# Discussing a Myth: On Fighting



## Sami Ibrahim (Jan 16, 2017)

In some American Kenpo circles an Instructor says "I can teach anyone to fight in a relatively quick time frame" and this is usually followed up by explaining that the reason students stay in the art beyond that point is for other personal reasons. 

On the surface this may seem like a harmless statement that is elevating a pugilistic endeavor into some noble and higher purpose but actually it is not true. It is a misleading statement about fighting and can cause some to shift the focus of their training from the practical to the impractical, leaving them vulnerable. 

Fighting skills are subject to the law of daily decrease, each day that you sham out of effective training is a day your skills decline. Just as Martial skill is built brick by brick, day by day with time and effort, the daily decrease comes along and kicks your building down when your no longer maintaining it. Also to say that you can teach someone to fight in a relatively quick time frame implies that their is this imagined end to fighting ability. 

"OK little Billy, you have complete your fighting lessons you are now and forever the greatest fighter in the Galaxy and can focus your training on frivolous or fancy stuff at your leisure." 

Sounds pretty stupid when I say it like that but that is basically what teachers are doing when they down play the importance of fighting in regards to Kenpo. Your training should always be elevating your fighting skill, your not supposed to give your students false confidence that they have "arrived" and are now capable fighters because the next stop for them is the XMAs lol 

Any thoughts?


----------



## drop bear (Jan 16, 2017)

it depends if you are actually going to fight someone. If you are then train hard on high percentage basics or you will get your face punched in.

If not train whatever intrests you.


----------



## Buka (Jan 16, 2017)

I've never actually heard anyone say they can train someone to fight in a relatively quick time frame. Not anyone I'd listen to, anyway. Never heard a Kenpo teacher say that. And I know a few.


----------



## Kickboxer101 (Jan 16, 2017)

Never heard that at all. In fact I've only heard the exact opposite saying how you never stop learning


----------



## Paul_D (Jan 16, 2017)

Would the time it takes to train someone to fight an unskilled and untrained opponent be relatively quick time frame, in comparison to teaching them to fight a highly skilled opponent?


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 16, 2017)

The kenpo claim, you reference, is that a student will have the ability to defend themselves, in a relatively short time, and that involves the
idea of not entering into random combat.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jan 17, 2017)

This saying is a perversion of some thing I have heard from many of my teachers. But the saying as I heard it was that people join a martial art to learn to fight but stay for other reasons.

I would add I could teach someone to fight in a few hours.  But that student will stink at fighting. So yeah you can teach quickly, the student just wont be any good.


----------



## Danny T (Jan 17, 2017)

Teaching someone to fight and be proficient probably won't happen in a very short time. 
Teaching someone some self defense... good effective self defense tactics and actions can be done in a rather short period of time. But then fighting and self defense are two different animals.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 17, 2017)

People tend to over-complicate fighting.  You don't need a sophisticated system to be able to fight, and fighting skills shouldn't take a long time to develop. Of course it depends on the individual.  Some people will never be able to fight no matter what training they get.  Other people are strong athletic, and aggressive and have a natural instinct that makes them an effective fighter with little or no training.

So, it depends.  But overall, effective fighting skills shouldn't take too long to develop, even tho that may not mean being ready to fight in a MMA championship.  And yes, these skills can be refined for a lifetime.

Personally, people who dwell on their fighting skills too much kinda come across as paranoid, in my opinion.


----------



## Sami Ibrahim (Jan 19, 2017)

Hi Flying Crane, 

         It's me the paranoid guy lol. I come from a world where the bad guys are really good at violence and the majority of martial arts practitioners are not. Violence the never-ending study is not something that you take a crash course in for a month or a year and suddenly you can afford to focus your attention on unrealistic stuff, yet some instructors realize that training students consistently to deal with real violence is hard work so instead they act as if the students are already past that primitive fighting stuff and now they can focus their attention on less demanding things that don't require any kind of pressure testing or bloody noses and bruises which are bad for business.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jan 19, 2017)

Sami Ibrahim said:


> I come from a world where the bad guys are really good at violence and the majority of martial arts practitioners are not.


