10 posts / 0 new
Last post
AllyWhytock
AllyWhytock's picture
Realistic & Reality

Hi,

Whilst watching Iain's Training Matrix video, I made a personal connection to lots of videos\articles from people who are self protection practitioners/teachers, who criticize what we do here i.e.we have compliant partners , not reality, not fighting, never been in a fight whilst they've been in gangs, they're ex-military etc etc etc.

I think part of their understanding or misunderstanding (depending on your outlook) may perhaps be they don't see an escalated version using non-compliant partners, more rapid and continuous attacks and controlled aggression. When I watch their videos or read their articles they seem to jump straight into the deepend, don't explain the sequence in detail and perhaps show rather than explain & show.

So perhaps a lot of the disconnect between us realistic practitioners and those "reality" practitioners  is the baseline at which they see us publicly demonstrate. I am a bit longwinded (you've probably guessed this by now) and hence I like to explain in detail with a compliant partner what the particular two person drill is about. My youtube videos are for folks in the club - as an additional reference. They a re teaching aids. I'm not pushing my ideas to the wider community.  However, I now realise that any visitor will look on my videos as "that won't work because the partner is too compliant" etc. 

My response is  about light teaching/learning. People have to start someplace. When learning, the techniques should be light & compliant. As learning embeds then, practice begins to escalate with progressive non-compliance. As weaknesses are exposed and resolved then, practice becomes training.

Other Martial Artists and S.P. practitioners do rank us in with those Karate Ka who do re-invent violence for their style. This must be based on what they view when they look at our videos etc. They cannot differentiate or seem to understand the iterative and progressive training approach.

I think it comes down to communication and the context.

Perhaps what we should do is continue to explain in detail, as this is the only way people learn, but then show the same with progressive non-compliance, in a more escalated, robust, messy etc context, all with the appropriate safeguards as we are being more realistic (as per Iain's "realistic " explanation). Finally, I know folks will say "Why bother?"  I think it is part of spreading the richness of what we do for the greater community to drive discussion. Kindest Regards,

Ally

Anf
Anf's picture

We see a classic example all the time when we work with new starters. We very slowly and gently apply a technique in response to their choreographed attack. Most cooperate but a fair few will say 'yes but...' and then go on about different attack types or worse, they will resist your counter, escape, and say 'ha... didn't work'. In either case they fail to realise a fundamental point. It would have worked had it been full speed and full power and with all the little intricacies added in that they will learn once they've got the basic idea. But then I'd we do it properly instead of demo mode then 1. They will not see what we did and therefore learn nothing of it and 2. They will be injured and probably won't return for the next class.

Chris R
Chris R's picture

AllyWhytock wrote:

However, I now realise that any visitor will look on my videos as "that won't work because the partner is too compliant" etc. 

The concern that is normally raised is not that the partner is too compliant for the demonstration, but rather that the technique would not work if you removed the compliance. Though an issue in some cases with criticising videos is that if they are short you might not understand the context properly. But anyway, I think that a lot of the criticism you were referring to also comes from the fact that most people don't show their stuff working against resistance, and in some cases they have no relevant experience or credentials to back up their claims that it would work in reality. I think that from the perspective of the viewer, it's not difficult to tell whether or not something is effective when you see it done at a slow speed, provided you understand what is being shown. Where the issues arise is when you see a whole bunch of videos containing stuff that is ineffective and taught by people with no experience. After watching enough of this stuff, you start to have a very negative view of traditional martial arts training. So it's easy to see where the criticism comes from, and it is valid criticism in many cases.

Overall, I believe that if you are teaching something useful, and if you are not the type of person I mentioned as the bad example (doesn't train against resistance, unrealistic teaching, and a low level of skill and experience), then I don't see what the problem would be with giving a slow demonstration, or any demonstration for that matter. It just depends on what you're trying to convey to your audience with the video. You might go slowly to remind your students of something, or you might demonstrate realistically for the public, it depends on your aim. But if you are teaching unrealistic stuff, then it will be obvious to those who know what they are doing, and you should expect criticism.

Also I had one question if you don't mind: Who were you referring to when you said "we" and "us?" 

