I've heard that Systema doesn't teach techniques per se. But surely they must teach some basic punches, kicks, etc. Is this so? If not, are people assumed to come to Systema with some basic knowledge of basic striking techniques?
Systema--Technique-free?
- Thread starter arnisador
- Start date
Klondike93
Master Black Belt
They do teach to punch and kick but not in the traditional manner.
They even do target work once and a while but mostly we just punch and kick each other.
They even do target work once and a while but mostly we just punch and kick each other.
Wouldn't those people you punch and kick at be and have targets? or does target work mean somthing different?
Arthur
Blue Belt
I think by target work... Klondike meant focus pad work. Of course anything you hit is a target... kind of. At least after the fact.
That said... I don';t teach my student how to punch. I teach them hoew to generate force. I teach them how they can find different ways of expressing and generating that force. The motions that come from that training can be an elbow, a punch, a throw, a choke, a lock, etc.
No technique... just movement.
Arthur
That said... I don';t teach my student how to punch. I teach them hoew to generate force. I teach them how they can find different ways of expressing and generating that force. The motions that come from that training can be an elbow, a punch, a throw, a choke, a lock, etc.
No technique... just movement.
Arthur
T
TAZ
Guest
Arthur,
great explination! One of the hardest concepts for new students to grasp is the idea of no technique...however once they start moving they quickly understand how a strike is just a continuation of movement and that the movement does not stop with the strike
We view the whole body as a striking tool and applied as an intrinsic part of all movement e.g. chest, hips, butt!....very hard to describe but very easy to feel....
For me it was the hook that drew me to the System..so simple but so capable...
my humble take on the subject.
regards
Taz
great explination! One of the hardest concepts for new students to grasp is the idea of no technique...however once they start moving they quickly understand how a strike is just a continuation of movement and that the movement does not stop with the strike
We view the whole body as a striking tool and applied as an intrinsic part of all movement e.g. chest, hips, butt!....very hard to describe but very easy to feel....
For me it was the hook that drew me to the System..so simple but so capable...
my humble take on the subject.
regards
Taz
Klondike93
Master Black Belt
That's why Arthur gets the big bucks and I don't, he can explain things a lot better than I.
I think that saying that we don't have techniques in Systema is misleading. We have movements. We have pieces of movements put together to give a reaction in the opponent's body. We typically, on the fly, mesh these together for a desired result.
What we normally don't have is "First do this, then this and this and this...and end with this"....as a concrete "structured" idea of what a technique is.
Strikes are worked on immensely. Everytime I do or am taught the "same old basics", it's brand new. The angle of thought and the depth of approach has changed dramatically....always furthering the understanding and comfort of it all. Yet, in the end...everything done is a bi-product of movement.
What we normally don't have is "First do this, then this and this and this...and end with this"....as a concrete "structured" idea of what a technique is.
Strikes are worked on immensely. Everytime I do or am taught the "same old basics", it's brand new. The angle of thought and the depth of approach has changed dramatically....always furthering the understanding and comfort of it all. Yet, in the end...everything done is a bi-product of movement.
I always liked the comparison to jazz, myself.
Or, perhaps, similar to the way my grandfather, upon purchasing a tin whistle while living in an orphanage almost a century ago, was able to experiment and teach himself how to master the instrument.
We have 'movements' - limited only by the vast range of motion we are capable of - that we link together, adapting to the infinite amount of variables of attack.
We do not have set techniques - no 'response 'a' to attack sequence 'b' - repeated the 10,000 times in training, until it is a programmed response.
It is, in many ways, MUCH easier to do than one might initially believe.
Or, perhaps, similar to the way my grandfather, upon purchasing a tin whistle while living in an orphanage almost a century ago, was able to experiment and teach himself how to master the instrument.
We have 'movements' - limited only by the vast range of motion we are capable of - that we link together, adapting to the infinite amount of variables of attack.
We do not have set techniques - no 'response 'a' to attack sequence 'b' - repeated the 10,000 times in training, until it is a programmed response.
It is, in many ways, MUCH easier to do than one might initially believe.
T
TAZ
Guest
Rob,
interesting analogy..one of my students is a 58 year old ex british paratrooper..who happens to also be an avid musician...he compares systema to music all the time...he tells me I provide his with the notes and he arranges them into his own tune... his music and my music are similar but each tune has subtle variations in the notes...
The analogy strikes a chord with me...ok sorry but couldn't resist that one... interestingly enough he did bring a drum stick along to last nights class to play with as an improvised weapon..makes a great Yawara substitute!!
Dave
interesting analogy..one of my students is a 58 year old ex british paratrooper..who happens to also be an avid musician...he compares systema to music all the time...he tells me I provide his with the notes and he arranges them into his own tune... his music and my music are similar but each tune has subtle variations in the notes...
