Techs that involve cooperation.

cfr

Black Belt
Joined
Jul 9, 2002
Messages
542
Reaction score
5
Location
Pittsburgh, PA.
Another question Ive been pondering. What do you guys think the value is of techs that involve:

Oppoenent throws a rear cross, but instead of retracting his arm immediately the way he should, he leaves it hanging out there, for you do do your techs without a hitch.

This is an example only. You can replace the above scenario with anything that would be equal to fighting someone who has no clue whatsoever how to fight.
I used this example because IMO it seems an absolute waste of time to train something like this as it relies on my opponent being an idiot. Now I know there could be a hundred other "what if he did" scenarios, but this one is something that people really do train for.
 

Flying Crane

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Sep 21, 2005
Messages
15,281
Reaction score
4,992
Location
San Francisco
cfr said:
Another question Ive been pondering. What do you guys think the value is of techs that involve:

Oppoenent throws a rear cross, but instead of retracting his arm immediately the way he should, he leaves it hanging out there, for you do do your techs without a hitch.

This is an example only. You can replace the above scenario with anything that would be equal to fighting someone who has no clue whatsoever how to fight.
I used this example because IMO it seems an absolute waste of time to train something like this as it relies on my opponent being an idiot. Now I know there could be a hundred other "what if he did" scenarios, but this one is something that people really do train for.

The ability to execute the technique needs to progress beyond this, gradually giving less and less time to execute the technique, until it can be done without cooperation. It is a learning and development process. If the technique is still being practiced this way, then it is still at a rudimentary level of development.

Some techniques are poorly designed, and would never work without this kind of cooperation. In my opinion, these techniques are a waste of time.
 

Aikikitty

Master Black Belt
Joined
Apr 22, 2002
Messages
1,151
Reaction score
25
Location
Southern Louisiana
We practice techniques like that where uke leaves his arm out. That's mostly just to learn and practice certain techniques. When we get better, uke starts pulling the arm back in and stops cooperating so we learn that's it's not just "step 1, step 2, etc.." and learn to go with whatever uke is giving us. We learn to adjust that same technique to the more realistic or switch to something completely different if the situation calls for it. But for basic practice and especially for beginners, the arm stays out there.

Our sensei makes sure we all realize that of course an attacker or anyone who really knows how to punch would never just leave there arm out like that.

Robyn :asian:
 

pete

Master Black Belt
Joined
Aug 31, 2003
Messages
1,003
Reaction score
32
Location
Long Island, New York
cfr said:
...it seems an absolute waste of time to train something like this as it relies on my opponent being an idiot.

disagree. the compliant opponent is a good way to learn how to do the technique correctly. better than doing it in the air. learn the correct angles, targets, and exposures.

then you get to the resisting opponent to test your timing, balance, and technique. this will make you self-correct or realize it aint gonna work. but, you have the reference back to the compliant opponent, to say how i can make it work, even if he pushes, pulls, kicks, and screams.

finally you have the ornery opponent, who will do anything and everything to escape, avoid, and counterattack your technique. this is more like a sparring situation where there is no designated good guy/bad guy.

to skip a step completely makes it too easy for a novice to say 'this tech won't work in da street', and begin 'tailoring' (read tinkering) with the technique before he understands how to make it work as-is, or casting it aside as 'useless'.

learn how to do it, then learn how it is supposed to work, then practice how to make it work under adverse conditions.

pete
 

CuongNhuka

Senior Master
Joined
Jun 16, 2005
Messages
2,596
Reaction score
31
Location
NE
So many people have said my oppion, I wont even bother.

