Absorb What is Useful

[Xue Sheng]

I think that only a maniac or a mass murderer would refuse to allow you to work around that kind of issue.

well I did talk to him once years ago.... he was rather a nice guy and very calm demeanor..... PERFECT cover for a maniacal mass murder

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

It has to do with you being in a strong position and them being weak. Which can be some very subtle differences. And it is not always intuitive.

The issue is that almost nobody who is any good is putting much time in to your crank a locks. (And this is because there is no real money in it. Sports guys can't do them so they don't bother. And crank a lock guys don't have to be very good. So they don't bother)

So you have to come at the mechanics sideways a bit. Find similar ideas and re work them.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

standing wrist or elbow locks not allowed in sport applications? Why not? It seems like a viable lead in.

 

[Glaeken]

Many, many years ago during my very short time in jiu-jutsu, I had the honor to engage in randori with a Russian Olympic judo champion.

Who was that?

You said "champion". That's not an Olympic rank.

Gold, silver, bronze? Soviet, Federation?

I follow Olympic Judo very, very closely.

 

[isshinryuronin]

Who was that?

You said "champion". That's not an Olympic rank.

Gold, silver, bronze? Soviet, Federation?

I follow Olympic Judo very, very closely.

It was over 50 years ago, a one-time thing, so that's all I can recall. The jiu jutsu sensei's name was Seki. This is long before you were probably born. But, why do you ask?

 

[Glaeken]

It was over 50 years ago, a one-time thing, so that's all I can recall. The jiu jutsu sensei's name was Seki. This is long before you were probably born. But, why do you ask?

Just curious. That's a short list. Maybe 10 people.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

standing wrist or elbow locks not allowed in sport applications? Why not? It seems like a viable lead in.

Some sport rulesets do allow them, as I understand. Some of these locks don't have a lot of "availability" (situations where they are reasonable answers), and that goes down the better your opponent is at defending arm locks. And some of them just aren't good for submission, because (as we've been discussing) there's too fine a line between "almost there" and "too far" - leading to injuries. Someone training for sport is much better served pursuing options that can be reasonably practiced at speed with resistance. You can get good with other techniques in the time it takes to start to get the feel for some of these - it's just not an efficient training path for competition. Some of the folks I've trained with who worked as bouncers, cops, etc. found these fairly useful (I never needed any of my MA this way, even when working security or the little bit of door work I did), even if they didn't go to the lock. The near-finish on these should include some signicant structure disruption they could use to get a situation under control - leading to cuffing or escort techniques.

 

[isshinryuronin]

Just curious. That's a short list. Maybe 10 people.

I appreciate your interest in accuracy of claims, and one I share. In that regard I will admit to only a 80% chance he was an Olympic/World medalist with a 20% chance he was just a national medalist. The incident is 100% true.

 

[Glaeken]

I appreciate your interest in accuracy of claims, and one I share. In that regard I will admit to only a 80% chance he was an Olympic/World medalist with a 20% chance he was just a national medalist. The incident is 100% true.

1964 Summer Olympics​
Lightweight, Men	Oleg Stepanov	=3	Bronze
	Ārons Boguļubovs	=3	Bronze
Heavyweight, Men	Parnaoz Chik'viladze	=3	Bronze
	Anzor K'ik'nadze	=3	Bronze
1972 Summer Olympics​
Lightweight, Men	Sergey Suslin	=13
Half-Middleweight, Men	Anatoly Novikov	=3	Bronze
Middleweight, Men	Guram Gogolauri	=5
Half-Heavyweight, Men	Shota Chochishvili	1	Gold
Heavyweight, Men	Givi Onashvili	=3	Bronze
Open Class, Men	Vitaly Kuznetsov	2	Silver

 

[Taiji Rebel]

Learning comes from all your contacts, experiences and all facets of your life. The assimilation of learning is called knowledge and the proper use of knowledge is called wisdom. Knowledge in martial arts can come from fields outside the martial arts. Knowledge can come from your peers, your elders, your juniors, your teachers, your students and even from your mistakes. Sometimes in a light conversation outside of a class room, you can become aware of a concept that a two-hour classroom lecture didn't reveal to you - Dan Inosanto

Absorb what is useful. Dan Inosanto's short essay which began this thread is thought-provoking. As students and teachers it is important to learn from all our life experiences. Last year I asked those who teach for their thoughts on improving and evolving their teaching. A lot of responses referred to the technical aspects of training; knowing the fundamentals is key, but there is much more to learning and teaching martial arts in the long run.

In the Dan Inosanto extract above he speaks about knowledge in martial arts coming from fields outside of the martial arts and I am curious to know what kinds of examples come to the minds of forum members here?