The analogy strikes a chord with me...ok sorry but couldn't resist that one... interestingly enough he did bring a drum stick along to last nights class to play with as an improvised weapon..makes a great Yawara substitute!!
Dave
It is hard for me, personally; to compare Systema to any martial art that I have not studied in depth. Also, it would be unfair and a disservice to practitioners in those methods to attempt to do so.
Our family member - Jackal - might be willing to take on that task, though I will not prevail on him to do so...it might be quite interesting.
Systema-ist's kinda get used to comparisons to other arts that viewers are practised in. It is, perhaps, human nature - we can only view things and express them through the familiar.
Our family member - Jackal - might be willing to take on that task, though I will not prevail on him to do so...it might be quite interesting.
Systema-ist's kinda get used to comparisons to other arts that viewers are practised in. It is, perhaps, human nature - we can only view things and express them through the familiar.
Jackal
Orange Belt
Somewhere, lost in the mists perhaps, I wrote a post comparing and contrasting Systema and Kenpo in response to a Kenpo practitioners inquiry. Ill have to see if I kept a copy and it still looks worth posting.
I dont have a lot of time to write at the moment but I can make some quick comments about technique vs. no-technique.
If were defining technique as, The systematic procedure by which a complex or scientific task is accomplished then it is true that we do not study techniques in Systema. Training is build upon situational drills where movement is borne out of necessity. More time is spent in the pursuit of understanding the capabilities of ones own body rather than imitating someone elses solution to a given problem.
A brief example of a warm-up drill from my first week at Vladimirs school:
1. One person holds a backbend or bridge position
2. Partner thrusts downward with a staff on to the torso or limbs of the bent person.
3. Bent person must yield to or evade staff, always returning to backbend position.
I was having a particularly difficult time evading at first so when Vlad walked by, I asked him how I was supposed to do this properly. He looked at me with a serious expression and said, Its your body. Its better that you figure it out. He then walked away.
It was frustrating at the time but it started me on the path of thinking for myself and coming up with my own solutions.
In Systema training, innovation and creative problem solving is stressed as essential. It was freedom that I was never permitted to explore in my earlier, more traditional training.
I am definitely better for it.
-Jackal
I dont have a lot of time to write at the moment but I can make some quick comments about technique vs. no-technique.
If were defining technique as, The systematic procedure by which a complex or scientific task is accomplished then it is true that we do not study techniques in Systema. Training is build upon situational drills where movement is borne out of necessity. More time is spent in the pursuit of understanding the capabilities of ones own body rather than imitating someone elses solution to a given problem.
A brief example of a warm-up drill from my first week at Vladimirs school:
1. One person holds a backbend or bridge position
2. Partner thrusts downward with a staff on to the torso or limbs of the bent person.
3. Bent person must yield to or evade staff, always returning to backbend position.
I was having a particularly difficult time evading at first so when Vlad walked by, I asked him how I was supposed to do this properly. He looked at me with a serious expression and said, Its your body. Its better that you figure it out. He then walked away.
It was frustrating at the time but it started me on the path of thinking for myself and coming up with my own solutions.
In Systema training, innovation and creative problem solving is stressed as essential. It was freedom that I was never permitted to explore in my earlier, more traditional training.
I am definitely better for it.
-Jackal
Jackal wrote: "If were defining technique as, The systematic procedure by which a complex or scientific task is accomplished then it is true that we do not study techniques in Systema. Training is built upon situational drills where movement is borne out of necessity. More time is spent in the pursuit of understanding the capabilities of ones own body rather than imitating someone elses solution to a given problem. "
Very nicely put!!
mark
Very nicely put!!
mark
"I've heard that Systema doesn't teach techniques per se" - as all the above replies Systema does not teach teachniques in {attacker} throws left punch and {defender} moves to the left with a kick to the nuts!! i.e. there is no densho to follow.
However with new students you have to create a "framework" for them to understand on how to punch properly i.e. elbow bent, 90 deg, no streching back, relaxed shoulders and 'strong' wrist etc.. Its with these principles and framework that a NEW student can start to create their movements. There is a scientific basis of how and why some of these principles work, and understanding these ideas before will help you on the learning curve. I believe that these are some of the principles on k-sys and ROSS (especially the figure 8's principles which I like) - i..e learning the scientific principles of motion, movement and biomechanics.
