Mirroring Techniques

Doc

Senior Master
Joined
May 12, 2002
Messages
4,240
Reaction score
180
Location
Southern California
Hand Sword said:
Does training the weaker side to try to do the tech's as the stronger side does really accomplish anything. I 've seen people try relentlessly to do so, but, never reach proficiency with the weaker side. Should the weaker side have the focus of performing speacialized tech's, such as the function of a jab, hook, etc.? From my experiences, that seems to get better results, or as some of my kali/escrima friends said when they brought up the use of the stick with both hands to instructors, and got the answer: better to be 100% effective in one side, than to be 50/50.
Sir, this has beed discussed here before, however unable to find the previous discussion, I will paste a previously published article.

Excerpts from the Diary of a "Mad" Kenpo Scientist
”The Ambidexterity Myth”
By
Ron Chapél, Ph.D.

Over the years there have been significant misconceptions regarding the efficacy of right and left side training. A great deal of discussion exists relative to whether forms performances, and self-defense techniques are or should be right, left, or balanced in teaching and training execution.

The simple truth is all are correct in certain respects, and the confusion like many other topics, comes from the progenitor himself. Mr. Parker spent a considerable amount of time looking into the concept and reached some rather interesting conclusions in our own research and discussions.

As a forms example, in most versions of Ed Parker’s Short Form Two, it does indeed include the physical left side in its right side presentation. But, it is still considered, by Ed Parker’s definition as explained to me, to be the right side, or what he quietly called right side brain dominant. However you do not reverse the synaptic and cerebellar pathway responsibilities for movement until the actual mirror image is performed.

This is what Parker meant by left side. The physical left is only motion or movement, but the true left side is an opposite or reversal of brain dominance and control. Thus all forms encompass in some manner right and left side, but to begin from the opposite side or mirror image reverses all mental functions and changes muscle response significantly enough to have significant influence on function.

Whether this is necessary in teaching is dependent on how you teach or train. Ed Parker created a series of conceptually right-handed techniques. He himself was not ambidextrous, nor was he working to become that way. His goal was physical competency in the physical interaction of the activity. And those who borrow sport concepts like cross training seem to put more value into ambidexterity than those who concentrate on self-defense as he did.

Although in his commercial schools he encouraged left & right training for a variety of reasons, he recognized in self defense, competence was more important than performing left and right equally well. He knew that practicing both sides can yield benefits, but he also knew right & left would never be equal. Either way the operative phrase is mirror image execution, to activate both sides of the brain to create balance in any kind of physical training.

In Ed Parker’s self-defense philosophy however, training should be based on a curriculum of well thought out systematically principled and progressive techniques. The mechanisms inherent in the process are designed to emphasize situational effectiveness with ambidexterity irrelevant to function. Movements should be performed on both sides to demonstrate effective basic skills generated by both sides of the brain with their own unique synaptic pathways. But, self-defense techniques are about competence and effectiveness within the sequence first, and emphasis must be place there as a top priority.

Of course basic skills should be raised to an acceptable level of effectiveness, but the goal of balance in the execution of self-defense techniques in their mirror image is unnecessary, time consuming, and not physically possible when it comes to equity.

The teachers who preach this both sides technique execution perspective themselves are not equally proficient on both sides. Most traditional styles and disciplines and even western boxing have techniques and moves used only from the left or right side. Most styles promote a left side forward to allow use of the right (strong) hand and leg from the rear. Even when the techniques change they still favor the right side. Even in those schools that promote equal side proficiency it is never, nor is it possible to be actually achieved.

The reasons it is not possible are physiological involving a mental interaction with the body’s ability to perform. Each side of the body is controlled by opposite sides of the brain. For example, when learning a left kick, a synaptic pathway must be created or established through the right side of the brain and vice versa. No matter how you train, the left and right pathways will never be identical in function. Even though the two sides of the brain function together, they do not have identical ways of performing the same function. They may produce identical physical movement, but how the movements are produced and controlled from the brain are very different.

