|
|
| Author |
Message |
sensei8
KF Sensei
Joined: 23 Feb 2008
Posts: 16430
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Styles: Shindokan Saitou-ryu [Shuri-te/Okinawa-te based]
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 18, 2017 8:09 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| MatsuShinshii wrote: |
| sensei8 wrote: |
| scohen0300 wrote: |
Sensei8 I couldn't agree more! I feel teaching Kata with no bunkai is a huge red flag.
BUT, some dojos practice sport karate, their kumite, as their "bunkai." I think that's how they're able to keep their students. It just baffles me that some karateka are perfectly fine with practicing a very effective self defense system blindly, and never even learning what they could be doing with it. Thank you all for your contributions!!! |
However, their Kumite as their Bunkai still puts a huge hole in the well known maxim...Three K's, down to it missing a very key part.
I'm for the Kumite, but it also starves for Kihon and Kata; in equal portions, with not one being more important than the other parts. I'm speaking towards Karate-do, but from a time that seems to be ignored for one reason or another.
I can't learn Kumite effectively without learning some of the tools of the trade, and this is where Kihon, and Kata, play into it wholeheartedly.
Yet, then is the old school that's akin to how dads taught their children how to swim...being thrown into the pool, and it's at that very moment that their children either sink or swim. Cruel, yet effective.
Same with Kumite as the only thing, and as it's own Bunkai. Throw the Jukyu out there with seasoned Karateka's and have at it. Either that student will sink or swim. That too, is cruel, yet effective.
The three K's are a proven maxim that I believe to this very day must be embraced by all Karateka's, or they'll either sink or swim, the hard way, and at times, the impossible way!!
 |
Sensei8,
I have to disagree with you on your statement above. I know we have discussed this before but I do not buy into the three K's as the only way to train or learn to fight. Kihon was never a training methodology, as performed today, in Toudi (Karate). To be honest neither was Kumite as it is performed today.
The way I was taught was minus Kihon and Kumite as it's taught in most schools today. Kihon is an invention of the Japanese not the Okinawan's. Kumite was utilized but again not as it is today.
Kumite today is a hudge pudge of whatever. Ever watched a class and see the students earnestly learning their Kata and then when it comes to Kumite it looks like boxing with a kick or two thrown in for good measure? It doesn't even resemble the art or what is taught. It's ok to forget everything that was taught, just throw some punches and remember to kick a few times. It's not Karate.
If the only way to learn how to fight is to train this way, I would say these are the students that are treading water.
Old school is systematic. It's not akin to getting thrown into the deep end and sink or swim. But we are taught per the Kata and our own creative minds in the way we are able to put techniques and applications together, how to utilize them and how to draw and create from them. This is closer to the way the old Okinawan's were trained than the way most are trained today.
Kihon comes from Kata. Kumite, unless it's the sport, boxing with a few kicks that we see today, comes from Kata. Without Kata you do not have an art to study.
However I respect your view points and agree that the three K's are a systematic way to learn. I am just pointing out that it's not the only or best way. Its a way. |
Just how boring it would be if we agree all of the time!!
Different methodologies/ideologies, even though you and I are well versed in an Okinawan style, we're different, in what we teach, and in what we were taught, as it's suppose to be.
The one thing you and I hold sacred is that Kata is the heart, and everything comes from the heart!! Without Kata, what's the reason!?
_________________
**Proof is on the floor!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Lupin1
Black Belt
Joined: 15 Dec 2009
Posts: 1637
Location: Naples, FL
Styles: Isshinryu
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 7:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
I say different strokes for different folks.
In our relatively safe modern world, few are studying karate out of a need to defend themselves. Unless you're regularly going to dangerous bars or are a police officer or bouncer or something like that, the likelihood of being attacked is slim. Yes, it's good to know what to do in that situation and martial arts training should teach that, but usually that's "break free and run" training rather than sustained kumite where you stand your ground and fight.
For most people karate is a stress relief activity, a social activity, and a sport. It's a hobby. And due to that nature, different people want to focus on different things. Me-- I'm there mostly for stress relief, socialization, and giving back to my community by working with the kids. For me kata and kihon are king.
I enjoy kumite and know it's necessary to be a well-rounded martial arts, but it's not my focus. So I attend a school that makes kihon and kata the main focus. There are other schools in my area who make kumite their main focus and who don't even do kata. The people who are more attracted to karate for the sport aspect are attracted to those schools.
