Advanced Techniques

[Deleted member 39746]

I would just put it down to difficult, a punch is dangerous to yourself and the other party. All techniques performed for combative purpose unless restraining* should be dangerous, the entire point is to damage the other persons body/destroy it.


Fun thing i think Scottish targ and something forgot the names, basically highlander sword and shield fighting has the last rule being "there are no rules" or something. a few other things do as well. Its like the "there are no absolutes and i believe that absolutely"


This is just my view on it, i would go with 1 and 4. But 4 isn't really a issue or thing to some people as previously mentioned.

* Both meaning pulling power when relevant and wishing to restrain the other party not maim/hurt past necessary. Both ways to read that fit.

 

[ShortBridge]

Interesting perspective thank you everyone. There are some references in some replies to content from someone on my ignore list, so I'm not seeing everything, but appreciate what I see.

What started me on this is the old MA myth of "secret, advanced techniques", of which there are certainly a few, but more often than not, I find that things that we hold for later are more about pedagogy than mysticism. Not to make it too much about wing chun, but when I take a new student, it's tough for me to get them comfortable with the idea of going in and getting close to someone who is trying to hurt them. Our system is built on the notion that we are safer and more effective at close range and that's not intuitive to someone without training that would specifically convince them of that. So, while we have longer range techniques and backward movement, I'm not quick to introduce it because it would work against my goal of teaching them to be comfortable closing and staying close.

But, that doesn't make longer range techniques generally "advanced" in the broader field of martial arts. Those ideas are basic in Tae Kwon Do, for example and (I assume) operating at the range we do might be considered "advanced" in TKD, for the same reason. We have different constructs/systems.

There are somethings like elbow strikes for example, that I don't like for students to do with partners until I'm sure they have good control (which takes time to develop), because it's harder to control elbow strikes than things with our hands, probably because our hands are designed to be more articulate than elbows. An errant elbow can cause a lot more harm than an imprecise fist or palm.

The first Wing Chun lineage I studied in (not true is my current one) didn't have students do drills that involved shifting, stepping, or kicking until they learned Chum Kiu (our 2nd form), because those things don't exist in our first form. That sifu's pedagogy was that you learn the forms in order and drill skills and qualities from the form you know. ergo - Shifting, stepping, moving your feet at all are advanced techniques or at least intermediate techniques. But, shifting is not considered advanced in most systems, and not even in my current wing chun lineage.

This language that I developed around it (my first post) is really an attempt to be straight with my students about what to expect over time. We've all been subject to the myth of these ancient, eastern secrets. Not saying there aren't any.

 

[Highlander]

Interesting perspective thank you everyone. There are some references in some replies to content from someone on my ignore list, so I'm not seeing everything, but appreciate what I see.

What started me on this is the old MA myth of "secret, advanced techniques", of which there are certainly a few, but more often than not, I find that things that we hold for later are more about pedagogy than mysticism. Not to make it too much about wing chun, but when I take a new student, it's tough for me to get them comfortable with the idea of going in and getting close to someone who is trying to hurt them. Our system is built on the notion that we are safer and more effective at close range and that's not intuitive to someone without training that would specifically convince them of that. So, while we have longer range techniques and backward movement, I'm not quick to introduce it because it would work against my goal of teaching them to be comfortable closing and staying close.

But, that doesn't make longer range techniques generally "advanced" in the broader field of martial arts. Those ideas are basic in Tae Kwon Do, for example and (I assume) operating at the range we do might be considered "advanced" in TKD, for the same reason. We have different constructs/systems.

There are somethings like elbow strikes for example, that I don't like for students to do with partners until I'm sure they have good control (which takes time to develop), because it's harder to control elbow strikes than things with our hands, probably because our hands are designed to be more articulate than elbows. An errant elbow can cause a lot more harm than an imprecise fist or palm.

The first Wing Chun lineage I studied in (not true is my current one) didn't have students do drills that involved shifting, stepping, or kicking until they learned Chum Kiu (our 2nd form), because those things don't exist in our first form. That sifu's pedagogy was that you learn the forms in order and drill skills and qualities from the form you know. ergo - Shifting, stepping, moving your feet at all are advanced techniques or at least intermediate techniques. But, shifting is not considered advanced in most systems, and not even in my current wing chun lineage.

This language that I developed around it (my first post) is really an attempt to be straight with my students about what to expect over time. We've all been subject to the myth of these ancient, eastern secrets. Not saying there aren't any.

