Power and Control

[DaveB]

I don't know about that. I've often continued momentarily through injuries in sports (until there was a good point to stop and get someone else on), without anger or fear being necessary. The emotion may be necessary for dealing with larger injuries, but we don't really want people continuing past those during training. I don't want most people breaking out significant amounts of anger or fear during training (or competition) - that's how people get hurt. There are some people - few, by proportion - whose anger is a useful and manageable component, even in relatively friendly competition.

I suggest you can also muster genuine aggression from pure determination. And the ability to fight through shock is more about self defence than the ring.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I suggest you can also muster genuine aggression from pure determination. And the ability to fight through shock is more about self defence than the ring.

I don't disagree with the idea of mustering genuine aggression from determination. To me, determination isn't really an emotion. That's probably just semantics, though, so if you were including determination in your prior comments, then we're probably more in agreement than I thought.

 

[KabutoKouji]

Personally, while I very much like the style of say kicks in a TKD pattern, for me the holding it out to show you had 'control' definitely did develop bad habits for me. where it has taken a long time to constantly force myself to 'snap back' straight away at any sort of instinctual level.

 

[PhotonGuy]

Some karate schools/styles have a strong focus on control from the very start of the karate journey.

I think that this is putting the cart before the horse and that the first year or so of training should be geared towards maximising power. After power speed, after speed, control.

What do you think?

No, control should come first. The first thing you should work on is control and proper technique. Once you develop good technique then you can start working on speed while making sure to maintain good technique. After that the power will come.

 

[DaveB]

No, control should come first. The first thing you should work on is control and proper technique. Once you develop good technique then you can start working on speed while making sure to maintain good technique. After that the power will come.

As I've said, power as I learned was a result of applying technique. So in advocating power development first I am also advocating technique 1st.

In my experience the first major obstacle in martial arts training is making your body move efficiently as one (power). Once that happens you need to be able to sustain it through movement and combinations of techniques (+balance).
Then you can worry about speed.

I still don't get what you are controlling before these steps have been taken? I suppose placement of your techniques, but what's the point if they lack strength or speed?

 

[JR 137]

As I've said, power as I learned was a result of applying technique. So in advocating power development first I am also advocating technique 1st.

In my experience the first major obstacle in martial arts training is making your body move efficiently as one (power). Once that happens you need to be able to sustain it through movement and combinations of techniques (+balance).
Then you can worry about speed.

I still don't get what you are controlling before these steps have been taken? I suppose placement of your techniques, but what's the point if they lack strength or speed?

What's the point in speed and power if you can't hit your target(s)? Knowing how to shoot an M16 won't make me lethal if I can't hit what I'm shooting at.

Proper form first, target practice second, then add speed, power, and target practice. Being able to get your foot up to your opponent's head and kick it is all about technique and control. Not control in the sense that you can keep your foot there and do squirrelly stuff, but being able to do it. Once you can (not full mastery, but a basic level of proficiency) then you start adding speed and power.

I think you're a lot closer to what everyone who's disagreeing with you than people realize.

I look at basic control as throwing a technique and being able to consistently hit a target. I don't mean a pin point target, but a consistent general area. Without a basic degree of consistency, you're just flailing away. Control can also be keeping your hands up when punching and kicking, not over swinging and falling over, and other stuff like that. There is a lot of crossover in control and proper technique.

 

[drop bear]

Also little detalils like not spiking people during take downs. Kicking dudes in the nuts and just basically being that guy nobody wants to train with.

 

[Martial D]

What I responded to was: "im not accepting of your claim fact that accuracy of a punch declines with speed to any meaningful extent"

And it does. Your acceptance of it or lack thereof does not matter one bit.

That does not mean that one should not train at the beginning stages of skill acquisition at high velocity. In fact, they definitely should. But, they need to know that they will suffer accuracy when doing so. However, that will improve over the long term.

Dangle a string from the ceiling. Reach out and touch it with your index finger 10 times. 10/10 times you will touch the string.

