Record what you can do

[Kung Fu Wang]

The following clips contain a lot of information. If you can create a clip like these, you have contributed to the MA world big time.

I like this kind of clip. Just do it. no talking.

Your thought?

 

[oftheherd1]

I did like those clips: both for what I considered what would work and what I thought would not or at least could be executed better. Both can be instructional. I like all the clips you post for that very reason. Thanks.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I don't really think my physical ability adds great import to the MA world. Most of what I do or can do, literally thousands of other folks do better. Why would it be important to document what's already out there?

I just don't buy that it's important for everyone to document, except where they're preparing specific material for students. And I'm more than a little leary of wordless video's value (all of it, not yours specifically). I've seen way too many examples of people picking apart some dead master's work (written, photographed, or video) and making assumptions about what's important in it. In some cases, I'm reasonably certain they're taking as basic principles things that are adjustments for that person (shorter steps as they age, etc.). I really don't want my students trying to exactly replicate what I do. I want them to understand the principles and learn eventually apply them in ways I cannot.

Someday I may document the basic elements of my curriculum. But there is much I will never document in video, because I want them to find very good examples, and I'm not that in some cases. When I teach, I point out the adjustments I make because of physical limitations, as well as bad habits that creep in. Wordless videos don't do that.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

One of my students is going to take the 4th degree BB test. Since in ACSCA, the 4th degree BB testing requirement has not been defined yet, I want my student to create a clip like this with 100 techniques. IMO, this can be a nice test for a personal's knowledge.

 

[drop bear]

I just don't really have the inclination to gab on for ten minutes about what I am going to do.

Of course my video are not ment to be professional marketing pieces. Just reference materials.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

It's a personal challenge.

Can you record 100 different techniques? How about 200, 300, or ...?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It's a personal challenge.

Can you record 100 different techniques? How about 200, 300, or ...?

Not the way I learned to divide them. I don’t think I have 100 separate techniques in my repertoire. But that may be nothing more than a difference in how you classify.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Not the way I learned to divide them. I don’t think I have 100 separate techniques in my repertoire. But that may be nothing more than a difference in how you classify.

If you can come up 30 different ways to apply "foot sweep", 100 technique is not that many.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Not the way I learned to divide them. I don’t think I have 100 separate techniques in my repertoire. But that may be nothing more than a difference in how you classify.

What wang said. Depending on how you classify techniques, you can easily come up with 100. Just going over punches, here's a few to give you an example.
1: lead hook punch to head.
2: rear hook punch to head.
3: lead hook punch to stomach.
4: rear hook punch to stomach.
5: lead uppercut to chin.
6: rear uppercut to chin.
7: lead uppercut to body.
8: rear uppercut to body.
9: lead front punch to jaw.
10: rear front punch to jaw.
11: lead front punch to stomach.
12: rear front punch to stomach.
13: lead front punch to groin.
14: rear front punch to groin.
15: lead thrust punch to jaw.
16: rear thrust punch to jaw.
17: lead thrust punch to stomach.
18: rear thrust punch to stomach.
19: lead thrust punch to groin.
20: rear thrust punch to groin.
21: lead bolo punch to liver.
22: rear bolo punch to liver.
23: lead backfist to temple.
24: lead backfist to jaw.
25: rear backfist to temple.
26: rear backfist to jaw.

I just got through a quarter of the needed techniques, without going through half the punches that I know. And there is a lot more grappling options than punching options. And if you decide to include clinches. And then strikes from clinches, you have even more. And if you decide to include weapons...good luck getting your list under 500.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

If you can come up 30 different ways to apply "foot sweep", 100 technique is not that many.

That’s what meant about difference in classification. What I call “leg sweep” is at least 4 separate techniques in Kodokan Judo, and that’s without variations in them. I could come up with 100 variations of an arm bar, for instance, but it’s just one technique to me.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

What wang said. Depending on how you classify techniques, you can easily come up with 100. Just going over punches, here's a few to give you an example.
1: lead hook punch to head.
2: rear hook punch to head.
3: lead hook punch to stomach.
4: rear hook punch to stomach.
5: lead uppercut to chin.
6: rear uppercut to chin.
7: lead uppercut to body.
8: rear uppercut to body.
9: lead front punch to jaw.
10: rear front punch to jaw.
11: lead front punch to stomach.
12: rear front punch to stomach.
13: lead front punch to groin.
14: rear front punch to groin.
15: lead thrust punch to jaw.
16: rear thrust punch to jaw.
17: lead thrust punch to stomach.
18: rear thrust punch to stomach.
19: lead thrust punch to groin.
20: rear thrust punch to groin.
21: lead bolo punch to liver.
22: rear bolo punch to liver.
23: lead backfist to temple.
24: lead backfist to jaw.
25: rear backfist to temple.
26: rear backfist to jaw.

I just got through a quarter of the needed techniques, without going through half the punches that I know. And there is a lot more grappling options than punching options. And if you decide to include clinches. And then strikes from clinches, you have even more. And if you decide to include weapons...good luck getting your list under 500.