I feel the martial arts world is big enough to contain schools and styles with different focuses and martial artists with all different goals. I think trying to argue a "one true way" is misguided. Different people have different goals and different things they want to get out of karate. All are valid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MatsuShinshii
Black Belt
Joined: 15 Aug 2016
Posts: 1423
Location: Kentucky
Styles: Machimura Suidi Rokudan, Ryukyu Kenpo, Kobudo, Judo
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 4:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sensei8 wrote: |
| MatsuShinshii wrote: |
| sensei8 wrote: |
| scohen0300 wrote: |
Sensei8 I couldn't agree more! I feel teaching Kata with no bunkai is a huge red flag.
BUT, some dojos practice sport karate, their kumite, as their "bunkai." I think that's how they're able to keep their students. It just baffles me that some karateka are perfectly fine with practicing a very effective self defense system blindly, and never even learning what they could be doing with it. Thank you all for your contributions!!! |
However, their Kumite as their Bunkai still puts a huge hole in the well known maxim...Three K's, down to it missing a very key part.
I'm for the Kumite, but it also starves for Kihon and Kata; in equal portions, with not one being more important than the other parts. I'm speaking towards Karate-do, but from a time that seems to be ignored for one reason or another.
I can't learn Kumite effectively without learning some of the tools of the trade, and this is where Kihon, and Kata, play into it wholeheartedly.
Yet, then is the old school that's akin to how dads taught their children how to swim...being thrown into the pool, and it's at that very moment that their children either sink or swim. Cruel, yet effective.
Same with Kumite as the only thing, and as it's own Bunkai. Throw the Jukyu out there with seasoned Karateka's and have at it. Either that student will sink or swim. That too, is cruel, yet effective.
The three K's are a proven maxim that I believe to this very day must be embraced by all Karateka's, or they'll either sink or swim, the hard way, and at times, the impossible way!!
|
Sensei8,
I have to disagree with you on your statement above. I know we have discussed this before but I do not buy into the three K's as the only way to train or learn to fight. Kihon was never a training methodology, as performed today, in Toudi (Karate). To be honest neither was Kumite as it is performed today.
The way I was taught was minus Kihon and Kumite as it's taught in most schools today. Kihon is an invention of the Japanese not the Okinawan's. Kumite was utilized but again not as it is today.
Kumite today is a hudge pudge of whatever. Ever watched a class and see the students earnestly learning their Kata and then when it comes to Kumite it looks like boxing with a kick or two thrown in for good measure? It doesn't even resemble the art or what is taught. It's ok to forget everything that was taught, just throw some punches and remember to kick a few times. It's not Karate.
If the only way to learn how to fight is to train this way, I would say these are the students that are treading water.
Old school is systematic. It's not akin to getting thrown into the deep end and sink or swim. But we are taught per the Kata and our own creative minds in the way we are able to put techniques and applications together, how to utilize them and how to draw and create from them. This is closer to the way the old Okinawan's were trained than the way most are trained today.
Kihon comes from Kata. Kumite, unless it's the sport, boxing with a few kicks that we see today, comes from Kata. Without Kata you do not have an art to study.
However I respect your view points and agree that the three K's are a systematic way to learn. I am just pointing out that it's not the only or best way. Its a way. |
Just how boring it would be if we agree all of the time!!
Different methodologies/ideologies, even though you and I are well versed in an Okinawan style, we're different, in what we teach, and in what we were taught, as it's suppose to be.
The one thing you and I hold sacred is that Kata is the heart, and everything comes from the heart!! Without Kata, what's the reason!?
|
Agreed.
_________________
The person who succeeds is not the one who holds back, fearing failure, nor the one who never fails-but the one who moves on in spite of failure.
Charles R. Swindoll |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Luther unleashed
Brown Belt
Joined: 30 Jan 2014
Posts: 676
Location: Phoenix
Styles: A few!
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2017 2:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
I happen to think there needs to be a balance however, I feel that students should drill the form quite a bit before practicing applications. In Kung Fu, the form is much more important then any other style I have learned. It is literally the end all be all. That’s a different situation because it’s most of what is learned so learning applications should begin sooner in my humble opinion.
I’m not a fan of advanced applications that require 2 years of drilling to get to a point where it’s useful, because in many cases it still won’t be useful against an unwilling attacker, I like striking applications for the most part. At any rate learning applications shouldn’t come right away unless it’s basic, because to me it is worthless until you really get the movement down anyway. Not just knowing the moves but being able to perform the mall with force. There has to be a balance though because I understand students need for knowledge to stay interested.
