Advanced Techniques

[drop bear]

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.

You don't just get punched in the face by a good technical jab at a high level.

There is a whole bunch of back of house that is at work that makes the jab work.

Advanced practitioner is a non answer.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

You don't just get punched in the face by a good technical jab at a high level.

There is a whole bunch of back of house that is at work that makes the jab work.

Advanced practitioner is a non answer.

I don't disagree with the first part. But that doesn't make a jab an advanced technique in my mind - just makes it true that there can be a more advanced application of it. Which is true of literally every technique.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

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

A basic technique is like a soldier. If you make it become a general with many soldiers to support it, it will become an advance technique. Since it takes time to develop so many soldiers to support your general, it's not an easy task. Sometime a general may need more than 30 soldiers to fully support it.

 

[drop bear]

I don't disagree with the first part. But that doesn't make a jab an advanced technique in my mind - just makes it true that there can be a more advanced application of it. Which is true of literally every technique.

It makes that jab an advanced technique because there are multiple layers to applying it.

Ogres have layers. Onions have layer. Advanced techniques have layers.

 

[Martial D]

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.

Here's where only real time sparring can inform you;

Yes, a jab mechanically, ie throwing into the air, or to a stationary target, is a simple motion.

However, landing it with regularity on a resisting opponent is an entirely different matter, and it does in fact require a high level of skill. Just as much(probably more) than any complex grappling move where you are actually controlling your opponents movement.

 

[Martial D]

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

Exactly.

Is your jab the same as Floyd Mayweathers jab?

Mechanically, maybe similar. But in practice?

I would say one is far more advanced than the other.

 

[JP3]

Advanced techniques are the basics mastered...

Man. Beat me to it.

I really do think that "advanced" techniques, not to be confused with "complicated" techniques, are oftentimes just the most basic of techniques "done correctly." Meaning, without all the unconscious short-cuts that we all develop to make a less... perfect? version "work."

In the Tomiki-ryu I do, my instructor Ray had a devastating technique he would use on us in randori all the time. It was a technique usually taught to a beginner/white belt in their first week of class. Typical aikido thing, we call it giaku-gameate. It's the eye-flash, hand above the eyes as the person is in front of you, and you lock the head and they fall backwards as you sidestep beside them holding the contact. Lots of systems have this, not just aikido, but CMA, FMA, other Japanese systems, etc.

The thing is, when Ray would do it, his timing would be nigh-perfect, his off-balance on you was very subtle but he knew where you were going better than you did and the execution happened very much like the crash of a wave on the shore. It's scary impressive.

And.. a white belt technique.

To me, Advanced as all get out.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Another way to look at the advance technique can be:

Beginner technique - attack 1 point (such as a hook punch).
Intermediate technique - attack 1 line (such as a hook punch to the head change into a straight punch to the body, a spiral punch).
Advance technique - attack 1 space (such as a hook punch change into an under hook along with leg spring to take your opponent down).

 

[Ivan]

Something that I started saying a few years ago and I finally wrote down (on a chalkboard at my kwoon):

Advanced Techniques are:
1) Difficult -or-
2) Dangerous (to you) -or-
3) Dangerous (to someone else) -or-
4) Break some of the rules or defy some of the system's basic/intermediate principles -or-
5) Some combination of the above

So, it stands to reason, based on #4 that advanced techniques in one system could be beginner or intermediate techniques in another system. If you are a free-form, collector-of-techniques-as-a-style type of practitioner, I don't think this applies to you.

For the rest of you, regardless of what system you teach or train in, what are your thoughts?

