How to attack-the missing information

[Dominic Jones]

Hello all

When talking about self defence techniques, the following statements are often heard:
Ć Understanding the attack is critical.
ƒÜ If you don¡¦t understand how people attack you won¡¦t recognize when they are attacking you.
Ć The technique is based on the how the attacker reacts and how they try to continue attacking.
Ć The type of attack dictates what technique to use.
Ć A proper attacker will result in a good technique.

I agree with the above statements and have heard them in various formats repeatedly from many different instructors/martial arts.

However, when attacks are described on the internet or in manuals the description for the attack is usually very brief and only describes the beginning move(s); often just ¡§left punch¡¨ or ¡§font grab¡¨. BUT the defence is often detailed covering angles, stances hand positions etc. For example, see the thread about Gripping Talon.

Often instructors will elaborate on the attack during a lesson, which is great.
But why aren¡¦t the attacks described more comprehensively in the manuals etc. This would help students to understand some of the reasons why there are different techniques for the ¡§same¡¨ general attack type.

Should the knowledge about different attacks be hidden from the students?
Should the students be expected to work out the different ways that a general attacking term can be realized in practice?
Is spoon feeding the students with all the answers, counter productive to increasing their ability to analyse techniques?


What do you think?


Cheers Dominic
:asian:

 

[Michael Billings]

I have them in Mr. Parker's "Notes" appended after each belt level in my manuals. Think of the attack description as a cue in the technique descriptions, while in the "Notes" that attack is clearly specifically defined, then the "What If's" are explored and suggested for us to explore and train our students.

I have not put the "Notes" up on my web site, nor do I intend to. Nor have I seen them on anyone else's sites. I guess Instructors are still good for something.

-Michael

 

[Ceicei]

It may be that the emphasis is on learning the fundamentals of defense first--the basics, before adding on to them. The analysis of attacks will come once we have secured a strong understanding of defense and how they can be modified to fit our needs.

In other words, there generally is no hurry to teach calculus to a toddler. When we as martial artists "mature" through training and experience and the careful tutelege of instructors, the analysis of attacks are taught to us along the way.

I have found that we of intermediate level and lower (and sometimes higher level too), myself included, often may exhibit the toddler trait without realizing it: "give it all to me now". It is hard sometimes to have the humility to realize that the making of a martial artist is a long process and requires seasoning along the way.

Instructors aren't "spoon-feeding" intentionally just to withhold information out of spite or entitlement. A good instructor tries to give each segment of different concepts at a time, rather than one entire thing. The intent is not to overwhelm a student. Too much material too soon may be as bad, if not worse, than too little material and the inability to hold attention.

Do you feel your instructor is a good one? Do you feel each class you go is beneficial or boring? Do you go feeling refreshed afterwards? If you feel you gain in knowledge and experience each time you train, or at least most of the time, then your pace is going the way it should. Study hard, both physically and mentally.

Now, if the rank of instructorship is already reached, it's easy enough to forget. You want to help your students progress faster and better, but the students we teach must also go through the process of learning too, just like all of us.


- Ceicei

 

[Goldendragon7]

Orig posted by Dominic Jones
When talking about self defence techniques, the following statements are often heard:
* Understanding the attack is critical.
* The technique is based on a specific attack, so exactly how the attacker is positioned, reacts, and how they try to continue attacking is important to the specific technique.

However, when attacks are described on the internet or in manuals the description for the attack is usually very brief and only describes the beginning move(s), often just "left punch" or "front grab", BUT, the defence is often detailed covering angles, stances hand positions etc. For example, see the thread about Gripping Talon.

Often instructors will elaborate on the attack during a lesson, which is great. But why aren't the attacks described more comprehensively in the manuals etc. This would help students to understand some of the reasons why there are different techniques for the "same" general attack type.

Through the years there have been several manuals developed and updated. Many have studied with Ed Parker for brief periods of time and left with "manuals" that were old or in use at that particular time.

Just prior to his passing 13 years ago he was once again updating his manuals to stress the exact details of a specific "attack" since he realized exactly what you are talking about. Those that were close to him at that time "DO" have such updated notes (as Billings stated), but your post is proof that even today there are many versions of older written works in circulation. These older works do add confusion to the Kenpo World when students of different eras get together and trade secrets. Although the material is basically the same, some is quite updated and informative to say the least.

Orig posted by Dominic Jones
Should the knowledge about different attacks be hidden from the students?

No, it hinders progress and understanding. If one knows this information he/she should teach it.

Orig posted by Dominic Jones
Should the students be expected to work out the different ways that a general attacking term can be realized in practice?

As a base in the beginning, NO, but as time goes on ...... YES, so as to realize the variables involved.

Orig posted by Dominic Jones
Is spoon feeding the students with all the answers, counter productive to increasing their ability to analyze techniques?
Cheers Dominic:asian:

No, you must provide a solid base for the student, which is a must. That being said, there is "no way" to teach "ALL" the answers at that time. Answers come after many hours of practice, teaching and study. There is no easy way.

:asian:

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by Goldendragon7
Through the years there have been several manuals developed and updated. Many have studied with Ed Parker for brief periods of time and left with "manuals" that were old or in use at that particular time.

Just prior to his passing 13 years ago he was once again updating his manuals to stress the exact details of a specific "attack" since he realized exactly what you are talking about. Those that were close to him at that time "DO" have such updated notes (as Billings stated), but your post is proof that even today there are many versions of older written works in circulation. These older works do add confusion to the Kenpo World when students of different eras get together and trade secrets. Although the material is basically the same, some is quite updated and informative to say the least.



No, it hinders progress and understanding. If one knows this information he/she should teach it.



As a base in the beginning, NO, but as time goes on ...... YES, so as to realize the variables involved.



No, you must provide a solid base for the student, which is a must. That being said, there is "no way" to teach "ALL" the answers at that time. Answers come after many hours of practice, teaching and study. There is no easy way.

:asian:

Yeah! What he said.