Another important note is some instructors will encourage you to develop your own applications, my instructors have been this way. My instructors have always encouraged you finding your interpretation of the movements. Some instructors don’t go that route!
Good luck in your training.
_________________
Hustle and hard work are a substitute for talent! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MatsuShinshii
Black Belt
Joined: 15 Aug 2016
Posts: 1423
Location: Kentucky
Styles: Machimura Suidi Rokudan, Ryukyu Kenpo, Kobudo, Judo
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2017 5:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Luther unleashed wrote: |
| I happen to think there needs to be a balance however, I feel that students should drill the form quite a bit before practicing applications. In Kung Fu, the form is much more important then any other style I have learned. It is literally the end all be all. That’s a different situation because it’s most of what is learned so learning applications should begin sooner in my humble opinion. |
To the bold - Everyone has their way of teaching and learning. I personally teach the applications as they learn the Kata.
To the underlined - This is exactly the point made above. Toudi's (Karate) Kata were influenced by Quan Fa and as such was taught pretty much the same way. The applications are what the Kata is created from and therefore is the way the art itself is transmitted and understood. Kata would be nothing more than a dance without an understanding of the applications.
| Luther unleashed wrote: |
| I’m not a fan of advanced applications that require 2 years of drilling to get to a point where it’s useful, because in many cases it still won’t be useful against an unwilling attacker, I like striking applications for the most part. At any rate learning applications shouldn’t come right away unless it’s basic, because to me it is worthless until you really get the movement down anyway. Not just knowing the moves but being able to perform the mall with force. There has to be a balance though because I understand students need for knowledge to stay interested. |
I'm not sure what applications you are being taught. In all my years I have never needed two years to understand or be able to apply the applications. Yes it is a life long study and you never stop training your art, which includes practicing the applications but to take two years before it becomes effective and can be used?
There is a hard rule to Bunkai - it must be effective and be able to or have the potential to end the fight. If you are learning applications that not only take years to understand and are not effective even after you have learned them, it sounds like someone has made up your applications.
For one they are not that complicated. The more complicated the less effective. The more moves the longer you need your opponent to sit still.
Most postures (steps) within the Kata have one or more applications associated with them. The applications fall into percussive (striking) which also include an understanding of chibudi (vital, cavity and weak targets of the body), Muto (throws, grappling and take downs), and Tuidi (joint locks, chokes, submissions and dirty tactics). There are some Ne Waza (ground fighting techniques but this is more so to return to your feet than to stay and submit).
The learning progression we use is the foundation applications (passed directly down from the founder), the basic or practical applications and then the student is allowed to experiment and discover other ways to apply the applications taught and to discover new meaning of the applications. They then prove them as effective by applying them to a resistive opponent to prove their effectiveness or ineffectiveness.
Not all applications will fit a students needs. This is dictated by strength, speed, mechanics, etc. etc. Once you have learned the applications and understand how they are utilized and also have a deeper understanding of how they could be applied for other situations, the student literally has thousands of answers to pretty much every form of attack. Obviously this does not include ground fighting, or at least where we are concerned.
| Luther unleashed wrote: |
Another important note is some instructors will encourage you to develop your own applications, my instructors have been this way. My instructors have always encouraged you finding your interpretation of the movements. Some instructors don’t go that route!
Good luck in your training. |
This is exactly what I was saying above.
My experience is that this actually makes better well rounded students. It forces them to start to analyze the uses and methods. Self discovery through critical thinking actually teaches more than an instructor handing them the information. This is often the case when students make the transition to teaching. By teaching others and having to answer questions a light goes off and what may not have been fully understood before is now blatantly obvious. I actually developed a deeper understanding the first year I taught than I had acquired as a student. It forces you to look at things from all sides and really think about the how, whats and whys.
When a student starts to understand the methods and uses they then start to understand other meanings of the applications. About 50% of our practical (we call them basic) applications came from students. They are tested and proven as to their effectiveness before being taught or practiced. The other 50% comes out of actual use in conflict by it's instructors, their instructors or theirs and so on.