Really like this reply, of course there is a progression to learning the skill, (something that's easy to forgot once you've already learned said skill) and techniques can be dangerous if learned to soon. I think you hit the nail on the head by comparing two arts. What's advanced to you might not be advanced to me (assuming were both on the same level) and to a brand new student every move seems advanced. In wing tsun we have an advancing of techniques and knowledge, but we should strive to keep the movements simple and efficient

 

[Gerry Seymour]

What's the difference? A technique is only as good as the person doing it can do it, which is reliant on a person's attributes.

Tell me, what good is complexity if it doesn't or cant accomplish anything?

Is not the most advanced thing also the most effective thing? If it isn't, then advancing past it to something less effective isn't really advancement..it's regression.

I think it's a matter of definition, as so many things are. I don't think the most advanced thing is necessarily the most effective thing - it's the thing that requires the most skill. A jab is highly effective, and pretty basic. You can get really good at doing it, and make it more effective by your advanced attributes, but those attributes aren't necessary for the jab to be reasonably effective. Most grappling moves are significantly more complex, requiring more advanced skill to do with competence.

I guess what I'm coming around to (brain's a bit slow today) is most folks seem to define "advanced technique" as "a technique that requires advanced skill" for whatever reason (those reasons being something like the list in the OP). I also don't think most folks consider an advanced technique necessarily better than a basic technique - most of us find the basic techniques more generally applicable than the advanced stuff.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Interesting perspective thank you everyone. There are some references in some replies to content from someone on my ignore list, so I'm not seeing everything, but appreciate what I see.

What started me on this is the old MA myth of "secret, advanced techniques", of which there are certainly a few, but more often than not, I find that things that we hold for later are more about pedagogy than mysticism. Not to make it too much about wing chun, but when I take a new student, it's tough for me to get them comfortable with the idea of going in and getting close to someone who is trying to hurt them. Our system is built on the notion that we are safer and more effective at close range and that's not intuitive to someone without training that would specifically convince them of that. So, while we have longer range techniques and backward movement, I'm not quick to introduce it because it would work against my goal of teaching them to be comfortable closing and staying close.

But, that doesn't make longer range techniques generally "advanced" in the broader field of martial arts. Those ideas are basic in Tae Kwon Do, for example and (I assume) operating at the range we do might be considered "advanced" in TKD, for the same reason. We have different constructs/systems.

There are somethings like elbow strikes for example, that I don't like for students to do with partners until I'm sure they have good control (which takes time to develop), because it's harder to control elbow strikes than things with our hands, probably because our hands are designed to be more articulate than elbows. An errant elbow can cause a lot more harm than an imprecise fist or palm.

The first Wing Chun lineage I studied in (not true is my current one) didn't have students do drills that involved shifting, stepping, or kicking until they learned Chum Kiu (our 2nd form), because those things don't exist in our first form. That sifu's pedagogy was that you learn the forms in order and drill skills and qualities from the form you know. ergo - Shifting, stepping, moving your feet at all are advanced techniques or at least intermediate techniques. But, shifting is not considered advanced in most systems, and not even in my current wing chun lineage.

This language that I developed around it (my first post) is really an attempt to be straight with my students about what to expect over time. We've all been subject to the myth of these ancient, eastern secrets. Not saying there aren't any.

I like the concept that some things are more advanced in a given context. Like those elbows - I teach them early, but restrict their use in early sparring, for just the reasons you point out. So, they're basic techniques, but advanced sparring techniques, if we define it that way.

 

[drop bear]

He definitely just pulls the guys arm down and across while taking a side step.
He just does it with great timing.

And do people tend to fall over if you take a side step and pull an arm?

 

[drop bear]

I think it's a matter of definition, as so many things are. I don't think the most advanced thing is necessarily the most effective thing - it's the thing that requires the most skill. A jab is highly effective, and pretty basic. You can get really good at doing it, and make it more effective by your advanced attributes, but those attributes aren't necessary for the jab to be reasonably effective. Most grappling moves are significantly more complex, requiring more advanced skill to do with competence.

I guess what I'm coming around to (brain's a bit slow today) is most folks seem to define "advanced technique" as "a technique that requires advanced skill" for whatever reason (those reasons being something like the list in the OP). I also don't think most folks consider an advanced technique necessarily better than a basic technique - most of us find the basic techniques more generally applicable than the advanced stuff.

How did that jab get to the point of impact and therefore become effective?

 

[drop bear]

 

[isshinryuronin]

Doing a basic punch 100% effectively doesn't make it an advanced technique. Attributes like speed, rhythm and timing (as Highlander alluded to) give advanced execution to a basic move. The punch itself is not advanced in this case, just the execution.

A punch or other basic move can work with a lesser degree of execution. Advanced techniques I would say are techniques which require a high level of execution to work. A sloppy punch has a chance of landing - a sloppy flying spinning heel hook or a poor setting of a joint lock in a fluid situation have little chance of working. So, these moves I would call advanced techniques - techniques which require a high level of execution to be effective.