 

[gyoja]

Learning comes from all your contacts, experiences and all facets of your life. The assimilation of learning is called knowledge and the proper use of knowledge is called wisdom. Knowledge in martial arts can come from fields outside the martial arts. Knowledge can come from your peers, your elders, your juniors, your teachers, your students and even from your mistakes. Sometimes in a light conversation outside of a class room, you can become aware of a concept that a two-hour classroom lecture didn't reveal to you - Dan Inosanto

Absorb what is useful. Dan Inosanto's short essay which began this thread is thought-provoking. As students and teachers it is important to learn from all our life experiences. Last year I asked those who teach for their thoughts on improving and evolving their teaching. A lot of responses referred to the technical aspects of training; knowing the fundamentals is key, but there is much more to learning and teaching martial arts in the long run.

In the Dan Inosanto extract above he speaks about knowledge in martial arts coming from fields outside of the martial arts and I am curious to know what kinds of examples come to the minds of forum members here?

I learned application to a much higher degree in the military. I also honed some of my self discipline as well, for example when I was food and sleep deprived.

 

[marvin8]

Everything within our experience operates within the laws of physics. This includes martial arts.

Yes, whether people realize it or not.

However, what this fellow described in the video is nothing more than introductory physics, even using the typical impact descriptions of “which would generate more force, a car moving at 5 mph vs. a heavier truck moving at 5 mph” that you would find in an introductory physics course.

More specifically, he is describing Newton's 3 Laws of Motion.

He didn’t make any real connection to the martial arts with this introductory physics. He tried. It was extremely non-specific, which gives nothing that is actually useful. Is an understanding of physics useful, and worthwhile in its own right? Absolutely. But trying to marry the equations to martial methods is something that I believe is a largely fruitless and pointless exercise.

Well, it's an introductory video. He may or may not be able to go more in depth in another video or class. Here Michael Page covers creating impact (action/reaction), momentum and head on collisions which follows Newton's Laws of Motion. (In throwing, the impact is the ground.)

Yeah, it’s intentional. It's usually based off something that they're doing, a forward action that they're doing. It’s often I like to create, my coach likes to call it, the “car crash” effect. I get you pulling forward. And then that's when I decide to go in the opposite direction. I want to constantly create a car crash.

So yeah, I need to have an understanding of the person that's in front of me. Everybody likes to respond differently. So for the first minute, minute and a half, depending on how quickly it takes for me to kind of figure somebody out, I call it “attaching strings.” Every time I fake, I might see you twitch. I'm like okay that's for that. And I'll twitch this and I see something else happening. So, I'm attaching strings where I'm doing a lot of faking, a lot of moving. But nothing's happening. But there's a lot going on. It's intentional just for me to understand what your preference is for a specific thing. What are you waiting for? Okay now I know how to bait you. Now, I know how to start pulling and playing with the strings I have now attached. [Now it's the case of which move am I going to assign to this.

It is no mystery, nor is it the exclusive realm of the physicist that if you punch a target that is moving toward you, you will land the strike with more force than if the target is stationary or moving away from you (assuming all other factors are equal). Trying to point to Newton’s laws to describe such an interaction in the chaos of combat is rather meaningless.

However, there are MAists that advocate block, trap or pull, then punch which can reduce the force of impact and cause other issues. There is a difference in impact force and timing. "Don't chase hands, chase the center."

Aside from this exercise being largely pointless, in my opinion, my cynical side suspects it is more about trying to claim a higher level of sophistication in one’s methods. “look at us! We aren’t just brutish brawlers (like the rest of you Neanderthals)! We are HIGHLY EDUCATED SCIENTISTS!! See??!! I am using NEWTON’S LAWS OF PHYSICS!!”

Yes, some may be using physics more for marketing, others not. Jeet Kune Do takes a physics and scientific approach to their pursuit of "absorb what is useful."

This is pointless and can very quickly become downright nonsense, and I hate to say it but it seems like the kenpo lineages (which the fellow in the video is part of) tend to go down this kind of path more than others Ive seen.

However, guiding principles can be useful. Robert Chuckrow writes about tai chi and Newton's Laws of Motion.

Excerpt from "A Clarification of “Secret” Teachings Revealed by Cheng Man-ch’ing:"

“A Force of 1,000 Pounds can be deflected with a Force of Four Ounces.” What is meant by this oft-quoted saying is that a very powerful attack can be deflected with a very small force....

 

[Taiji Rebel]

Yes, whether people realize it or not.


More specifically, he is describing Newton's 3 Laws of Motion.


Well, it's an introductory video. He may or may not be able to go more in depth in another video or class. Here Michael Page covers creating impact (action/reaction), momentum and head on collisions which follows Newton's Laws of Motion. (In throwing, the impact is the ground.)

However, there are MAists that advocate block, trap or pull, then punch which can reduce the force of impact and cause other issues. There is a difference in impact force and timing. "Don't chase hands, chase the center."


Yes, some may be using physics more for marketing, others not. Jeet Kune Do takes a physics and scientific approach to their pursuit of "absorb what is useful."


However, guiding principles can be useful. Robert Chuckrow writes about tai chi and Newton's Laws of Motion.