JD
JD's picture

Chris R wrote:
Overall, I believe that if you are teaching something useful, and if you are not the type of person I mentioned as the bad example (doesn't train against resistance, unrealistic teaching, and a low level of skill and experience), then I don't see what the problem would be with giving a slow demonstration, or any demonstration for that matter. It just depends on what you're trying to convey to your audience with the video. You might go slowly to remind your students of something, or you might demonstrate realistically for the public, it depends on your aim. But if you are teaching unrealistic stuff, then it will be obvious to those who know what they are doing, and you should expect criticism.

I'm in agreeance with Chris in what he put above.

I think if an instructor has the experience and abilty to teach something that is practical and effective, who also has the skill to verbally present it and describe as they demonstrate, anyone watching will appreciate the technique being shown, regardless of how much resistance is applied by the partner.

If you are trying to pass an oi zuki attack to the solo plexus and a defence with a soto uke as ''realistic'' or ''practical'', that's where there's an issue and viewer's will automatically think ''who attacks or defends like this in the street or down at my local pub when getting into a scrap?''.

If it looks practical, feel's practical and is demonstrated in a practical manner, regardless of it being pressure tested to prove a point, I think most viewers will respect it for what it is and deem it as useful and applicable under the right circumstances i.e the street etc...

It all depends on what you're teaching, how you teach it and how you can verbally back up what you're demonstrating to give clear explanations to what's happening and how it would work given ''this'' or ''that'' particular situation... not every penny fit's the slot and any technique is subject to it's environment and effictiveness giving that particular situation at that time. 

If you're worried someone may get the wrong impression of your posted youtube vids, put a caption explaining these are for training reference only and do not represent real accounts or sequences of confrontations or actual fight's, that way anyone who still views and has the opinion in the manner you describe, obviously are inexperienced or have poor understanding and probably would have the same incorrect opinion and find fault even if you showed them the most practical technique executed in real time under full resistance, meaning their view isn't worth a chocolate freddo in the first place and is not something to be concerned over.

Without compliant drills, we would all have more injuries, less quality training time, not learn as quick, not be able to drill over and over again to perfect techniques and ulitmately put pupils off training very quickly due to over exuberance. Like Allywhytock said above, pupils need to start somewhere when learning.

If what you show, teach and train is effective and realistic in actual self defence situations and is sourced from proven and qualified expertise, then it doesn't matter what other's think, you know it's legit and anyone with basic understanding will too, that's my opinion.

If it isn't practical and made to look like the 3k or kihon basic linear defence and strike techniques like most karate dojo's teach, well a person would be right to assume it isn't practical and efficient for self defence... because it isn't! 

Definately comes down to communicating whilst demonstrating, you only have to watch Iain show drills and techniques... in the past I've looked and thought ''yes but, doesn't that leaves you open th...?'' before I've had chance to ask myself the question, Iain has verbally confirmed alternatives and responses that answer that ''what if'' moment, however, if no verbal description and communication was being used and I relied on pure visual of the physical, that question may of gone unanswered, leaving speculation as to it's effectiveness under real conditions. So it would be reasonable to agree verbal communication is a strong element in avoiding doubt regards people's mis-understanding towards karate demonstrations.

Just my thoughts anyway...

All the best to all,

JD

Marc
Marc's picture

AllyWhytock wrote:

I like to explain in detail with a compliant partner what the particular two person drill is about. My youtube videos are for folks in the club - as an additional reference. They a re teaching aids.

Doing drills slowly at first allows us to explain what we do. As Itosu wrote:

Practice each of the techniques of karate repeatedly. Learn the explanations of every technique well, and decide when and in what manner to apply them when needed.

We could not teach the explanations and the options of how to apply them if we would do things fast and hard everytime.

Also we need to learn them first with a compliant partner, so we can get a feel for the ideal execution of the techniques. As Funakoshi wrote:

Kata is the ideal form. Actual fighting is a special case.

and

Depending on your opponent make [the necessary] adjustments!

The same is true for practising applications with a partner:

Practising with a compliant partner teaches us the ideal execution of the technique and what should ideally happen with the partner. When practising with a non-compliant partner we will have to make adjustments depending on how the partner resists our attempted technique.

Take care,

Marc

AllyWhytock
AllyWhytock's picture

Thanks for the contributions.

