The tree training method

[Kung Fu Wang]

Here is a training method that I like. Would like to hear your opinion on this?

You use technique A to attack your opponent. If your opponent responds with method

- 1, you change your technique A into A1.
- 2, you change your technique A into A2.
- ...
- n, you change your technique A into An.

Starting with technique A as the main trunk of a tree, depending on your opponent's different responds, your tree starts to branch out as A1, A2, ..., An.

Next step will be the sub-branches that branch out from A1 (A11, A12, ... A1n), A2 (A21, A22, ... A2n) , ..., An (An1, An2, ..., Ann). After many levels, you will then have a full growing tree.

 

[Xue Sheng]

I trained Police Sanda for a bit, and the tree training method was we hit trees

 

[Flying Crane]

Here is a training method that I like. Would like to hear your opinion on this?

You use technique A to attack your opponent. If your opponent responds with method

- 1, you change your technique A into A1.
- 2, you change your technique A into A2.
- ...
- n, you change your technique A into An.

Starting with technique A as the main trunk of a tree, depending on your opponent's different responds, your tree starts to branch out as A1, A2, ..., An.

Next step will be the sub-branches that branch out from A1 (A11, A12, ... A1n), A2 (A21, A22, ... A2n) , ..., An (An1, An2, ..., Ann). After many levels, you will then have a full growing tree.

View attachment 28295

It can become cumbersome as a curriculum.

 

[wab25]

Here is a training method that I like. Would like to hear your opinion on this?

You use technique A to attack your opponent. If your opponent responds with method

- 1, you change your technique A into A1.
- 2, you change your technique A into A2.
- ...
- n, you change your technique A into An.

Starting with technique A as the main trunk of a tree, depending on your opponent's different responds, your tree starts to branch out as A1, A2, ..., An.

Next step will be the sub-branches that branch out from A1 (A11, A12, ... A1n), A2 (A21, A22, ... A2n) , ..., An (An1, An2, ..., Ann). After many levels, you will then have a full growing tree.

View attachment 28295

I would like to see the full tree diagram for your art, including all the techniques. I would then be curious as to how long it takes to graph it out and then an estimation of how long it would take someone to memorize it.

Also, what happens when someone uses a response to a technique that your graph says is the wrong response at that point in the tree?

 

[O'Malley]

I trained Police Sanda for a bit, and the tree training method was we hit trees

I heard it's good to practice rooting.

"It takes time but it eventually bears fruit." - Bob Sapp.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I would like to see the full tree diagram for your art, including all the techniques. I would then be curious as to how long it takes to graph it out and then an estimation of how long it would take someone to memorize it.

Also, what happens when someone uses a response to a technique that your graph says is the wrong response at that point in the tree?

It should be a forest (a set of trees) and not just a single tree.

- Any missing tree branch may indicate that something is missing in the system.
- Any wrong tree branch may indicate that something is wrong in the system.

I believe it may take someone lifetime to develop it. One may develop only 1 or 2 trees in his life. One may never develop any tree.

The advantage of this approach is you can use 1 technique to link many techniques into a group (tree). It's easy to learn, teach, train, remember ....

For example, if your system has 200 techniques, how do you remember those techniques? You can remember

1. one after another.
2. as a set of groups (trees).

IMO, 1 < 2.

 

[Flying Crane]

It should be a forest (a set of trees) and not just a single tree.

- Any missing tree branch may indicate that something is missing in the system.
- Any wrong tree branch may indicate that something is wrong in the system.

I believe it may take someone lifetime to develop it. One may develop only 1 or 2 trees in his life. One may never develop any tree.

The advantage of this approach is you can use 1 technique to link many techniques into a group (tree). It's easy to learn, teach, train, remember ....

For example, if your system has 200 techniques, how do you remember those techniques? You can remember

1. one after another.
2. as a set of groups (trees).

IMO, 1 < 2.