Now, same thing, same movement, but at full speed. If you land 3/10 you are pretty accurate.

Your premise seems self evident to me. I think some people just enjoy arguing.

 

[DaveB]

What's the point in speed and power if you can't hit your target(s)? Knowing how to shoot an M16 won't make me lethal if I can't hit what I'm shooting at.

Proper form first, target practice second, then add speed, power, and target practice. Being able to get your foot up to your opponent's head and kick it is all about technique and control. Not control in the sense that you can keep your foot there and do squirrelly stuff, but being able to do it. Once you can (not full mastery, but a basic level of proficiency) then you start adding speed and power.

I think you're a lot closer to what everyone who's disagreeing with you than people realize.

I look at basic control as throwing a technique and being able to consistently hit a target. I don't mean a pin point target, but a consistent general area. Without a basic degree of consistency, you're just flailing away. Control can also be keeping your hands up when punching and kicking, not over swinging and falling over, and other stuff like that. There is a lot of crossover in control and proper technique.

I'd question whether or not one needs training at all to make that level of accuracy. People who've no training can usually find the face quite easily (just ask my wife, she never misses).

And the usual training methods like focus pad work and partner drills incorporate general targeting skills anyway.

Control for me is more about being able to vary impact with precision. The technique based stuff and balance I lump under technique.

 

[Flying Crane]

As I've said, power as I learned was a result of applying technique. So in advocating power development first I am also advocating technique 1st.

In my experience the first major obstacle in martial arts training is making your body move efficiently as one (power). Once that happens you need to be able to sustain it through movement and combinations of techniques (+balance).
Then you can worry about speed.

I still don't get what you are controlling before these steps have been taken? I suppose placement of your techniques, but what's the point if they lack strength or speed?

In my training, proper technique centers around generation of power. It isn't just an abstract movement of "technique" to which power can be added or removed. It is proper movement and body engagement to deliver a powerful strike efficiently. That is proper technique.

So if you are not delivering with power, you have poor technique.

If you deliberately pull back your power, then you undermine the development of your own technique. By doing so, you interfere with the development of the proper body engagement necessary for powerful, and therefore proper, technique.

 

[Martial D]

In my training, proper technique centers around generation of power. It isn't just an abstract movement of "technique" to which power can be added or removed. It is proper movement and body engagement to deliver a powerful strike efficiently. That is proper technique.

So if you are not delivering with power, you have poor technique.

If you deliberately pull back your power, then you undermine the development of your own technique. By doing so, you interfere with the development of the proper body engagement necessary for powerful, and therefore proper, technique.

Agreed. Technique IS power. With good technique you can generate a lot of power without using a lot of muscle.

 

[drop bear]

I'd question whether or not one needs training at all to make that level of accuracy. People who've no training can usually find the face quite easily (just ask my wife, she never misses).

And the usual training methods like focus pad work and partner drills incorporate general targeting skills anyway.

Control for me is more about being able to vary impact with precision. The technique based stuff and balance I lump under technique.

Yeah. I had issues where I was kicking guys heads off. I could get up there and nail the kick. But when I landed it was end of the round, go grab an ice pack. Especially if I set them up off a right hand

It makes it hard to train with volume if you can't kick with precision. If you cant train with volume. You can't gain the necessary skills.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yeah. I had issues where I was kicking guys heads off. I could get up there and nail the kick. But when I landed it was end of the round, go grab an ice pack. Especially if I set them up off a right hand

It makes it hard to train with volume if you can't kick with precision. If you cant train with volume. You can't gain the necessary skills.

I think I'm even more inclined that way, DB, because my primary focus in most of my training has been locks and throws. Locks require restraint from the very first time - they are done on a person from first experience, whereas strikes usually start on a practice target of some sort. But the principle is the same. If I threw without control on a regular basis, I'd have the same problem you had with those head kicks (I problem I'm unlikely to have - my head kicks aren't very powerful).