I have no personal concerns about what I do and what I present. I was suggesting that sometimes showing the complete process would be useful - there will be knowledgeable viewers who get it but I think there is still a broad group within the martial arts community who don't get it and the fact that Iain produced his recent video does suggest this.

Chris R wrote:
 Also I had one question if you don't mind: Who were you referring to when you said "we" and "us?"

I don't mind. I was a bit colloquial/imprecise/too generic here and for that I apologise. I was refering to those contributors to this forum who follow Iain's approach and those like me who have committed many years of time to Iain's approach and methods. When I train with others who have a similar interest and association with Iain, we have these types of face to face discussions and perhaps I am too used to that. I hope this answers the question.

Kindest Regards,

Ally

Anf
Anf's picture
AllyWhytock wrote:

I was suggesting that sometimes showing the complete process would be useful - there will be knowledgeable viewers who get it but I think there is still a broad group within the martial arts community who don't get it and the fact that Iain produced his recent video does suggest this.

This is my perspective as a student, who as a student, doesn't have much say in how instruction is delivered.

I suspect that in a lot of cases where people 'don't get it', it is because half of their training is completely missing. Iain gave the specific example of combining light contact sparring with really walloping pads. Between the two, you know you have both the agility/accuracy and the power. But many clubs have highly impractical sparring rules. No grabbing. No head shots. No take downs etc. Basically sparring reduced to dancing in pyjamas. That kind of sparring, even if backed by walloping pads, proves no fighting skill beyond what is inherent in the human animal. You get fitness and balance and reflexes of course. Just as you would with tennis or football or any other sport, but nothing combat specific.

For some, this is fine. If someone has never seen a real fight let alone been in one, they'll be able to convince themselves that dancing around playing tag makes them a warrior. But for everyone else, and healthy dose of skepticism is inevitable.

Clearly there are good teachers. Iain's clearly visible frustration in the training matrix video demonstrates this very effectively. But it's unfair to aim criticism at the wider audience of students and enthusiasts, when I'd guess most instructors only teach half the picture and sell it as a comprehensive package.

JD
JD's picture

AllyWhytock wrote:

Chris R wrote:
 Also I had one question if you don't mind: Who were you referring to when you said "we" and "us?"
I don't mind. I was a bit colloquial/imprecise/too generic here and for that I apologise. I was refering to those contributors to this forum who follow Iain's approach and those like me who have committed many years of time to Iain's approach and methods. When I train with others who have a similar interest and association with Iain, we have these types of face to face discussions and perhaps I am too used to that. I hope this answers the question.

I'm guilty of doing this all the time, it's natural to associate certain groups together for how or what they do and train...''us'' ''them'' ''we'' ''our''.

When i issued my comment/post, it's purely on your first post and not Iain's vid, I haven't seen this matrix vid yet. 

All the best,

JD

Chris R
Chris R's picture

AllyWhytock wrote:

 I think there is still a broad group within the martial arts community who don't get it

I think that could have an impact, though in my opinion the average person would be more impressed by things like sparring footage, (sport) fight footage, real world experience, and being associated with a well known group or individual. But I think your idea could have benefits, also for reasons other than what was discussed here. So I would personally be happy to see that kind of stuff shared more often.

AllyWhytock wrote:
I was refering to those contributors to this forum who follow Iain's approach and those like me who have committed many years of time to Iain's approach and methods. When I train with others who have a similar interest and association with Iain, we have these types of face to face discussions and perhaps I am too used to that. I hope this answers the question.

That answers the question, thanks.

Neil Babbage
Neil Babbage's picture

Part of the challenge with removing compliance is that the technique becomes much harder to control without injuring your training partner. Iain's second drill from Heian Nidan (the knife hand sequence) is usually performed as a flow drill. Instead of the normal starting position of crossed arms, try instead pushing hard into your partner's arm as if trying to force through their arm into their head. They will push back strongly to resist the movement. Abrutly release the pressure and switch to the other side of their arm to clear it and move in to strike the neck. It absolutely works as it use the partner's strength against them. However, it  can also lead (ofen lead!?) to you delivering a very strong blow into their neck because of the energy in the system. If we trained - especially beginners - like this, they'd never come back and might even start suing us!