200 techniques is too many and is cumbersome. Especially if your definition of “technique” is a standardized, scripted response to a specific attack. It’s been done already. I don’t recommend it.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Let's use "jab" to build a tree. When you throw a right jab, your opponent may try to

1. dodge backward it, you can then follow with a groin kick.
2. dodge side-way, you can then follow with a roundhouse kick.
3. block it side-way, before his blocking arm touches on your arm, you can pull back your right jab and then send another right jab.
4. block it side-way, you can pull his blocking arm and give a left cross.
5. block it side-way, you can borrow his blocking force, change your right jab into a right hook.
6. block it downward, you can change your right jab into a right back-fist.
7. block it downward, you can throw a left overhand.
8. block it upward, you can throw a left uppercut.
9. ...

From main tree trunk jab, you will have tree branches as:

1. front kick,
2. roundhouse kick,
3. jab,
4. cross,
5. hook,
6. back-fist,
7. overhand,
8. uppercut,
9. ...

This way, you can use jab to link 8 other techniques together.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

200 techniques is too many and is cumbersome. Especially if your definition of “technique” is a standardized, scripted response to a specific attack. It’s been done already. I don’t recommend it.

If we look at MA in general, there are about

- 10 different punches.
- 20 different kicks.
- 40 different joint locks.
- 62 different categories of throw, a total of 230 different throws.
- ... different ground game skills.

When you cross train both the striking art and the grappling art, the total techniques can be over 300 (the ground game skill is not included).

By using the "leg spring" as the main tree trunk, you can have tree branches such as:

1. Knee seize
2. Knee down inner hook
3. Double inner hooks
4. Hand block
5. Shoulder pull
6. Foot sweep
7. Double legs
8. Tie
9. Shin bite
10. Cut

In other words, by using 1 technique, you can logically group 10 other techniques together. This can be easily for training, remembering, teaching, and learning.

 

[Xue Sheng]

200 techniques is too many and is cumbersome. Especially if your definition of “technique” is a standardized, scripted response to a specific attack. It’s been done already. I don’t recommend it.

”I fear not the man who has practiced 10,000 kicks once, but I fear the man who has practiced one kick 10,000 times.” -- Bruce Lee

 

[Flying Crane]

If we look at MA in general, there are about

- 10 different punches.
- 20 different kicks.
- 40 different joint locks.
- 62 different categories of throw, a total of 230 different throws.
- ... different ground game skills.

When you cross train both the striking art and the grappling art, the total techniques can be over 300 (the ground game skill is not included).

I would say those joint locks and throws in particular are not so much different techniques as they are variations on certain techniques. Often the approach and manipulation into the technique are somewhat different, ending in a final lock or final throw that is foundational and common. So the real number of truly different joint lock and throwing techniques is far fewer.

This really struck home with me a few years ago when I was reading a couple books on Quin-na by Yang Jwing-Ming. He illustrated numerous joint locks and how to set them up and set the lock. They each had a different name and identity in his books. But the ending locking technique was really limited in variety, maybe a dozen or fewer locks that were really different. It was just the setup that gave it variety. In my opinion, a lot of it was duplicative with only minor variations and didn’t necessarily deserve a completely separate identity. But I guess I look more for the common themes rather than minor differences in detail.

Arguably this is true of kicks as well. I can easily name 6 or 8 variations of a side kick, for example. Are those really different techniques? Maybe, maybe not. I’m not gonna try to force a definition on everyone. But to me, it’s one technique that can be done and worked into in a variety of ways.

Punch identity can be a little easier to identify as different punches land with different parts of the hand, and different directions can make a difference as well. But even there, I can easily come up with a variety of ways to throw the same punch. For me, I don’t see those as different punches.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I would say those joint locks and throws in particular are not so much different techniques as they are variations on certain techniques.

When you apply the leg skill "leg block", you can control your opponent with:

1. head lock,
2. under hook,
3. over hook,
4. waist wrap,
5. ...

