.
Now, book study is no substitute for actual training! Nor is going all slow at 1/4 speed, being loosey-goosey and relaxing a substitute for someone fighting you at 100% and trying to kill you. SOmetimes efficincy in combat is at a macro-level - to efficiently end the fight be grabbing the eye socket and kicking them in the balls, old school ****.
Nor is Kadochnikov's training the be-all-end-all. if it was, his long term students ...like Retuinskih (created ROSS), Zavgorodnij (created SPS), and Shvets (created SRS), Me with Pramek, the list goes on...would not have branched out on their own and created their own methods. With Pramek for beginners we created the 'tool box' which is basically a few principles and metods to apply to combat (not grappling or sport but hand to hand combatives) that are quick to learn and apply and primarily revolve around ending the fight quickly, in an unorthodox manner, and we bring in 75% spped fighting early to give people the jolt of real combat and test their knowledge.
Ok, that's a lot to type - thank goodness I type at like, 60WPM - anyone need a secretary?
Questions, refutations, fire away!
6/26/2008 10:47pm, #15
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- general mayhem
One more thing - I remember walking with Dr. Shvets and Victor Zavgorodnij after training.
We were at a bus stop and I had spoken English, at which point Victor slapped me on the back of my head because I wasn't supposed to speak English in public (yes, it was weird there then) when I was with them.
Some mean ass drunk weathered beat up old guy came up, got into my face, and started yelling at me. Victor stepped in between us and said a few words, and the man put his head down, apologized, and walked off. We got into a discussion about the Russian systems, what is efficient, Ryabko, Vasiliev, Retuinskih, etc.
I just dug out my old note book and wrote down the translation I wrote when I got back to the training. It's almost exact....
'For us, there is no 'good' or 'bad'.
There is efficient and inefficient.
If your drunken neighbor has a hammer and comes after you and your son, will you use dance moves from the Cossacks to defeat him? Or will you shield your son behind you and be able to disarm your neighbor?
If that man on the street attacked you, would you jump around and flail your arms, or would you grab him by his eye sockets and throw him...and have the energy left to fight three more?
If you patrolled for five days with a heavy pack, and lost your water two days ago, and were attacked by your enemy, would you be able to fight them off and continue to your objective, or do you run out of energy on the last guy and succumb?
There is not bad...there is not good. There is efficient, which I can test from a book and with scientific studies, and there is inefficient, which I can test not knowing if it works...I will take what scientific law says works. We do it each day with our radios, our cars, our elevators.'
I try to keep that in mind in training and teaching.
6/27/2008 2:36am, #16
Up a touch late are we Matt?
I do have a question, and it's something about which I've been curious for some time. Did Mr. K take into account the effects of combat stress on aggregate muscle tension? I know via my own experience that individuals placed in a sustained state of "fight or flight" tend to be capable only of crude, gross motor movements. Does Kadochnikov system take into account such responses? Based on my past experiences, I can't see any effective combat training that doesn't aknowledge the neuro-psycho-physical effects of fighting. In fact, out of all the training I've had in my 31 years, Vasiliev's systema goes the furthest in mitigating that tendency to "freeze." Does K-sys address this at all?Originally Posted by Cullion
6/27/2008 9:31am, #17
By the way, K-sys is exempt from my earlier assertion about the priciples of the Russian "system." I actually consider his approach to be more western than many of his Russian peers, though he is spectacularly good at it. Many of the principles preached by Ryabko and Vasiliev I learned first from Pavel Tsatsouline, which causes me to assume they're universal accross all Russian physical culture.
According to Pavel, who takes a more scientific approach than Valiliev/Ryabko, the body is too complicated for measurements in specific terms to be usefull. Hence, his disdain for what he calls "pedantic, silly, navel contemplating over analysis." Such specifity only becomes usefull once the athlete has reached a high level of conditioning and training, and only then to correct bad movement habits.
Last edited by SFGOON; 6/27/2008 9:34am at .Originally Posted by Cullion
6/30/2008 10:49am, #18
I can't figure out a way to say this without being snide. I hope its just my poor writing skill.
How many of you guys that are involved in the Russian training methodologies were athletes in regional championship high school programs or division 1/2 college athletic programs?
6/30/2008 11:22am, #19
Originally Posted by WhiteShark
- Join Date
- Feb 2004
- Seattle, WA
6/30/2008 11:55am, #20
Great, so do you find that a large portion of these ideas are new to you?
I've never been out and out against them I just don't believe they are novel. I've heard 95% of this already from my various coaches.
While walking to the store to get my lunch I started thinking about my personal experiences and am now wondering if it may have been more unique than I realize. I was on a high school cross country and track team that was coached by one of the winningest coaches in high school track history. It was also at a private catholic school so Christian spirituality was also embraced. My coach spent about 80% of his energy on mental coaching and 20% on mechanical coaching. Positive mental outlook was heavily reinforced including prayer and visualization exercises. He also used to discuss biomechanical efficiency all the time. and would teach us tricks to adjust our form and put our minds into a relaxed state which will relax your body and help you run farther. Two that I remember really well were holding potato chips and relaxing your jaw. Holding potato chips involves imagining a chip between your thumb and forefinger and always keeping your grip light enough to hold the chip without crushing it. Relaxing your jaw is a little more obvious but the result is that a relaxed jaw tkaes tension out of your neck and lets your shoulder girdle "float". Basically he had a million little things that he would stress for different runners to make each of us more efficient.
Then in college I was a life guard and swimmer at the 2004 Olympic facility at Georgia Tech. My girlfriend was a biology major and I took a lot of anatomy and physiology. I also saw tons of studies on sports mechanics and their study. I majored in Industrial Design and took more course on human measurement and accessibility.
I guess that is a pretty specific experience. I'll probably shut up now.