 

[isshinryuronin]

To me, that's really what defines a technique as advanced - it requires more of those attributes (perhaps a high level of one or more, or no gaps at a moderate level). A basic technique is something that works reasonably well with a lower total of those attributes.

I guess I just reworded what gpseymour wrote. Didn't mean to plagerize you, gp. Didn't see your post till after I posted. Needless to say, great minds think alike.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

IMO, an advance technique is a technique that you can change from there no matter how your opponent may respond. For example, a hip throw can be an advance technique. Not only you know how to set it up in different situations, when you apply hip throw, if your opponent

- sinks down,
- steps in front of you,
- spins with you,
- moves his hip away from you,
- ...,

you can change your hip throw into ....

In other words, an advance technique is an area that you are very familiar with. Not only you are good with that technique, you are also good with all the counters and counters to those counters.

It's the root of one MA tree that you have built through your life time.

 

[Buka]

I think in the overall grand scheme of self defense, advanced techniques are more fun than necessary.

But some of them are way cool fun.

 

[drop bear]

Doing a basic punch 100% effectively doesn't make it an advanced technique. Attributes like speed, rhythm and timing (as Highlander alluded to) give advanced execution to a basic move. The punch itself is not advanced in this case, just the execution.

A punch or other basic move can work with a lesser degree of execution. Advanced techniques I would say are techniques which require a high level of execution to work. A sloppy punch has a chance of landing - a sloppy flying spinning heel hook or a poor setting of a joint lock in a fluid situation have little chance of working. So, these moves I would call advanced techniques - techniques which require a high level of execution to be effective.

Because those attributes occur via magic?

Or ar they the results of training?

 

[ShortBridge]

I think in the overall grand scheme of self defense, advanced techniques are more fun than necessary.

But some of them are way cool fun.

Don't disagree, but let me offer an alternative. Beginner techniques work predictably well against simple, predictable attacks. Perhaps some advanced techniques become relevant when you are in a position that would you prefer not to be in. Perhaps they can serve as a transition back to a point where a more basic response will be more effective.

 

[yak sao]

Don't disagree, but let me offer an alternative. Beginner techniques work predictably well against simple, predictable attacks. Perhaps some advanced techniques become relevant when you are in a position that would you prefer not to be in. Perhaps they can serve as a transition back to a point where a more basic response will be more effective.

Absolutely. As a wing tsun practitioner, we should seek the most direct, efficient route to end the fight, the problem is, the guy we're fighting has a say in the matter and is trying to keep that from happening....even worse, he's trying to beat us!

By learning more advanced, or more complex techniques, we are adding to our body's repertoire of movement.

If all we know are basic movements we may not have the skill set needed to recover if placed in an awkward situation in the course of a fight.

By having a larger catalog to pull from, our body is not as likely to be placed in unfamiliar territory and it will seek the path of least resistance to regain its footing and "get back to basics".

 

[yak sao]

IMO, an advance technique is a technique that you can change from there no matter how your opponent may respond. For example, a hip throw can be an advance technique. Not only you know how to set it up in different situations, when you apply hip throw, if your opponent

- sinks down,
- steps in front of you,
- spins with you,
- moves his hip away from you,
- ...,

you can change your hip throw into ....

In other words, an advance technique is an area that you are very familiar with. Not only you are good with that technique, you are also good with all the counters and counters to those counters.

It's the root of one MA tree that you have built through your life time.

So I see it as not that we're doing advanced techniques, but we become advanced and are able to execute how we need to to make it happen.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

How did that jab get to the point of impact and therefore become effective?

With some appropriate level of skill. The higher that level of skill (the more advanced the practitioner) the more situations that jab will get to the point of impact.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

IMO, an advance technique is a technique that you can change from there no matter how your opponent may respond. For example, a hip throw can be an advance technique. Not only you know how to set it up in different situations, when you apply hip throw, if your opponent

- sinks down,
- steps in front of you,
- spins with you,
- moves his hip away from you,
- ...,

you can change your hip throw into ....

In other words, an advance technique is an area that you are very familiar with. Not only you are good with that technique, you are also good with all the counters and counters to those counters.

It's the root of one MA tree that you have built through your life time.

So, a basic technique becomes advanced as the person becomes advanced?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I think in the overall grand scheme of self defense, advanced techniques are more fun than necessary.

But some of them are way cool fun.

I agree big time on this. There are some I'd remove if they weren't so much fun to work with.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Because those attributes occur via magic?

Or ar they the results of training?

I don't understand what you're arguing against in this, DB. I think we all agree this definition of advanced technique requires more training - a more advanced practitioner. In fact, I think that's pretty much the definition being used.