Huh. I had no idea that Washington was particularly dangerous. Where in Washington do you live?


----------



## drop bear (Jan 19, 2017)

Flying Crane said:


> People tend to over-complicate fighting.  You don't need a sophisticated system to be able to fight, and fighting skills shouldn't take a long time to develop. Of course it depends on the individual.  Some people will never be able to fight no matter what training they get.  Other people are strong athletic, and aggressive and have a natural instinct that makes them an effective fighter with little or no training.
> 
> So, it depends.  But overall, effective fighting skills shouldn't take too long to develop, even tho that may not mean being ready to fight in a MMA championship.  And yes, these skills can be refined for a lifetime.
> 
> Personally, people who dwell on their fighting skills too much kinda come across as paranoid, in my opinion.



Sort of. This is the first takedown you will learn for MMA




. and it is the same takedown that takes years to develop. If you want to use it at a top level.





One is simple, one is incredibly sophisticated.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 19, 2017)

Sami Ibrahim said:


> Hi Flying Crane,
> 
> It's me the paranoid guy lol. I come from a world where the bad guys are really good at violence and the majority of martial arts practitioners are not. Violence the never-ending study is not something that you take a crash course in for a month or a year and suddenly you can afford to focus your attention on unrealistic stuff, yet some instructors realize that training students consistently to deal with real violence is hard work so instead they act as if the students are already past that primitive fighting stuff and now they can focus their attention on less demanding things that don't require any kind of pressure testing or bloody noses and bruises which are bad for business.


I wasn't aiming my my paranoid comment at you personally, it was just a general observation that I have had.

I understand that you come from a military background, I have seen your postings and probably had some discussion with you over on kenpotalk.  We are shaped in a large way by our experiences.  From what I have seen, people with military or LEO experience often express what I would call an elevated awareness of potential violence.  I understand that the background gives these people an awareness that others may not share, tho sometimes it could be unnecessary.

I have no military nor LEO experience, tho I have lived in a bigger city for some 20 years, much of that in neighborhoods that were not downright bad, but did have their share of grit.  I've had people mess with me, but I've always been able to dodge the real violence.  I know it is out there and I am alert to it, but I am also confident that most of us can get thru life, or most of life, without physical altercations.  For most of us, for most of the time, violence simply does not find its way into our lives and it is often easy to avoid.  If a grown adult keeps getting into violent encounters, and it isn't part of his profession, then either it's time to move to a new neighborhood or it's time for some self-reflection to figure out just what in the hell he is doing wrong in life, because likely he is the problem.

Now, as I said, fighting skills can benefit from constant honing and practice.  But let's be honest, it does not take years of training before someone ought to have some decent level of functional ability.  As I stated, that does not mean they are ready for an MMA championship fight.  But yes, they ought to be able to fight.  It does not take forever to develop that skill. It just is not that difficult to hurt someone.  Yet at the same time humans are surprisingly tough and resilient.  Interesting paradox, that is.

Now, you reference some unrealistic stuff.  I don't know just what that is.  The methods that I train does not have such stuff.  It is practical and useful.

I have seen things out there that struck me as impractical.  I don't train that stuff, and don't know why some systems might keep that kind of material. Maybe some people simply should not be teaching others if they keep unrealistic material in their curriculum.  I am sure ones own perspective give guidance as to how that might be judged, and there won't be complete consensus on what any of that is.  What you may feel is unrealistic, someone else may find to be quite useful.  But still, it doesn't take long to learn some useful and functional fighting skills.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 19, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> Would the time it takes to train someone to fight an unskilled and untrained opponent be relatively quick time frame, in comparison to teaching them to fight a highly skilled opponent?


