That's just not how it works in real life.

[Gerry Seymour]

small problem with this thesis.
the issue is that the stimuli within martial arts training often does not look like the stimuli that will be encountered in real situations.
thus the brain will draw a blank when looking for the response.
this is what i meant when i posted that the reality within the dojo must match the street reality.
not all arts practice the same so some will match but many wont.

That's why there should be an attempt made to create things that look like what's likely to happen, and to practice lots of different variations (which often comes in sparring/randori/rolling), so your brain gets used to recognizing a lot of different stimuli. I even prefer to work knife defense with a metal knife, rather than wood, for this reason.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

As we progress we move from fixed combos to ajusted combos depending on what the other guy does.

IMO, your "fixed combos" training should also cover "adjusted combos" training. I don't believe anybody can pull up a "adjusted combo" in fighting if he had not trained it before.

For example, when you sweep your opponent's leg, his head may open for your hook kick. But if you have not trained foot sweep, hook kick combo, even if the opportunity may be there, you may not be able to catch that opponent fast enough.

 

[Ironbear24]

One of the reasons I introduced kata was to give students a way to practice visualizing. I found that many, when they start, are unable to visualize where the other person is. They need practice at that, and kata seems to help (still early in the process), at least when I force them to move as if there was an actual person there.

Why not just do bunkai so a person is there? Or is the purpose to build visualizations?

 

[drop bear]

IMO, your "fixed combos" training should also cover "adjusted combos" training. I don't believe anybody can pull up a "adjusted combo" in fighting if he had not trained it before.

For example, when you sweep your opponent's leg, his head may open for your hook kick. But if you have not trained foot sweep, hook kick combo, even if the opportunity may be there, you may not be able to catch that opponent fast enough.

You can have a guess at what a person will do though.

Striking low then high is pretty common.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

You can have a guess at what a person will do though.

Striking low then high is pretty common.

But if one has never trained "hook kick" in his life, even if the opportunity is there, he won't be able to catch it.

 

[drop bear]

There was a demo that went full retard on that. Called it the science of something and pretended they could then predict the future.

Scars mabye?

I will have a look.

Auto kinematics. Is the term.

 

[Paul_D]

One reason to practice kata alone rather than with a partner can be so you can use full speed/power. Which you can't use on a person with some of the techniques (depending on your version of bunkai of course).

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Why not just do bunkai so a person is there? Or is the purpose to build visualizations?

Part of the purpose is to build that visualization ability. It helps for times when you can't keep your eyes on the person, or when lighting is poor. It also helps for solo practice, and seems to assist in pattern matching.

 

[JP3]

And of those situations, how many were something you could have predicted, resulting in a prescripted set of moves that actually happened as you expected?

I think you missed DirtyDog's point. His responsive moves were not "prescripted." His reflexive principles were, however.

Since you've not used the word principles yet, I am wondering if you never got this kind of teaching.

And I totally agree with you on Muay Thai being a wonderful illusion-crusher. It did the same thing for me.

As did judo, about 15 years later.

As did BJJ about 10 years after that.

 

[JP3]

One reason to practice kata alone rather than with a partner can be so you can use full speed/power. Which you can't use on a person with some of the techniques (depending on your version of bunkai of course).

Correction: You CAN do them full power... but you run out of people willing, or able, to train with you during the next class.

 

[JP3]

Part of the purpose is to build that visualization ability. It helps for times when you can't keep your eyes on the person, or when lighting is poor. It also helps for solo practice, and seems to assist in pattern matching.

And... for those times where there is an odd number of people.

 

[JP3]

For Martial D, I didn't read pages 2-4, so you may have used the word "principle" in there. My bad if so. I think my thought is still valid though and I am curious.

 

[Ironbear24]

I think you missed DirtyDog's point. His responsive moves were not "prescripted." His reflexive principles were, however.

Since you've not used the word principles yet, I am wondering if you never got this kind of teaching.

And I totally agree with you on Muay Thai being a wonderful illusion-crusher. It did the same thing for me.

As did judo, about 15 years later.

As did BJJ about 10 years after that.

What "illusions" exactly were crushed?

 

[Martial D]

I think you missed DirtyDog's point. His responsive moves were not "prescripted." His reflexive principles were, however.

Since you've not used the word principles yet, I am wondering if you never got this kind of teaching.

And I totally agree with you on Muay Thai being a wonderful illusion-crusher. It did the same thing for me.

As did judo, about 15 years later.

As did BJJ about 10 years after that.

Yes, BJJ was an eye opener. If you don't have real grappling training, there is literally nothing you can do once a good BJJ guys gets ahold of you. Humbling.

But anyway, yes I understand about training reflexes through repetition, muscle memory, etc (although the term reflexive principle has never come up afaik), but that's not the point. I've never argued against that. Why would I train martial arts at all if I didn't believe it was doing anything? The whole point is to train movements to be automatic.

The point, of which many seem to feel implicated(the old saying applies..if you think they are talking about you, they probably are), is that a fight, a real fight, isn't a predictable narrative you can build prior to combat and proceed to execute step by step. It just isn't.

If you do not hold the position that it is(the proverbial you), then why even argue?

 

[drop bear]

Correction: You CAN do them full power... but you run out of people willing, or able, to train with you during the next class.

I have plenty of partners who will let me train full power. I don't because someone would have to scoop me up with a trowel afterwards.

There is even a little speech made before sparring to pretty much that. It ends with if you start you have to finish. There is no running off mid round.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

If you do not hold the position that it is(the proverbial you), then why even argue?

Because the point was made, and then made more emphatically, as if someone were saying something that made the point more necessary. I really haven't heard/seen anyone say anything that supports your notion that people believe that. I'm sure some do, but I've not seen a point made here from which one could actually infer that conclusion.

Oh, and because it helps us practice explaining to students who don't yet get it. That's a lot of why I carry on some of the discussions I get into here. I encourage my students to challenge what they are taught. Often, what they come up with (what if's) is easily answered, because it's stuff we've been working on for a long time. Sometimes they come up with something that I don't have to talk about often, and MT is a good place to find out what explanations are most helpful (resolve the question, without ending their questioning).

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I have plenty of partners who will let me train full power. I don't because someone would have to scoop me up with a trowel afterwards.

There is even a little speech made before sparring to pretty much that. It ends with if you start you have to finish. There is no running off mid round.

Even with those folks, you couldn't safely do some of your techniques full-power/full-speed if you got into position to do them fully. (I'm talking about submissions like an arm bar lock or shoulder lock, where full power is never applied in training.)

 

[drop bear]

Even with those folks, you couldn't safely do some of your techniques full-power/full-speed if you got into position to do them fully. (I'm talking about submissions like an arm bar lock or shoulder lock, where full power is never applied in training.)

Arm bars and submissions dont really sort of work because they are full contact though. They work because you cant get out of them.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Arm bars and submissions dont really sort of work because they are full contact though. They work because you cant get out of them.

Agreed. I was just pointing out that this is probably what JP was referring to. If you actually went full-power all the way on those techniques, you'd run out of partners quickly. There are things we can do full-tilt, and things we have to hold back on. There are some things that fall in-between. I can throw full-force with many of my throws, against someone who has very good ukemi, but I can't do it often, because it's really hard on training partners to take falls that hard.

 

[jobo]

Arm bars and submissions dont really sort of work because they are full contact though. They work because you cant get out of them.

an arm bar full power is a broken arm, or at least badly damaged tendons.if you are fighting submission then it is by definition light contact