 

[DaveB]

Yeah. I had issues where I was kicking guys heads off. I could get up there and nail the kick. But when I landed it was end of the round, go grab an ice pack. Especially if I set them up off a right hand

It makes it hard to train with volume if you can't kick with precision. If you cant train with volume. You can't gain the necessary skills.

Totally, but as I said I'm quite fine with either no partner work or pads only or fully armoured partner work until the comtrol phase is reached.

I'm not anti control, I'm anti control at the beginning of ones training. After 6 months to a year when one has turned their body into a weapon (perhaps not quite the immortal iron fist yet) then they can learn to control it, then comes the refinement of skills through partner training.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Totally, but as I said I'm quite fine with either no partner work or pads only or fully armoured partner work until the comtrol phase is reached.

I'm not anti control, I'm anti control at the beginning of ones training. After 6 months to a year when one has turned their body into a weapon (perhaps not quite the immortal iron fist yet) then they can learn to control it, then comes the refinement of skills through partner training.

I disagree with this approach entirely, Dave, but I'm not entirely certain I'm doing so for good reason. Part of it definitely goes to my grappling bias - there's no way to do that effectively without a partner, and no amount of armoring helps much against an uncontrolled partner. Part of my disagreement also comes from having dealt with people who didn't learn control early. It seems to take them an inordinate amount of time to learn it, once the habit of uncontrolled striking sets in. But that might be people who wouldn't have had good control, regardless of the order of approach.

So, while I disagree vehemently, there might be a valid point in there I'm just biased against.

 

[Buka]

Fortunately, there's more than one way to skin a cat. And, fortunately, I've skinned a lot of cats.

 

[drop bear]

Totally, but as I said I'm quite fine with either no partner work or pads only or fully armoured partner work until the comtrol phase is reached.

I'm not anti control, I'm anti control at the beginning of ones training. After 6 months to a year when one has turned their body into a weapon (perhaps not quite the immortal iron fist yet) then they can learn to control it, then comes the refinement of skills through partner training.

6 months before you spar? You would grow old and die before you had any usable skill.

 

[DaveB]

6 months before you spar? You would grow old and die before you had any usable skill.

I'm in the camp that says sparring too early just ingrained bad habits and slows overall progress.

Also I posted this in the karate forum because I think of it in terms of karate rhetoric. So since we are already going for a long term training plan a few months isn't going to make any difference.

Also I completely concede that this is not a suitable strategy for grappling. Different method needs different training.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I'm in the camp that says sparring too early just ingrained bad habits and slows overall progress.

Also I posted this in the karate forum because I think of it in terms of karate rhetoric. So since we are already going for a long term training plan a few months isn't going to make any difference.

Also I completely concede that this is not a suitable strategy for grappling. Different method needs different training.

I teach an art where striking is not the primary weapon, and I wouldn't want my students to go 6 months without sparring. I think that's definitely too long to spend NOT working with a partner on strikes. We start partner striking about 2-1 weeks in (again, striking isn't our primary weapon, otherwise, this would probably be the 2nd class), with a basic strikes/blocks drill that gets them used to facing a punch. That's part of the progression to sparring. They should be able to do light, controlled (there's that word again) sparring within a month of that (sooner, for a striking art).

I don't think it's fair to the student to assume they will be around for 5 years. Many things can change their plans, and if the purpose of the training is for them to be able to use it against a person (whether for self-defense or competition, or both), they should start building that ability early.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I think everyone is using a different perspective of what sparring is. There are different levels of sparring and not all sparring is about winning or taking hard shots.
From what I see in the conversations it's clear to see that sparring can be done early or later based on the type of sparring.

For me I want people to be comfortable with attacks coming in, starting with punching. Student seem to be less intimidated when they are put into this environment as soon as possible. I say this because I finally figured out why some of the students in my school are afraid to spar. They are afraid to spar because they spent 6 months watching other students punch and kick the mess out of pads during drills, and they have put in their minds that's what they will get in sparring. They mentally make sparring to be worse than it really is especially for beginners. I rather get students sparring before they start building their misconceptions on what sparring is and more important what fighting is.