If there is one application (most have many but for the sake of argument) and there 14 Kata (in our case) and there are lets say on average 40 steps (this is low), that is 560 applications. A pretty good amount. But they when you realize that applications can be used together you now double that. This is just the foundation applications. They you add the practical applications and then add the self discovered applications (that have been proven effective) a student has thousands to tens of thousands of techniques and applications to draw on. The average fighter has maybe 10 to 30.
The original applications either created by the founder during combat or passed down by his teacher to him create the foundation and is the art itself. On the surface most Okinawan arts are similar. It's only after you delve deeper into the art's Kata and it's applications that you find it's uniqueness. Without the Kata and it's applications there is no art.
_________________
The person who succeeds is not the one who holds back, fearing failure, nor the one who never fails-but the one who moves on in spite of failure.
Charles R. Swindoll |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Luther unleashed
Brown Belt
Joined: 30 Jan 2014
Posts: 676
Location: Phoenix
Styles: A few!
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2017 10:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MatsuShinshii wrote: |
| Luther unleashed wrote: |
| I happen to think there needs to be a balance however, I feel that students should drill the form quite a bit before practicing applications. In Kung Fu, the form is much more important then any other style I have learned. It is literally the end all be all. That’s a different situation because it’s most of what is learned so learning applications should begin sooner in my humble opinion. |
To the bold - Everyone has their way of teaching and learning. I personally teach the applications as they learn the Kata.
To the underlined - This is exactly the point made above. Toudi's (Karate) Kata were influenced by Quan Fa and as such was taught pretty much the same way. The applications are what the Kata is created from and therefore is the way the art itself is transmitted and understood. Kata would be nothing more than a dance without an understanding of the applications.
| Luther unleashed wrote: |
| I’m not a fan of advanced applications that require 2 years of drilling to get to a point where it’s useful, because in many cases it still won’t be useful against an unwilling attacker, I like striking applications for the most part. At any rate learning applications shouldn’t come right away unless it’s basic, because to me it is worthless until you really get the movement down anyway. Not just knowing the moves but being able to perform the mall with force. There has to be a balance though because I understand students need for knowledge to stay interested. |
I'm not sure what applications you are being taught. In all my years I have never needed two years to understand or be able to apply the applications. Yes it is a life long study and you never stop training your art, which includes practicing the applications but to take two years before it becomes effective and can be used?
There is a hard rule to Bunkai - it must be effective and be able to or have the potential to end the fight. If you are learning applications that not only take years to understand and are not effective even after you have learned them, it sounds like someone has made up your applications.
For one they are not that complicated. The more complicated the less effective. The more moves the longer you need your opponent to sit still.
Most postures (steps) within the Kata have one or more applications associated with them. The applications fall into percussive (striking) which also include an understanding of chibudi (vital, cavity and weak targets of the body), Muto (throws, grappling and take downs), and Tuidi (joint locks, chokes, submissions and dirty tactics). There are some Ne Waza (ground fighting techniques but this is more so to return to your feet than to stay and submit).
The learning progression we use is the foundation applications (passed directly down from the founder), the basic or practical applications and then the student is allowed to experiment and discover other ways to apply the applications taught and to discover new meaning of the applications. They then prove them as effective by applying them to a resistive opponent to prove their effectiveness or ineffectiveness.
Not all applications will fit a students needs. This is dictated by strength, speed, mechanics, etc. etc. Once you have learned the applications and understand how they are utilized and also have a deeper understanding of how they could be applied for other situations, the student literally has thousands of answers to pretty much every form of attack. Obviously this does not include ground fighting, or at least where we are concerned.
| Luther unleashed wrote: |
Another important note is some instructors will encourage you to develop your own applications, my instructors have been this way. My instructors have always encouraged you finding your interpretation of the movements. Some instructors don’t go that route!
Good luck in your training. |
This is exactly what I was saying above.
My experience is that this actually makes better well rounded students. It forces them to start to analyze the uses and methods. Self discovery through critical thinking actually teaches more than an instructor handing them the information. This is often the case when students make the transition to teaching. By teaching others and having to answer questions a light goes off and what may not have been fully understood before is now blatantly obvious. I actually developed a deeper understanding the first year I taught than I had acquired as a student. It forces you to look at things from all sides and really think about the how, whats and whys.
When a student starts to understand the methods and uses they then start to understand other meanings of the applications. About 50% of our practical (we call them basic) applications came from students. They are tested and proven as to their effectiveness before being taught or practiced. The other 50% comes out of actual use in conflict by it's instructors, their instructors or theirs and so on.