Yes... but it's important top remember that "untrained" and "unskilled" are two very different things. There are a lot of people who are good at fighting (and/or good at assaults, which isn't necessarily the same thing), but have never done any formal training.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 19, 2017)

Flying Crane said:


> Now, you reference some unrealistic stuff. I don't know just what that is. The methods that I train does not have such stuff. It is practical and useful.
> 
> I have seen things out there that struck me as impractical. I don't train that stuff, and don't know why some systems might keep that kind of material. Maybe some people simply should not be teaching others if they keep unrealistic material in their curriculum. I am sure ones own perspective give guidance as to how that might be judged, and there won't be complete consensus on what any of that is. What you may feel is unrealistic, someone else may find to be quite useful. But still, it doesn't take long to learn some useful and functional fighting skills.



There are degrees of functional. And as this is going to work towards "Yeah try that stuff in the ring and see how functional it is" I may as well kick off in that direction.

At the moment we are doing our 12 week program and will have to get people ready to fight full contact MMA in a very short time.

And to do that in the very short time we have we will have to cement the absolute basics without any fluff what so ever.

It will be about standing and striking effectively under pressure. 1 or 2 takedows 1 or 2 escapes a d then just grinding that untill they have a skill set they can use.

This will be a successful method up to 5 or 10 fights in. For self defense it is successful forever.

After a few fights you will need to have some variety and will start training the more unrealistic stuff.

But it is amazing how concepts like punching straight can beat martial artists with years under their belt. And a thousand more techniques.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 19, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> Would the time it takes to train someone to fight an unskilled and untrained opponent be relatively quick time frame, in comparison to teaching them to fight a highly skilled opponent?


Agree! If you just want to be able to handle someone who has no MA training, it should not take too much time. If you want to fight against Mike Tyson, that will be a different story.

One day a guy walked into my school. He had no MA training in the past. He wanted to learn fighting. But he didn't want to learn any basic and form. We met 4 times a week, 2 hours each session. When he came, we put on gloves and tried to knock each other down for that 2 hours. The whole training lasted for 8 months. 8 months later, he came back and told me that his training worked. He got into fight in a bar. A guy tried to hit him. In the whole fight, that guy could not even land a single punch on his body. That guy finally sat down on the couch and could not figure what had just happened.

If you want to learn how to fight, you just fight. That definitely can be a short cut for fighting ability training but I won't call that MA training.


----------



## Sami Ibrahim (Jan 21, 2017)

kempodisciple said:


> Huh. I had no idea that Washington was particularly dangerous. Where in Washington do you live?



I live on Joint Base Lewis McChord, on the Fort Lewis side, that is near Lakewood WA the zip code is 98433. Your assumption that I was making reference to Washington is wrong, it was in reference to my travels throughout the world. As I get ready to retire I have been paying more attention to how people with limited or no exposure to violence think and at last I am starting to get it (I am rather dense) I cannot expect people to take training for violence seriously when it is such a foreign thing to them, I may as well tell them to prepare themselves to slay a fire breathing dragon.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 22, 2017)

Sami Ibrahim said:


> I live on Joint Base Lewis McChord, on the Fort Lewis side, that is near Lakewood WA the zip code is 98433. Your assumption that I was making reference to Washington is wrong, it was in reference to my travels throughout the world. As I get ready to retire I have been paying more attention to how people with limited or no exposure to violence think and at last I am starting to get it (I am rather dense) I cannot expect people to take training for violence seriously when it is such a foreign thing to them, I may as well tell them to prepare themselves to slay a fire breathing dragon.


Why do you think people don't take it seriously?  They may do things differently than you do them, but that doesn't meant they aren't serious about it.


----------



## JP3 (Jan 22, 2017)

I've no bone to pick with Kenpo on this (the O/P), but I've heard other art's instructors, not only/just Kenpo, say that sortr of thing to their student body.