Additionally the human body is not mathematically symmetrical in the true sense of the term. It is normal in human anatomy for one leg or arm to be longer than the other, and even different in diameter. Every muscle, tendon, cartilage, and even hair growth varies from side to side. World-class athletes do not stride, jump, throw, or move the same on both sides of the body. What is even more interesting is when an athlete is trained to be exactly symmetrical in their execution; it has been shown that physical performance actually declines overall. The body may be visually aesthetically symmetrical, but not precisely physically or mathematically.

Most have unreasonable expectations with regard to weak side performance. If we anticipate we can train the weak side to perform equally with the strong, we are mistaken. Because of how the brain works, you cannot attain the exact same degree of skill on both sides. It would be like attempting to teach yourself to write equally as well with both hands. You may achieve an acceptable level on the weak side but the strong will always be better and dominant.

Human beings have a natural physical preference to have a dominant side that is predetermined at birth. Even in cases where a person has activity dedicated dominance, they are always opposite of each other. I have a student who writes on one side, throws on the other, and still in baseball, bats opposite his dominant throwing side. But these activities are still functionally dedicated. He can’t write, bat, or throw equally with both. This dominance is so strong in human behavior; it cannot be overcome by external training.

In the Chinese Martial Sciences, students are taught opposite most other later martial art disciplines with the strong side forward for practicality. In examining the basic idea of most techniques, they can be executed on the prescribed side or they can be executed in what Mr. Parker, called Half Mirror Image. That is a technique may be designed for one side attacking, however just because the attacker uses the other side or "mirror" doesn’t mean you have to react in kind with a "mirrored" response.

The self-defense techniques Thrusting Salute and Buckling Branch as kicking defenses are both interchangeable whether the right or left kick is used in the attack. In "Thrusting Salute" the attack is a front kick with the right leg, and you respond with the prescribed Default Solution to that particular assault. When the attack of a left front kick is used in "Buckling Branch," the attacker is now using the Mirror Image Assault of Thrusting Salute. However if you respond with the Default Solution to Thrusting Salute, you are in a Half Mirror Image Solution response. These attacks, although mirror opposites of each other, can be responded to with the same right handed response.

This type of training only requires one side be developed significantly to be functional. The opposite side can and will also be developed, but performing a different function. In another example, in the attack for "Delayed Sword" (a right hand), you defend by stepping back with the left foot and executing with your front (right) hand. "Attacking Mace" (again an attacking right hand), does just the opposite, defending by stepping back with the right foot. Both techniques are developed independent of each other on opposite sides of the body, but they both function quite well with either right or left side dominance. Although all of Parker’s interpretations of his art tend to be right-handed, students with left-handed dominance can, and do flourish.

But no matter how well you perform in symmetrical forms, the dominant side will always be more coordinated and controlled. However, in a fight or confrontation of significant stress, and given the choice, you will always have a preference for one side over the other.

In closing, remember all interpretations of Ed Parker’s American Kenpo should be about self-defense first. Many, specifically in America, have confused through clever marketing, sport training with self-defense training. Cross training and symmetrical performance borrowed from sport training and tradition-laden disciplines, must take a back seat to practical function and applications in reality.

For the same reasons of symmetrical dominance, with the addition of mechanical efficiency, please consider any passive non-action while opposite body parts are moving are dysfunctional in human anatomical movement, and violate this balanced perspective of anatomical movement as well.

The Ed Parker Slap check (or pak sao in Chinese), and all its many subcategories and functions are always in some manner active. To achieve certain balanced skills, it is imperative that both sides of the body be active and functional at all times, and never ever passive.

True ambidexterity is a myth and although it is worthy of pursuit, it should not overshadow the quest for practical application first. They don’t fight in tournaments they compete. On the street, right or left is irrelevant to survival. You should be capable of using both sides of your body, but not necessarily the same nor equal. Ed Parker was right handed, and so are the systems he created and influenced.



Over the years there have been significant misconceptions regarding the efficacy of right and left side training. A great deal of discussion exists relative to whether forms performances, and self-defense techniques are or should be right, left, or balanced in teaching and training execution.