Advanced techniques, to me, have always been those that I did not yet know how to do. I would imagine it is the same for everyone else. For example, everyone here who has practiced a martial art that involves kicking was at the point where they thought that side kicks were impossible.
"How do these people generate so much power?"
"How do I keep my balance while pivoting my root foot?"
"I'm just not flexible enough."
These are the types of thoughts which I can state with 100% certainty everyone's experienced at some point while learning to sidekick. However, once you nail the kick down on both legs, and you constantly practice, the technique is no longer an advanced technique. The word advanced, in my opinion (I understand that I could be wrong), is relative to each student, practitioner, fighter and sensei. Everyone has a set of techniques which they can execute in an almost legendary manner and they might consider as easy or even basic. Yet they will also have techniques which they whole heartedly avoid using, as they're not good enough with them yet and they might consider them advanced. Meanwhile, another practioner considers these same techniques easy, and the ones that former practioner has mastered, as advanced.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It makes that jab an advanced technique because there are multiple layers to applying it.

Ogres have layers. Onions have layer. Advanced techniques have layers.

View attachment 22289

I can see that. It's not the definition I use, but I like it. So, the advanced technique is the advanced development of a technique.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Here's where only real time sparring can inform you;

Yes, a jab mechanically, ie throwing into the air, or to a stationary target, is a simple motion.

However, landing it with regularity on a resisting opponent is an entirely different matter, and it does in fact require a high level of skill. Just as much(probably more) than any complex grappling move where you are actually controlling your opponents movement.

I disagree, to an extent. Every grappling technique has a high failure rate if it's used regularly, which is the same for a jab. But getting a jab to land requires a lot less complexity than getting most grappling techniques. And the level of competence of the opponent matters a lot (in both). Hitting a gumby with a jab doesn't take a high level of skill, at all.

So, I think you're kind of saying the same thing DB is. Getting that jab to land against a skilled opponent requires an advanced jab.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Exactly.

Is your jab the same as Floyd Mayweathers jab?

Mechanically, maybe similar. But in practice?

I would say one is far more advanced than the other.

I'd call that an advanced version of a jab, rather than that making the jab advanced. His jab is advanced, mine...probably not so much. This is why I don't say the jab is an advanced technique.

 

[Martial D]

I'd call that an advanced version of a jab, rather than that making the jab advanced. His jab is advanced, mine...probably not so much. This is why I don't say the jab is an advanced technique.

Ok.

Since you seem to be sticking to that position without offering any sound argument as to why, let me help.

Define, in your view, what 'advanced technique' means. Define it, and we can proceed from there.

 

[Danny T]

There are techniques (for example, the jab) and there are advanced applications of said techniques. What makes them advanced is knowing how and when to use setup techniques for said technique (the jab) to work. However, the Jab is just a fundamental technique.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Ok.

Since you seem to be sticking to that position without offering any sound argument as to why, let me help.

Define, in your view, what 'advanced technique' means. Define it, and we can proceed from there.

I don't think it really needs a defense, MD. It's just a statement of the definition I use. Nothing wrong with the one you use; as I said to DB, I kinda like it.

I've stated my definition (more or less) earlier. An advanced technique is one that requires an advanced level of skill.

 

[Martial D]

an advanced technique is one that requires an advanced level of skill.

So then, any technique you can land with regularity without getting creamed. Glad we agree.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

So then, any technique you can land with regularity without getting creamed. Glad we agree.

Nope. Not the same thing. A jab can be completed with basic skills. I'd argue a hook is more complex, requires more skills to execute, so I'd rate it as more advanced.

 

[Martial D]

Nope. Not the same thing. A jab can be completed with basic skills. I'd argue a hook is more complex, requires more skills to execute, so I'd rate it as more advanced.

Landing ANYTHING on a resisting opponent without taking something back, especially one that knows what they are doing, requires an advanced level of skill, as per your definition.

Would you like to change your definition?

 

[Martial D]

For the record I do understand your point, but it's only true under certain conditions; that being a compliant partner or no partner.

 

[marques]

Anything I can apply against a range of opponents must be quite advanced technique, even if it is a jab.

Usually people think advanced stuff is the fancy stuff. Fancy stuff is risky; and from time to time helpful.