Some thoughts on compliance, for no other reason than I have time enough to put them down, and it is always helpful to read the thoughts of others (until we get to page three by which time everyone is arguing about a different offshoot topic of course). I will be reading/liking comments, but probably won't be be relying to anyone:-
The argument is often put forward that locks/throws practised only with a complaint Uke cannot be made to work in a live situation (by live situation, I mean self protection from non consensual criminal violence. Not “fighting” i.e. two trained martial artists competing in a sporting environment, or two idiots brawling in the street) . Before we go into that though, let us look at some levels of complicity.
Beginner
Uke is not only complaint, but actively places themselves into the correct position for a technique to work. This is to enable the beginner to learn what position their partner needs to be in for a given technique to be effective. At this stage Tori is also learning how to control their own body and learning to position themselves correctly.
Intermediate
Uke no longer positions themselves into the required position, this is now left to Tori. However, Tori does not yet posses the required level of skill to manoeuvre a resisting open into the correct position, so uke does not resist.
Advanced
Tori is now at a stage where they are proficient enough at the technique, controlling their own body, and fully understand the principals. At this point Uke can add resistance. Practising against resistance will improve Tori’s technique and allow them to reach a higher level of proficiency.
Arguing however that a given lock/throw will only work once the student has reached an advanced level is to miss an important point. That throws/locks are not intended to be used isolation, i.e. without any proceeding atemi necessary to set them up.
Once you are at the stage during a live situation were there is no other alternative other than to strike pre-emptively*, if during the course of your striking a throw or lock presents itself, then there is of course the option to take it
The problem is that some styles either acknowledge the strikes are there, but don’t practice them when practising throws/locks, or have removed the strikes completely form their system (in which case the student would of course need to practice atemi extra curricularly). Both with the intention of allowing the student to fully focus on the technique at hand. The means when others see the techniques, sans atemi, they conclude “it won’t work”.
If then you have been on the receiving end of one or more preemptive strikes the question of your compliance is now somewhat mute in a live situation (as few criminals are highly trained highly skied martial artists conditioned to taking blows from their victims). If you are still not convinced ask your training partner to punch you in the throat and then apply (insert name of technique here). See if you can successfully counter or resist.
Geoff Thompson sums this up very well by saying that he trains for the first shot, as that’s all he needs. Not meaning he is necessarily going to end it with one punch, but that as it will be delivered without warning the techniques that will follow the first punch will be continued to be delivered without respite. Meaning you will never be afforded the luxury of the opportunity to resist.
Iain Abernethy also has a great saying "The blow before the throw".
*hence we are not talking about people who get into an argument and then agree to fight in the street or pub car park. As pre-emption is not possible when you start by square off against each other from fighting distance
The argument is often put forward that locks/throws practised only with a complaint Uke cannot be made to work in a live situation (by live situation, I mean self protection from non consensual criminal violence. Not “fighting” i.e. two trained martial artists competing in a sporting environment, or two idiots brawling in the street) . Before we go into that though, let us look at some levels of complicity.
Beginner
Uke is not only complaint, but actively places themselves into the correct position for a technique to work. This is to enable the beginner to learn what position their partner needs to be in for a given technique to be effective. At this stage Tori is also learning how to control their own body and learning to position themselves correctly.
Intermediate
Uke no longer positions themselves into the required position, this is now left to Tori. However, Tori does not yet posses the required level of skill to manoeuvre a resisting open into the correct position, so uke does not resist.
Advanced
Tori is now at a stage where they are proficient enough at the technique, controlling their own body, and fully understand the principals. At this point Uke can add resistance. Practising against resistance will improve Tori’s technique and allow them to reach a higher level of proficiency.
Arguing however that a given lock/throw will only work once the student has reached an advanced level is to miss an important point. That throws/locks are not intended to be used isolation, i.e. without any proceeding atemi necessary to set them up.
Once you are at the stage during a live situation were there is no other alternative other than to strike pre-emptively*, if during the course of your striking a throw or lock presents itself, then there is of course the option to take it
The problem is that some styles either acknowledge the strikes are there, but don’t practice them when practising throws/locks, or have removed the strikes completely form their system (in which case the student would of course need to practice atemi extra curricularly). Both with the intention of allowing the student to fully focus on the technique at hand. The means when others see the techniques, sans atemi, they conclude “it won’t work”.
If then you have been on the receiving end of one or more preemptive strikes the question of your compliance is now somewhat mute in a live situation (as few criminals are highly trained highly skied martial artists conditioned to taking blows from their victims). If you are still not convinced ask your training partner to punch you in the throat and then apply (insert name of technique here). See if you can successfully counter or resist.
Geoff Thompson sums this up very well by saying that he trains for the first shot, as that’s all he needs. Not meaning he is necessarily going to end it with one punch, but that as it will be delivered without warning the techniques that will follow the first punch will be continued to be delivered without respite. Meaning you will never be afforded the luxury of the opportunity to resist.
Iain Abernethy also has a great saying "The blow before the throw".
*hence we are not talking about people who get into an argument and then agree to fight in the street or pub car park. As pre-emption is not possible when you start by square off against each other from fighting distance