Yep, that is the difference in classification I referred to. At most, in my mind, that lost would be 2 hooks (front and rear), jab, uppercut, rear straight, overhand, backfist. The grappling techniques top out at about 54, and the rest is just variations on the principles.

Cataloguing the way you and John are, I could probably come up with hundreds.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Yep, that is the difference in classification I referred to.

Will you consider the following as different techniques?

1. Waist wrap hip throw.
2. Under hook hip throw.
3. Over hook hip throw.
4. Head lock hip throw.
5. Reverse hip throw (your back touch your opponent's back).
6. ...

All 5 hip throws require different set up.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Will you consider the following as different techniques?

1. Waist wrap hip throw.
2. Under hook hip throw.
3. Over hook hip throw.
4. Head lock hip throw.
5. Reverse hip throw (your back touch your opponent's back).
6. ...

All 5 hip throws require different set up.

By my normal classification, no. The finish is the “technique”, and it is identified mostly by principle (so 6 distinct variations of the arm bar are all just “Arm Bar”). Entries are covered in discussion of “applications”, which would be closer to your usage of “technique”.

 

[Flying Crane]

A while back I read a couple of books by Sifu Yang Jwing-Ming about Chin-na techniques. After studying the sequential photos and reading the descriptions of the several dozen or more joint manipulations, all with a unique name, I realized there were actually only about a half dozen or so distinct techniques. It was all just variations on a handful of fundamentals. Different set-ups (sometimes the difference was very minor) to get you to the same control manipulation.

Personally, that approach doesn’t work well for me.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

A while back I read a couple of books by Sifu Yang Jwing-Ming about Chin-na techniques. After studying the sequential photos and reading the descriptions of the several dozen or more joint manipulations, all with a unique name, I realized there were actually only about a half dozen or so distinct techniques. It was all just variations on a handful of fundamentals. Different set-ups (sometimes the difference was very minor) to get you to the same control manipulation.

Personally, that approach doesn’t work well for me.

Even the most simple "wrist lock" has 3 different application:

1. Vertical downward,
2. Horizontal side way.
3. Horizontal pulling.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

23: lead backfist to temple.
24: lead backfist to jaw.

That's too much detail.

Here are 2 different foot sweep:

1. Sweep behind your opponent's ankle.

2. Sweep in front of your opponent's foot.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Even the most simple "wrist lock" has 3 different application:

1. Vertical downward,
2. Horizontal side way.
3. Horizontal pulling.

To my mind, the basic principle is the same in all three. Differentiating then inserts a barrier between the applications that doesn’t work for me.

I think that’s largely going to depend on both how you were taught in your formative MA years and your own brain.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

That's too much detail.

Here are 2 different foot sweep:

1. Sweep behind your opponent's ankle.

2. Sweep in front of your opponent's foot.

I wouldn’t even classify the second as a sweep. They are two wholly different principles in those. This is closer to the distinction of “technique” I’m used to.

 

[skribs]

Not the way I learned to divide them. I don’t think I have 100 separate techniques in my repertoire. But that may be nothing more than a difference in how you classify.

If you can come up 30 different ways to apply "foot sweep", 100 technique is not that many.

It gets further complicated. The way my Master teaches things in Hapkido, a "technique" is a combination of techniques. For example, a technique may be:

1. Opponent applies cross-arm grab
2. Transition into V-Lock
3. Swing your leg around and use the V-Lock to take them down
4. Standing armbar

He may have another "technique" (in quotes because I call it a combination) which changes one or more of the steps.

1. If the opponent applies a 2-arm grab or a straight grab, you can still do steps 2-4, but it will be a different transition to get to the V-Lock.
2. From a cross-arm grab, I could easily transition into one of several different wrist locks; I'm not limited to a V-Lock
3. There are a number of different ways I could take someone down. I could primarily use pressure on the wrist, a couple of different ways I can pressure the elbow, or I could transition into a different take-down from the V-Lock.
4. I also have numerous options what to do after I take them down.

The way I would personally categorize it is each lock, take-down, and submission would be their own technique, and each grouping would be a "combination". Different variances might be a different technique, or a different "application" of the same technique.

It's kind of like boxing. How many punches are there in boxing? Is it:

• Jab, Cross, Hook, Uppercut
• Jab, Cross, Lead Hook, Lead Uppercut, Strong Hook, Strong Uppercut
• Jab, Cross, Lead Long-Range Hook, Lead Long-Range Uppercut, Lead Medium Hook, Lead Medium Uppercut, Lead Short Hook, Lead Short Uppercut, Lead Overhand, and long-range versions of all of the above?

The same coach could teach all of the techniques in the third option, but just teach them as different ways to use the "jab, cross, hook, and uppercut".

 

[Flying Crane]

Even the most simple "wrist lock" has 3 different application:

1. Vertical downward,
2. Horizontal side way.
3. Horizontal pulling.

Exploring the variations is an important part of understanding the technique. But it’s still one technique and does not need to be over-complicated by giving it completely separate identities.

In My example of the books I read, those books could have been streamlined significantly if the fundamental technique was presented, and then variations were shown as part of that presentation. Instead, each variation was presented from the beginning to the end as if it was truly unique and separate. I think that is a cumbersome way to organize a body of knowledge.