The simple truth is all are correct in certain respects, and the confusion like many other topics, comes from the progenitor himself. Mr. Parker spent a considerable amount of time looking into the concept and reached some rather interesting conclusions in our own research and discussions.

As an example in the execution of "forms," in most versions of Ed Parker’s Short Form Two, it does indeed include the physical left side in its right side presentation. But, it is still considered, by Ed Parker’s definition, to be the right side, or what he quietly called right side brain dominant. However you do not reverse the synaptic and cerebellar pathway responsibilities for movement until the mirror image is performed.

This is what Parker meant by left side. The physical left is only motion or movement, but the true left side is an opposite or reversal of brain dominance and control. Thus all forms encompass in some manner right and left side, but to begin from the opposite side or mirror image reverses all mental functions and changes muscle response enough to have significant influence on function.

Whether this is necessary in teaching is dependent on how you teach or train. Ed Parker created a series of conceptually right-handed techniques. He himself was not ambidextrous, nor what he working to become that way. His goal instead was physical competency in the physical interaction of the activity. And those who borrow sport concepts like cross training seem to put more value into ambidexterity than those who concentrate on self-defense as he did.

Although in his commercial schools he encouraged left & right training for a variety of reasons, he recognized in self defense, competence was more important than performing left and right equally well. He knew that practicing both sides can yield benefits, but he also knew right & left would never be equal. Either way the operative phrase is mirror image execution, to activate both sides of the brain to create balance in any kind of physical training.

In Ed Parker’s self-defense philosophy however, training should be based on a curriculum of well thought out systematically principled and progressive techniques. The mechanisms inherent in the process are designed to emphasize situational effectiveness with ambidexterity irrelevant to function. Movements should be performed on both sides to demonstrate effective basic skills generated by both sides of the brain with their own unique synaptic pathways. But, self-defense techniques are about competence and effectiveness within the sequence first, and emphasis must be place there as a top priority.

Of course basic skills should be raised to an acceptable level of effectiveness, but the goal of balance in the execution of self-defense techniques in their mirror image is unnecessary, time consuming, and not physically possible when it comes to equity.

The teachers who preach this both sides technique execution perspective themselves are not equally proficient on both sides. Most traditional styles and disciplines and even western boxing have techniques and moves used only from the left or right side. Most styles promote a left side forward to allow use of the right (strong) hand and leg from the rear. Even when the techniques change they still favor the right side. Even in those schools that promote equal side proficiency it is never, nor is it possible to be actually achieved.

The reasons it is not possible are physiological involving a mental interaction with the body’s ability to perform. Each side of the body is controlled by opposite sides of the brain. For example, when learning a left kick, a synaptic pathway must be created or established through the right side of the brain and vice versa. No matter how you train, the left and right pathways will never be identical in function. Even though the two sides of the brain function together, they do not have identical ways of performing the same function. They may produce identical physical movement, but how the movements are produced and controlled from the brain are very different.

Additionally the human body is not mathematically symmetrical in the true sense of the term. It is normal in human anatomy for one leg or arm to be longer than the other, and even different in diameter. Every muscle, tendon, cartilage, and even hair growth varies from side to side. World-class athletes do not stride, jump, throw, or move the same on both sides of the body. What is even more interesting is when an athlete is trained to be exactly symmetrical in their execution; it has been shown that physical performance actually declines overall. The body may be visually aesthetically symmetrical, but not precisely physically or mathematically.

Most have unreasonable expectations with regard to weak side performance. If we anticipate we can train the weak side to perform equally with the strong, we are mistaken. Because of how the brain works, you cannot attain the exact same degree of skill on both sides. It would be like attempting to teach yourself to write equally as well with both hands. You may achieve an acceptable level on the weak side but the strong will always be better and dominant.

Human beings have a natural physical preference to have a dominant side that is predetermined at birth. Even in cases where a person has activity dedicated dominance, they are always opposite of each other. I have a student who writes on one side, throws on the other, and still in baseball, bats opposite his dominant throwing side. But these activities are still functionally dedicated. He can’t write, bat, or throw equally with both. This dominance is so strong in human behavior; it cannot be overcome by external training.