Pervaz
However with new students you have to create a "framework" for them to understand on how to punch properly i.e. elbow bent, 90 deg, no streching back, relaxed shoulders and 'strong' wrist etc.. Its with these principles and framework that a NEW student can start to create their movements. There is a scientific basis of how and why some of these principles work, and understanding these ideas before will help you on the learning curve. I believe that these are some of the principles on k-sys and ROSS (especially the figure 8's principles which I like
) - i..e learning the scientific principles of motion, movement and biomechanics.Pervaz
My introduction to systema was a bit different than many. Basically I spent the first year under an instructor drilling the material found in H2H, ground fighting, holds, releases and attacks, plus assorted games. My instructor was a real taskmaster, and didn't just demand that my movements look good, but would b very exacting in terms of which muscles were involved, and 'feel'. And of course he would crush me with the sparring and his rather dirty brand of wrestling. Sometimes he'd put me in a painful hold and scream at me to think (of a way out). After some time, something clicked, but it took a LOT of thinking and rethinking of basic assumptions.
After that year I was much better at sparring (as I found out when I started sparring with other people), but I stopped using my jujutsu and used just what I'd learned during systema. A couple of years later, my jujutsu started coming out of me, too, although often modified and not premeditated. Since then I've picked up very basic stuff from others I have met.
So to use a japanese reference, systema has no waza, but it does have some kihon.
Although, as you go further, the kihon gets subsumed in the movement. You learn to make up your own kihon and think in terms of end results rather than methods.
At the end, you just have this amophous skill set.
After that year I was much better at sparring (as I found out when I started sparring with other people), but I stopped using my jujutsu and used just what I'd learned during systema. A couple of years later, my jujutsu started coming out of me, too, although often modified and not premeditated. Since then I've picked up very basic stuff from others I have met.
So to use a japanese reference, systema has no waza, but it does have some kihon.
Although, as you go further, the kihon gets subsumed in the movement. You learn to make up your own kihon and think in terms of end results rather than methods.
At the end, you just have this amophous skill set.
K
Kwan Lee
Guest
This has turned into a great thread with many important ideas given by a few regulars in The System. Please permit me to think out loud for a minute or two.
I would agree with the importance of learning at least some basics that can be described as technique-like. Pressure point work is one area that needs to be taught in this way. However, the delivery of pressure point striking, or any striking, should be, in a word, mindless, whether or not they are done with wave-like figure-eight movement.
Things like proper alignment in punching and movement using the wave are related to keeping and releasing form, a cornerstone principle. In The System, we want to look at things conceptually in order to build attributes and tools that are able to generate the needed technique in any given situation. Techniques are the decoration and frosting over the base (cake) of proper movement. A technique + technique = result mentality will probably yield reasonable results in the training hall, but the time it takes to refer to this methodology in a real situation will probably get you hurt. Of course, we must use our heads to stay out of trouble, but in the heat of it all, our bodies should do the thinking by using intuition, energy fields, and contact forces as tools and inputs.
An example of a more effective construct would be to ask yourself how your initial evasive movement could give you the time and positioning to do other things. This methodology can result in endless variations. How then can someone focus solely on memorization of technique? I have learned that for the most part, learning in this way is not the most practical. Movement is first; technique is second. Of course, all of this is in conjunction with proper form, breathing, and relaxation. It is my experience that the moment I start to think about doing a specific technique in a situation is the moment I start to tense up (mentally then physically). This may be because I am trying to consciously focus on doing a technique while having to react to the actions of my attacker(s), and we all know that the mind cannot focus on two things at once. If we are lucky, the technique will stick, but while youre taking the time to think of doing the technique and realize that it worked, did you consider the guys buddy behind you?
That being said It is our nature to want to do technique. We cannot avoid this. Techniques give us a very temporary hold on what is actually indefinable and unpredictable. However, we must understand that focusing on technique will hinder us from grasping over-arcing concepts such as freedom of movement.
I will relate an explanation given by one of Vladimirs senior students in Toronto about our limitations when it comes to simple concepts such as movement versus technique.
The concept of perfect movement can be understood as the body of all correct movements for any given situation, for all times. Perfect movement can thus be seen as a perfect, continuous circle. We, as students of perfect movement, will invariably tend to slice this circle into pieces (individual arcs) so that we are able to inspect, understand, and digest some part of the whole. Each piece can be considered a technique, an instance of movement that is taken out of the continuum of perfect movement. Among other reasons, we do this so that we feel comfortable within the immense framework of The System and also to give ourselves a benchmark in progress. We think that if we understand each piece of this circle, then we will eventually have it all.
The only problem is that, though this methodology is somewhat scientific, when we attempt to redraw these individual arcs for ourselves during the process of learning, we end up with imperfect curves of varying radii. Our formulas for examining these pieces are imprecise.