If there is one application (most have many but for the sake of argument) and there 14 Kata (in our case) and there are lets say on average 40 steps (this is low), that is 560 applications. A pretty good amount. But they when you realize that applications can be used together you now double that. This is just the foundation applications. They you add the practical applications and then add the self discovered applications (that have been proven effective) a student has thousands to tens of thousands of techniques and applications to draw on. The average fighter has maybe 10 to 30.
The original applications either created by the founder during combat or passed down by his teacher to him create the foundation and is the art itself. On the surface most Okinawan arts are similar. It's only after you delve deeper into the art's Kata and it's applications that you find it's uniqueness. Without the Kata and it's applications there is no art. |
I like the way you said the Kata was built from the application. Never thought about it this way, neat approach mentally!
I do feel however that as for applications being learned, learning the application should be not too difficult and can be learned in weeks or perhaps a class. Learning to use it on an unwilling attacker is another story and that’s what I meant by taking years. 90% of the time people never complete pressure test their material. Against an unwilling partner is where the test lies and most students can’t be effective with anything less then years of training it. That’s my opinion from what I have seen in the few hundred students I have taught. More kids then adults but either way I feel it takes time.
_________________
Hustle and hard work are a substitute for talent! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MatsuShinshii
Black Belt
Joined: 15 Aug 2016
Posts: 1423
Location: Kentucky
Styles: Machimura Suidi Rokudan, Ryukyu Kenpo, Kobudo, Judo
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 29, 2017 3:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Luther unleashed wrote: |
| MatsuShinshii wrote: |
| Luther unleashed wrote: |
| I happen to think there needs to be a balance however, I feel that students should drill the form quite a bit before practicing applications. In Kung Fu, the form is much more important then any other style I have learned. It is literally the end all be all. That’s a different situation because it’s most of what is learned so learning applications should begin sooner in my humble opinion. |
To the bold - Everyone has their way of teaching and learning. I personally teach the applications as they learn the Kata.
To the underlined - This is exactly the point made above. Toudi's (Karate) Kata were influenced by Quan Fa and as such was taught pretty much the same way. The applications are what the Kata is created from and therefore is the way the art itself is transmitted and understood. Kata would be nothing more than a dance without an understanding of the applications.
| Luther unleashed wrote: |
| I’m not a fan of advanced applications that require 2 years of drilling to get to a point where it’s useful, because in many cases it still won’t be useful against an unwilling attacker, I like striking applications for the most part. At any rate learning applications shouldn’t come right away unless it’s basic, because to me it is worthless until you really get the movement down anyway. Not just knowing the moves but being able to perform the mall with force. There has to be a balance though because I understand students need for knowledge to stay interested. |
I'm not sure what applications you are being taught. In all my years I have never needed two years to understand or be able to apply the applications. Yes it is a life long study and you never stop training your art, which includes practicing the applications but to take two years before it becomes effective and can be used?
There is a hard rule to Bunkai - it must be effective and be able to or have the potential to end the fight. If you are learning applications that not only take years to understand and are not effective even after you have learned them, it sounds like someone has made up your applications.
For one they are not that complicated. The more complicated the less effective. The more moves the longer you need your opponent to sit still.
Most postures (steps) within the Kata have one or more applications associated with them. The applications fall into percussive (striking) which also include an understanding of chibudi (vital, cavity and weak targets of the body), Muto (throws, grappling and take downs), and Tuidi (joint locks, chokes, submissions and dirty tactics). There are some Ne Waza (ground fighting techniques but this is more so to return to your feet than to stay and submit).
The learning progression we use is the foundation applications (passed directly down from the founder), the basic or practical applications and then the student is allowed to experiment and discover other ways to apply the applications taught and to discover new meaning of the applications. They then prove them as effective by applying them to a resistive opponent to prove their effectiveness or ineffectiveness.
Not all applications will fit a students needs. This is dictated by strength, speed, mechanics, etc. etc. Once you have learned the applications and understand how they are utilized and also have a deeper understanding of how they could be applied for other situations, the student literally has thousands of answers to pretty much every form of attack. Obviously this does not include ground fighting, or at least where we are concerned.
| Luther unleashed wrote: |
Another important note is some instructors will encourage you to develop your own applications, my instructors have been this way. My instructors have always encouraged you finding your interpretation of the movements. Some instructors don’t go that route!
Good luck in your training. |
This is exactly what I was saying above.