In the Chinese Martial Science, students are taught opposite most other later martial art disciplines with the strong side forward for practicality. In examining the basic idea of most techniques, they can be executed on the prescribed side or they can be executed in what Mr. Parker, called Half Mirror Image. That is a technique may be designed for one side attacking, however just because the opponent uses the other side or mirror, doesn’t mean you have to react in kind with a mirror response.



The self-defense techniques Thrusting Salute and Buckling Branch as kicking defenses are both interchangeable whether the right or left kick is used in the attack. In Thrusting Salute the attack is a front kick with the right leg, and you respond with the prescribed Default Solution to that particular assault. When the attack of a left front kick is used in Buckling Branch, the attacker is now using the Mirror Image Assault of Thrusting Salute. However if you respond with the Default Solution to Thrusting Salute, you are in a Half Mirror Image Solution response. These attacks, although mirror opposites of each other, can be responded to with the same right handed response.

This type of training only requires one side be developed significantly to be functional. The opposite side can and will also be developed, but performing a different function. In another example, in the attack for Delayed Sword (a right hand), you defend by stepping back with the left foot and executing with your front (right) hand. Attacking Mace (again an attacking right hand), does just the opposite, defending by stepping back with the right foot. Both techniques are developed independent of each other on opposite sides of the body, but they both function quite well with either right or left side dominance. Although all of Parker’s interpretations of his art tend to be right-handed, students with left-handed dominance can, and do flourish.

But no matter how well you perform in symmetrical forms, the dominant side will always be more coordinated and controlled. However, in a fight or confrontation of significant stress, and given the choice, you will always have a preference for one side over the other.

In closing, remember all interpretations of Ed Parker’s American Kenpo should be about self-defense first. Many, specifically in America, have confused through clever marketing, sport training with self-defense training. Cross training and symmetrical performance borrowed from sport training and tradition-laden disciplines, must take a back seat to practical function and applications in reality.

For the same reasons of symmetrical dominance, with the addition of mechanical efficiency, please consider any passive non-action while opposite body parts are moving, as dysfunctional in human anatomy. This too violates the balanced perspective of anatomical movement as well.

The Ed Parker Slap check (or pak sao in Chinese), and all its many subcategories and functions are always in some manner active. To achieve certain balanced skills, it is imperative that both sides of the body be active and functional at all times, and never ever passive.

True ambidexterity is a myth and although it is worthy of pursuit, it should not overshadow the quest for practical application first. They don’t fight in tournaments they compete. On the street, right or left is irrelevant to survival. You should be capable of using both sides of your body, but not necessarily the same nor equal. Ed Parker was right handed, and so are the systems he created and influenced.
 

Dark Kenpo Lord

Brown Belt
Joined
Feb 22, 2004
Messages
425
Reaction score
48
Location
So. Cal.
Jumpin' Jeeehhoossaaphat, I wholeheartedly agree, agree, agree. Finally, some sense to this mess, THANK YOU. I wonder why it is so hard for many to see this fact Ron, it's just too logical I suppose.

DarK LorD
 
5

5 hand swords

Guest
Rob Broad said:
A simple method to help you get the material down is to video tape yourself doing the techniques slowly on the second side. Watch the tape and look for holes in your technique. Every few times you practice the second side tape your self, you should start to see improvement. The taping will help you find the things you have missed.

In no time you will be banging of techniques either side with out thought.
VERY USEFUL - NEW use of a now (modern="cheap magic trick") for basic training.

Use it or lose it, I just know which way it went.
Grasp New Things
 
5

5 hand swords

Guest
Doc said:
It's all busy work and has nothing to do with proficiency in a well taught system.
Except good lefty's or tricks and that really makes it busywork? lol.
I don't think so, can be a weak area no problem though but happens.
Hey! Do you think Leonardo (and I don’t mean the Turtle MA) with the entire mirror Latin Diary’s etc to his credit could have got this down ?