Excerpt from "A Clarification of “Secret” Teachings Revealed by Cheng Man-ch’ing:"

Steven Pearlman's book is perfect for those of you who enjoy discussing the theory and reading about Newtonian physics as applied to martial arts:

Amazon.com

In some classes you will have students who wish to know the theoretical aspects and it's a good idea to have a few simple examples to satisfy their curiosity... Steven Pearlman's book fulfils that requirement.

A higher percentage of students though are happier to learn techniques and start testing them during practice and sparring sessions.

"Those who know do not speak. Those who speak do not know" - Lao Tzu

 

[isshinryuronin]

Steven Pearlman's book is perfect for those of you who enjoy discussing the theory and reading about Newtonian physics as applied to martial arts

The definitive word here is "enjoy." For many (and me to a lesser extent) it is interesting to see how the laws of physics coincides with MA, but it isn't necessary to be a good martial artist. Objects in nature follow these laws independent of their understanding of them. We all know that lowering our center of gravity aids in balance and lends some additional force in downward strikes and takedowns. Not because we've studied Newton's Laws, but because we have observed and personally experienced them.

Throughout the evolution of MA, and before, centuries of refining combat techniques have led us to discover the most efficient ways of moving to generate speed, power, leverage and other biomechanical elements to be applied in subduing an opponent. 95% of top fighters are very good at this without knowing anything more about physics than if you pick up a guy and let go, he'll fall down, or if you put body mass and/or speed behind a punch it will do more damage.

The combat applications of physics were discovered by experiencing them over time as to be good and have been codified in TMA kata and passed down by instructors. The Laws are inherent in MA. Even if we can't verbalize them, we utilize them. Talking about these laws may help a physics/engineering nerd catch on a little quicker or it may be interesting to see how they are manifested in MA, but the real learning and improving comes from doing.

Even allowing that studying the mathematical basis of physics may help someone tweek their MA by 1 or 3%, using that time to study tactics and combat psychology and practicing the moves will better oneself 10 or 20%.

 

[Fungus]

Everything within our experience operates within the laws of physics. This includes martial arts.

Yes, whether people realize it or not.

So they say about alot, but we still don't know in what realm the laws of physics themselves operate or evolve within, especially as you ponder about the forces possible diversities from one master interaction at big bang.

Some may think that the laws of physics just are irreducible. But many think that is merely a state of confusion.

"To suppose universal laws of nature capable of being apprehended by the mind and yet having no reason for their special forms, but standing inexplicable and irrational, is hardly a justifiable position. Uniformities are precisely the sort of facts that need to be accounted for. Law is par excellence the thing that wants a reason. "
-- [1201.2632] Unification of the state with the dynamical law

 

[Fungus]

Even allowing that studying the mathematical basis of physics may help someone tweek their MA by 1 or 3%, using that time to study tactics and combat psychology and practicing the moves will better oneself 10 or 20%.

I like to see similarities between abstractions.

I associated here between the strategy and psychology vs things like brute power - Who has the fastest hardest punch or kick?
or Who has the smartest fighting psychology?

One could argue that Quantum Mechanics (in game theoretic interpretation) relatest o newtons mechanics, like combat psychology relates to "punching and kicking mechanics".

The similarity is that in quantum interactions, the results of the interaction(read game/fight) is not a simple "average" of simplistic attach and counter combinations that are randomly thrown, but the expectation of your environment changes the game in a non-trivial way, such as interference.

I think the same is in fighting, each fighters mutual expectation of the other fighter significantly changes the outcome of the fight, because any SINGLE strategy is accounting for all the options. So analysing this allwos for better strategies than merely looking at who is the harder or faster kicker or puncher.

Game Theory in Defence Applications: A Review
"using game theory to devise strategies not only based on one’s own military options but also expectations around enemy actions as well. Game theory accounts for different interactions with the enemy, rather than simply considering which side had superior maximum-effort power"
-- Game Theory in Defence Applications: A Review

I think what I wanted to say, is that there may be a mathematical basis also for combat psychology, which in a sense may be more fundamental than the laws of physics, because many physical interactions also have the appearance of relational games, and not as rigid as fixed laws of physics. I think the latter is a much simplisitic view of the world I refuse to endorse.

 

[Hyoho]

Absorb What is Useful​

-by Guro Dan Inosanto

Lol, Guru Inosanto told my friend he was to be promoted in recognition of his many years of practice and teaching. To come to his event to be acknowledged. What he had not mentioned was the large amount of money he was expect to pay for it.

 

[Flying Crane]

Nice to see a few posts that make my point.

 

[mograph]

Steven Pearlman's book is perfect for those of you who enjoy discussing the theory and reading about Newtonian physics as applied to martial arts:

Amazon.com

I love Pearlman's book, especially in how it crosses disciplines and styles.

 

[isshinryuronin]

One could argue that Quantum Mechanics..........

.........allows us to be in two places at once? Cool. I can land both a front kick and back kick on a guy at the same time.