My experience is that this actually makes better well rounded students. It forces them to start to analyze the uses and methods. Self discovery through critical thinking actually teaches more than an instructor handing them the information. This is often the case when students make the transition to teaching. By teaching others and having to answer questions a light goes off and what may not have been fully understood before is now blatantly obvious. I actually developed a deeper understanding the first year I taught than I had acquired as a student. It forces you to look at things from all sides and really think about the how, whats and whys.
When a student starts to understand the methods and uses they then start to understand other meanings of the applications. About 50% of our practical (we call them basic) applications came from students. They are tested and proven as to their effectiveness before being taught or practiced. The other 50% comes out of actual use in conflict by it's instructors, their instructors or theirs and so on.
If there is one application (most have many but for the sake of argument) and there 14 Kata (in our case) and there are lets say on average 40 steps (this is low), that is 560 applications. A pretty good amount. But they when you realize that applications can be used together you now double that. This is just the foundation applications. They you add the practical applications and then add the self discovered applications (that have been proven effective) a student has thousands to tens of thousands of techniques and applications to draw on. The average fighter has maybe 10 to 30.
The original applications either created by the founder during combat or passed down by his teacher to him create the foundation and is the art itself. On the surface most Okinawan arts are similar. It's only after you delve deeper into the art's Kata and it's applications that you find it's uniqueness. Without the Kata and it's applications there is no art. |
I like the way you said the Kata was built from the application. Never thought about it this way, neat approach mentally!
I do feel however that as for applications being learned, learning the application should be not too difficult and can be learned in weeks or perhaps a class. Learning to use it on an unwilling attacker is another story and that’s what I meant by taking years. 90% of the time people never complete pressure test their material. Against an unwilling partner is where the test lies and most students can’t be effective with anything less then years of training it. That’s my opinion from what I have seen in the few hundred students I have taught. More kids then adults but either way I feel it takes time. |
There is truth in what you are saying.
Applications should not IMHO have too many steps (= time) or be so difficult that the student can not pick it up in one session of class. Having said this, no one is going to be able to implement an application against a resisting/unwilling opponent after learning the application. It doesn't matter if it is striking, throwing, trapping and locking, or any other technique. No matter the discipline it takes time to develop the body mechanic's, timing, distance and reaction time (what we would call Mushin, where it has been done so many times that the body reacts without thought).
There is no discipline in which after one or two lessons that the student is going to be able to implement a technique or application on a unwilling opponent. This is primarily due to the fact that in class most teach the Uke to attack with a certain strike, a certain way and with a certain speed and power. This is not applicable in a real fight because there is no one to dictate these things to your opponent. Fights are ugly and unpredictable. The only way to train for this is to pressure test students. This is done by having Uke throw a punch, not just one way, but 30 ways. At different angles, at different speeds, and at different distances.
So you are right... it definitely takes time to be able to use applications and techniques against an unwilling opponent. But so does any art. If you're studying Judo you learn to off balance and throw the opponent. However until you are against an unwilling Uke you don't realize that you have to adjust to what throw you will use because things change in a split second.
There is no art that after one lesson you can say that you have mastered that technique and can move on. You may have the technique and it's movements down but that is against a SET attack and as we all know real life is anything but set. This is why we do not train this way and yes, it takes time.
You spoke of striking. I agree striking is picked up quickly. Once you learn the proper body mechanic's and understand how to properly utilize the body to achieve maximum power and speed most think that is all that is needed.
However when you get into the ring or on the streets and you do not understand how to gauge distance, timing and how to hit a moving target with any amount of efficiency you find out very quickly that you need to learn more. This is a good thing. Time is a factor that some do not have but with time you cover all bases. With time and training against someone that will not repeat the same attack time after time, with someone that will throw a cog in the wheel, you learn to adapt and find ways to make the techniques and applications work for you. With this comes muscle memory. After years of training you will find yourself responding and wonder how you did that. This is why you train and why time is a good thing.
If students are looking to be Bruce Lee after a few sessions they are delusional. It takes years to learn how to apply, when to apply and what to apply for a given situation. Unfortunately the only way this happens is continuous training. Not sure how to short circuit the system. This in large part is why I wonder how so many systems can produce BB's in record time.
Anything worth learning is worth taking the time to learn.
_________________
The person who succeeds is not the one who holds back, fearing failure, nor the one who never fails-but the one who moves on in spite of failure.
Charles R. Swindoll |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
on the post.