Practice
 
R

rmcrobertson

Guest
Seig--this reads like exactly what I was saying; in Short 3, first one steps forward with the right foot into the "destructive twins," beginning moves, runs through the right side of the form, then having returned to the horse stance steps forward with the left into the, "destructive twins," beginning moves....

So it's the same thing. What I can't seem to figure out are the arguments that a) after doing this, you STILL haven't done the "other side," of the form in Short 1, Long 1, and Short 3; b) there's some "other side," still to be done of forms such as Short 2, Long 3, Long 4, Long 5 & 6, even though these forms intertwine both sides from the start.

There only seems to be one form in which this would make the slightest sense, Long 2, which I've always liked but always found the weirdest form in kenpo.

As for the whole sidedness debate, I can't help but wonder why it is that folks can't figure out that if both Ron Chap'el and Larry Tatum are saying fundamentally the same thing about sidedness, there's a very good chance that that's the way to do it--given that if you add them up, you've got pretty much the span from 1960 or so to the present covered, including around twenty-five years or so of experience with Mr. Parker....

I mean, I realize that this isn't the only way in the world to see things, but in terms of kenpo...
 
C

clapping_tiger

Guest
I came in late on this thread and quite honestly did not have time to read all the pages in this thread, so if this has been posted I apologize. And I don't think the original question was whether it is practical or not,
mj-hi-yah said:
I'm wondering if anyone who teaches this or has self taught technique mirroring has any insights, ideas, suggestions, or recommendations on how to make this process a little less painful. :)

Thanks,
MJ :asian:
but by reading the last few pages it looks like the debate has taken that turn. Different schools and different instructors have different ideas on what has value and we should respect that. Anyway, we are required by our school to do the techniques on both sides right from the start. I don't see anything wrong with that. Something that may be helpful, and this goes along with the video taping method, is to video tape yourself doing the techniques as you normally would. Then when you watch the video, facing the TV, copy your movements and they should be on the opposite side. Do this until you are comfortable with it. The opposite side thing is quite a mental challenge at first but with some work it becomes just as easy as the base side.

Another helpful technique is to break each technique down into 3 or 4 segments. Then do 1 segment on the base side and mirror it on the opposite side, then do 1 and 2, then 1,2,3 and so on. This not only forces you to break down the technique and analyze it more, but gives your brain a challenge as well.
 

Doc

Senior Master
Joined
May 12, 2002
Messages
4,240
Reaction score
180
Location
Southern California
clapping_tiger said:
I came in late on this thread and quite honestly did not have time to read all the pages in this thread, so if this has been posted I apologize. And I don't think the original question was whether it is practical or not, but by reading the last few pages it looks like the debate has taken that turn. Different schools and different instructors have different ideas on what has value and we should respect that. Anyway, we are required by our school to do the techniques on both sides right from the start. I don't see anything wrong with that. Something that may be helpful, and this goes along with the video taping method, is to video tape yourself doing the techniques as you normally would. Then when you watch the video, facing the TV, copy your movements and they should be on the opposite side. Do this until you are comfortable with it. The opposite side thing is quite a mental challenge at first but with some work it becomes just as easy as the base side.

Another helpful technique is to break each technique down into 3 or 4 segments. Then do 1 segment on the base side and mirror it on the opposite side, then do 1 and 2, then 1,2,3 and so on. This not only forces you to break down the technique and analyze it more, but gives your brain a challenge as well.

Well now as opinion go, let me express mine in another way. If an individual feels the need and has the time to do techniques on both sides, then they have learned very little on either. Conceptually some interpretations by design include busy work because of a lack of understandings needed to teach more in-depth material, or to maintain a standard conducive to commercial and financial success. Of course all of these things are relative, and I've already stated my definitve case earlier in the thread for those who do not find it too long or in-depth to read. I recognize the superficial approach runs rampant and accept that what some have experienced and accept as in-depth material is in fact quite shallow. But, shallow is what some want and are very satisfied with. Just don't try and sell it to those who know better.

"Busy work is the distraction that keeps you from realizing that you are learning very little." - Ron Chapél

"If you can't dazzle them with science, blind them with bulls**t." - Ed Parker Sr.
 

Latest Discussions

Top