Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

chicken or the egg?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Freddy
    replied
    Please send me another message. (Obviously I didnt get the first one.) Apparently the length of the messages are limited to thousand words (give or take a few) .

    Leave a comment:


  • IndoChinese
    replied
    'I personally dont think technique necessarily has a principle. To be more specifically a sound principle. You could puch someone with using only your arm strength but this is not a principle. Now if you punch someone using other muscle groups ie. legs hip rotation etc. then there is a principle. The principle of using the most relevent muscle groups to deliver the most maximum amount of energy with the least waisted motion to conclude your end results. (Mind you it depends on the type of punch and what one's intentions are)'


    my assertion would be that any movement will see a commesurate rise in 'success' to the degree that it conforms to the underlying principles upon which it is founded, PROVIDED the principles are sound. If they are based on physics, then they will be.

    it is a matter of efficiency and quality of movement...





    ( my apologies, the reply i sent to you (PM) was too long. I must send another)

    Peace.

    Leave a comment:


  • IndoChinese
    replied
    'I totally understand what you are saying and I agree with the importance of principles.
    I think you and I have a different definition of the term "technique".'

    absolutely ronin. although we all speak english, the words have a different meaning for each. Terminology is a bitch.

    as well, we each have our own viewpoint, which we believe to be correct.

    a friend of mine if fond of saying, " and how's that working out for ya?"

    in the end that is all that really matters.

    I am sure that you can demonstrate the truth of what of you are saying...of that i have no doubt.

    Peace.

    Leave a comment:


  • Freddy
    replied
    I personally dont think technique necessarily has a principle. To be more specifically a sound principle. You could puch someone with using only your arm strength but this is not a principle. Now if you punch someone using other muscle groups ie. legs hip rotation etc. then there is a principle. The principle of using the most relevent muscle groups to deliver the most maximum amount of energy with the least waisted motion to conclude your end results. (Mind you it depends on the type of punch and what one's intentions are)

    Leave a comment:


  • Ronin
    replied
    Indeed, so it would seem.
    I guess I am being too literal.

    Leave a comment:


  • IronBuddha
    replied
    semantics........and ambiguity. tsk tsk. the bane of text communication.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ronin
    replied
    I totally understand what you are saying and I agree with the importance of principles.
    I think you and I have a different definition of the term "technique".

    Leave a comment:


  • IndoChinese
    replied
    ronin,

    it is matter of perspective and understanding.

    take your punch example.

    successful strikes land because they are done correctly. there are three BASIC consideration in landing a hit, Timing, Distance, and Angle. it is not a matter of choice or preference. IF the timing, angulation, and distance are correct you will hit your target. it is simple physics.

    knowing this and acting on it is what makes the difference between consistently good perfomance and improvement, and 'hit and miss' success.

    if you punch someone, and it works, it doesn't mean that it was good. It was very likely a very crude action, and was a essentially a 'lucky idealization'. It managed to match up, but not because of known parameters. You dumb your way through things.

    acting in accord with the underlying principles of physics, otoh, yields a much higher quality action because it is based on REALITY or PHYSICS. it is not subject to interpretation.

    If i know the operative principles, i can accomplish the task many different ways, all spontaneous. there is more than one way to skin a cat.

    If all i know is a technique, my options will be severly limited, and their sucess will be highly variable.

    I will say it again, TECHNIQUES DO NOT EXIST, THEY ARE PROCESSES.




    "Old Man, how is it that you can hear the grasshopper at your feet?"

    "Young Man, how is it that you cannot?"

    Leave a comment:


  • Ronin
    replied
    Let us look at a strike, its a techniques governed by many principles, how do you eleiminate the technique?

    I have spoken with some pretty amazing instructors here and in Europe, I have never heard them say anything about "eliminating" techniques.
    Having no-techniques as a techniques, I have heard, of course that has always meant to not be dependant on any particular technique(s).

    The moment you move in a coordinated manner, instinctive or not, you are employing some sore ot technical ability ie: a technique.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ronin
    replied
    Originally posted by kuntaokid
    'What about when you don't 'fight' during violent conflict?

    What happens when you address violent conflict in the training (lots of hard contact in a variety of scenarios and formats), but don't espouse the thinking that your actions are combative, or that you're engaging the attacker(s) with a 'fighting' mindset?

    Just wondering if any of you have experience in this type of martial training.'



    the ultimate. beyond their ken.
    I have a hard time telling when you are serious or kidding.

    Leave a comment:


  • IndoChinese
    replied
    i'm not 100% sure what you are getting at...but anyways.

    by the sound of things, you guys are just banging arms........if it isn't combative and it's not meant for fighting, u're dancing. full contact dancing.

    dunno how this has to do with principles though.

    ------------------

    You are dismissed.

    Leave a comment:


  • IndoChinese
    replied
    'when you fight enough, you realize there is no fundamental law (def. code of conduct) in the context of fighting. every law is broken, hence not a law. there are no principles. only techniques and favorite techniques.
    (not including physics and why things work!)'

    after a promising start, IronBuddha takes a nosedive, crashes, and burns.

    Leave a comment:


  • IndoChinese
    replied
    'What about when you don't 'fight' during violent conflict?

    What happens when you address violent conflict in the training (lots of hard contact in a variety of scenarios and formats), but don't espouse the thinking that your actions are combative, or that you're engaging the attacker(s) with a 'fighting' mindset?

    Just wondering if any of you have experience in this type of martial training.'



    the ultimate. beyond their ken.

    Leave a comment:


  • Shooter
    replied
    It has everything to do with principles and nothing to do with techniques. I'm describing how I approach my TCC.

    The main principle of which is neutralization. But don't confine that idea to just the physical. While physical/tactical method is often a part of conflict, it's not everything.

    Leave a comment:


  • IronBuddha
    replied
    one of my friends went to a school where they just banged arms. he thought he could fight until he actually sparred people outside of his school. thing was though, he had some tough arms.

    Leave a comment:

Collapse

Edit this module to specify a template to display.

Working...
X