Sweet Brighit Bless your Blade,

John
 

Touch Of Death

Sr. Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
May 6, 2003
Messages
11,610
Reaction score
849
Location
Spokane Valley WA
The answer is to teach the attacker to throw the best attack he can do and then teach him to do it better. He should also be taught to look for the weakness of your tech and you should allow him the opportunity to show you.
Sean
 

jdinca

Master Black Belt
Joined
Dec 8, 2005
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
11
Location
SF Bay Area
Ditto everything already said. Remember also that a technique in most cases is a physical story that teaches you how to move and react. Attacker does this, you do that, attacker's reaction is this, so then you do that. That doesn't mean that that's what's going to happen in real life. That also doesn't mean that in that situation, you're going to do that technique, or any technique that you've been taught but you will have the tools to react in some way. If you ask those here that have been involved in martial arts for a number of years what they would do in a given attack situation, chances are the answer will be "something, but I couldn't tell you what".

I think we've all had techniques taught to us at some point that we thought were silly but if it doesn't work, then it shouldn't be in the system. There's been a number of times that I've been taught something that I thought was odd or silly, only to realize later, when I was at a higher level of training and understanding that what I was taught made perfect sense. Go with it and see what happens down the line.
 

still learning

Senior Master
Joined
Nov 8, 2004
Messages
3,749
Reaction score
48
Hello, For beginners this is good. To train for real is do the real thing.

but you will always need cooperations from partners before taking it to the next level (faster,harder,stronger and so on ). Do you agree?....Aloha
 

karatekid1975

Master Black Belt
Joined
Apr 1, 2002
Messages
1,417
Reaction score
3
Location
Rochester area, NY
I agree with most of you here. In the begining (white belt), it's good to have your partner leave their hand out there, like pete described, so you can learn the tech correctly. Once you get to a higher rank (interm), then you can kick it up a notch with a resisting opponent. By the time you get to the senior ranks, you'll be (or should be) good at it.
 

rutherford

Master Black Belt
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
1,194
Reaction score
13
Location
Vermont, USA
You'll also see some drills that start this way, but the thing being taught is not "what should I do if my opponent leaves his arm hanging here" but rather, it's a movement further down the chain of events that's being trained. Having a standard and easy to get through set of movements to get you into that position is important and useful.

As a note of dissent, I often have trouble making movements I know aren't called for in a specific situation. To keep with the simple example given by cfr, I often need a second punch to get me moving, get my guards up, etc.
 

DeLamar.J

3rd Black Belt
Joined
Oct 20, 2003
Messages
910
Reaction score
22
Location
Barberton, Ohio, USA
cfr said:
Another question Ive been pondering. What do you guys think the value is of techs that involve:

Oppoenent throws a rear cross, but instead of retracting his arm immediately the way he should, he leaves it hanging out there, for you do do your techs without a hitch.

This is an example only. You can replace the above scenario with anything that would be equal to fighting someone who has no clue whatsoever how to fight.
I used this example because IMO it seems an absolute waste of time to train something like this as it relies on my opponent being an idiot. Now I know there could be a hundred other "what if he did" scenarios, but this one is something that people really do train for.
I think this is ok at first just to ease someone into the training, but thats it. It should go fast and hard after a while or your not going to get any real use out of it.
 

MJS

Administrator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
30,187
Reaction score
430
Location
Cromwell,CT
cfr said:
Another question Ive been pondering. What do you guys think the value is of techs that involve:

Oppoenent throws a rear cross, but instead of retracting his arm immediately the way he should, he leaves it hanging out there, for you do do your techs without a hitch.

This is an example only. You can replace the above scenario with anything that would be equal to fighting someone who has no clue whatsoever how to fight.
I used this example because IMO it seems an absolute waste of time to train something like this as it relies on my opponent being an idiot. Now I know there could be a hundred other "what if he did" scenarios, but this one is something that people really do train for.

Whenever you'r first learning something, having a co-operative 'attacker' will aid you in understanding the fine points of the technique. Gradually, adding in resistance, the retraction of the arm, throwing the cross, rather than a step thru, etc. will give you a better feel for what the tech. will really be like.

Being able to adapt is also part of the "what if" phase of all techniques.

Mike
 

Latest Discussions

Top