This is not to say that somebody should start micromanaging his or her training by studying all the technique in the world, in an attempt to draw a more precise circle. In the context of the metaphor above, the arcs would get much smaller, and the circle would take forever to construct. The high number of joints comprising this circle would further impede continuity and flow. It is unnatural to follow this path. It is mechanical and will freeze us up when things really need to flow. We must be ourselves by training in the most intuitive ways and allowing the training to reflect who we are individually.
And herein lies the essential truth that Vladimir once brought up:
We will never fully understand perfect movement because we are not perfect people.
We do our best however, and over time, we end up with a bumpy resemblance of what the actual circle should look like. Hopefully, we are always tweaking/refining/reconnecting these arcs as we revisit them over the course of our lives. That is why some circles are smoother than others.
Respectfully,
Kwan Lee
I would agree with the importance of learning at least some basics that can be described as technique-like. Pressure point work is one area that needs to be taught in this way. However, the delivery of pressure point striking, or any striking, should be, in a word, mindless, whether or not they are done with wave-like figure-eight movement.
Things like proper alignment in punching and movement using the wave are related to keeping and releasing form, a cornerstone principle. In The System, we want to look at things conceptually in order to build attributes and tools that are able to generate the needed technique in any given situation. Techniques are the decoration and frosting over the base (cake) of proper movement. A technique + technique = result mentality will probably yield reasonable results in the training hall, but the time it takes to refer to this methodology in a real situation will probably get you hurt. Of course, we must use our heads to stay out of trouble, but in the heat of it all, our bodies should do the thinking by using intuition, energy fields, and contact forces as tools and inputs.
An example of a more effective construct would be to ask yourself how your initial evasive movement could give you the time and positioning to do other things. This methodology can result in endless variations. How then can someone focus solely on memorization of technique? I have learned that for the most part, learning in this way is not the most practical. Movement is first; technique is second. Of course, all of this is in conjunction with proper form, breathing, and relaxation. It is my experience that the moment I start to think about doing a specific technique in a situation is the moment I start to tense up (mentally then physically). This may be because I am trying to consciously focus on doing a technique while having to react to the actions of my attacker(s), and we all know that the mind cannot focus on two things at once. If we are lucky, the technique will stick, but while youre taking the time to think of doing the technique and realize that it worked, did you consider the guys buddy behind you?
That being said It is our nature to want to do technique. We cannot avoid this. Techniques give us a very temporary hold on what is actually indefinable and unpredictable. However, we must understand that focusing on technique will hinder us from grasping over-arcing concepts such as freedom of movement.
I will relate an explanation given by one of Vladimirs senior students in Toronto about our limitations when it comes to simple concepts such as movement versus technique.
The concept of perfect movement can be understood as the body of all correct movements for any given situation, for all times. Perfect movement can thus be seen as a perfect, continuous circle. We, as students of perfect movement, will invariably tend to slice this circle into pieces (individual arcs) so that we are able to inspect, understand, and digest some part of the whole. Each piece can be considered a technique, an instance of movement that is taken out of the continuum of perfect movement. Among other reasons, we do this so that we feel comfortable within the immense framework of The System and also to give ourselves a benchmark in progress. We think that if we understand each piece of this circle, then we will eventually have it all.
The only problem is that, though this methodology is somewhat scientific, when we attempt to redraw these individual arcs for ourselves during the process of learning, we end up with imperfect curves of varying radii. Our formulas for examining these pieces are imprecise.
This is not to say that somebody should start micromanaging his or her training by studying all the technique in the world, in an attempt to draw a more precise circle. In the context of the metaphor above, the arcs would get much smaller, and the circle would take forever to construct. The high number of joints comprising this circle would further impede continuity and flow. It is unnatural to follow this path. It is mechanical and will freeze us up when things really need to flow. We must be ourselves by training in the most intuitive ways and allowing the training to reflect who we are individually.
And herein lies the essential truth that Vladimir once brought up:
We will never fully understand perfect movement because we are not perfect people.
We do our best however, and over time, we end up with a bumpy resemblance of what the actual circle should look like. Hopefully, we are always tweaking/refining/reconnecting these arcs as we revisit them over the course of our lives. That is why some circles are smoother than others.
Respectfully,
Kwan Lee
Jackal
Orange Belt
Great post Kwan!!
Great stuff everyone. I notice that there has been more great Systema posts on this forum in the last two days than in the old forum had in the past month+. Lossing the old forum sucks but one positive is that it has cleaned the slate and ignited new conversation. We can no longer tell folks that ask questions to look in the archives. Still miss the old forum but this new found chattyness is a surprising and nice by product. Take care.
mark
mark
Latest Discussions
-
-
-
-
-
-
Registering for a tournament in a belted system when you have no belt- Latest: Monkey Turned Wolf