Since your control points are different, even if you are using the same leg skill, you still need different hands set up. All those different set up require different training.

There are:

1. 35 different foot sweep.
2. 32 different leg block.
3. 15 different single leg.
4. ...

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I’m not gonna try to force a definition on everyone. But to me, it’s one technique that can be done and worked into in a variety of ways.

Chinese wrestling had defined those technique name long time ago. I can't change it.

For example, if you use hand to pull your opponent's leg from

- outside, it's called Kou.
- inside, it's called Tao.

You may call both as "leg pulling". By doing so, you have reduced the number of techniques. But you may miss some technique detail.

 

[Flying Crane]

Chinese wrestling had defined those technique name long time ago. I can't change it.

Of course you can.

 

[Flying Crane]

When you apply the leg skill "leg block", you can control your opponent with:

1. head lock,
2. under hook,
3. over hook,
4. waist wrap,
5. ...

Since your control points are different, even if you are using the same leg skill, you still need different hands set up. All those different set up require different training.

There are:

1. 35 different foot sweep.
2. 32 different leg block.
3. 15 different single leg.
4. ...

Recognizing the variation is important, I do not dispute that. But codifying it into a formalized curriculum makes it very cumbersome when it reaches a certain size. I think there may be a better way to deal with it under centralized ideas and themes rather than codified “different” techniques that are really more similar than different. Some judgement call needs to be made in this regard, but that is up to the teacher to recognize.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

But I guess I look more for the common themes rather than minor differences in detail.

The "little circle wrist lock" force can be applied into 3 different ways:

- downward force,
- horizontal side-way force.
- backward pulling force.

IMO, even if the hands position remains unchanged, since you are using different force to deal with your opponent's different responds, it should be called as 3 different techniques.

 

[Flying Crane]

The "little circle wrist lock" force can be applied into 3 different ways:

- downward force,
- horizontal side-way force.
- backward pulling force.

IMO, even if the hands position remains unchanged, since you are using different force to deal with your opponent's different responds, it should be called as 3 different techniques.

I disagree. But everyone has their reasons.

Consider this: what if the people who codified the curriculum suffered from some form of Obsessive-Compulsive disorder? That lead them to create this overly cumbersome curriculum by trying to identify and separate every conceivable possibility into distinctly identified techniques. Are you and every following generation beholden to that? Do you have to follow that, bend to their obsessive-compulsion, even if you can recognize a better way of organizing the information and a better approach to the training?

The people who came before us, who created these systems and methods, they were smart fellows, to be sure. But they were not infallible. They were not gods. And they took what came before them, and changed it into what it is now. You and following generations can do the same. Nothing about this stuff, and I do mean NOTHING, is sacred so that it must not be changed, if change can make it better.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

The people who came before us, who created these systems and methods, they were smart fellows, to be sure. But they were not infallible. They were not gods.

Let's take 'leg spring' as one example. You can spring your opponent's leg:

- horizontally backward.
- horizontal side-way.
- 45 degree upward.
- 45 degree downward.
- ...

The basic trainings are all different. If you can do one, it doesn't mean you can do the others.

 

[Flying Crane]

Let's take 'leg spring' as one example. You can spring your opponent's leg:

- horizontally backward.
- horizontal side-way.
- 45 degree upward.
- 45 degree downward.
- ...

The basic trainings are all different.

They may be, and there may be reasons to keep them separated. I am not trying to say you can just lump all of it together without any thought. You need to make judgements about it. But I know that sometimes a curriculum can become cumbersome, and there are reasonable and intelligent ways to restructure the material to make it less cumbersome.

 

[Xue Sheng]

They may be, and there may be reasons to keep them separated. I am not trying to say you can just lump all of it together without any thought. You need to make judgements about it. But I know that sometimes a curriculum can become cumbersome, and there are reasonable and intelligent ways to restructure the material to make it less cumbersome.

Now there you go sounding like Wang Xiangzhai again