Fighting skills are, to a point, frangible and decrease with time. I would say that, once a person has practiced in something for 30 years, most of those fundamentals are now ingrained and part of the person and won't be forgotten.  That's not to say that the physical ability wn't erode, but if they had to erupt into violent action, they could. Then, maybe they'd fall over from exhaustion, have a stroke, have fifteen muscle pulls and joint strains, etc.

But, to tell folks, "You are now Billy Bad-*** since we've awarded you the speckled hen certificate, waved the wand of Badjiju over your hands and feet, and given you that awesome magenta belt," it's a bad idea.


----------



## Sami Ibrahim (Jan 22, 2017)

Flying Crane said:


> Why do you think people don't take it seriously?  They may do things differently than you do them, but that doesn't meant they aren't serious about it.



I think it is because I see a huge disconnect between what real violence encompasses in its multitude of manifestations in comparison to what many martial arts practitioners do during training. I do believe in and respect progressive learning but often students never even progress to the edges or boarders of realistic training. 
Violence is unscripted, it is not fair, honorable or flowery (also its painful), generally speaking rabbits don't attack lions, gold fish don't attack sharks and experienced violent human predators don't attack people that can easily defeat them either but listen to how far in fantasy land many martial arts practitioners heads are when they discuss how after a couple of weeks on a sanitized, soft, flat surface drilling a couple of scripted moves they got that fighting part down and out of the way,


----------



## Paul_D (Jan 22, 2017)

Sami Ibrahim said:


> when they discuss how after a couple of weeks on a sanitized, soft, flat surface drilling a couple of scripted moves they got that fighting part down and out of the way,


Which martial artists are these?  I've certainly never heard someone discuss how they have got the fighting part out of the way after two weeks of training.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 22, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> Which martial artist are these?  I've certainly never heard someone discuss how they have got the fighting part out of the way after two weeks of training.



Scars would be pretty close. But there are degrees.


----------



## Sami Ibrahim (Jan 22, 2017)

OK so I am a 33 year old man, approximately 240-250 pounds, 5' 11" with over a decade of military service and 27 years of Kenpo training, I have experience in wars and some bouncing and security work among other things. When I take a walk through a parking lot, or into an establishment serving alcohol or even just around my home what threat is going to require a "martial response" honestly it is not going to be a gold fish by comparison or even a school of gold fish, its going to be a shark or a frenzy of sharks. I think it is funny how some people bank on their future enemies being whelps they can easily overcome with a few days worth of practice when in reality if you ever do get confronted by an aggressive whelp, you can just slap them on the rump and make them stand in time out, you don't need to waste money training in a martial art for that kind of adversary. Underestimating enemies has constantly gotten people killed in my experience and that was despite the departed having decent training. If your going to take time out of your life to attend a martial arts training facility and put in the effort and energy day in and day out to learn a martial art, you may as well prepare yourself for criminals who have a long history of hurting people and knack for it, don't bet your life that because the enemy has not had martial arts training they are not a significant threat (if anything that makes them more of a threat). Best of luck to all of us on our training and lives.


----------



## Sami Ibrahim (Jan 22, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> Which martial artists are these?  I've certainly never heard someone discuss how they have got the fighting part out of the way after two weeks of training.



I posted this right after students from a very popular Kenpo lineage made such comments. I refrained from mentioning them directly because it would serve no positive purpose, my intent is simply to draw attention to the false idea, I am a little jealous of those of you who live in a universe where you never hear this kind of thing lol


----------



## Paul_D (Jan 22, 2017)

Sami Ibrahim said:


> I posted this right after students from a very popular Kenpo lineage made such comments. I refrained from mentioning them directly because it would serve no positive purpose, my intent is simply to draw attention to the false idea, I am a little jealous of those of you who live in a universe where you never hear this kind of thing lol


So you are talking about a few of people from one style?


----------



## drop bear (Jan 22, 2017)

Sami Ibrahim said:


> I think it is because I see a huge disconnect between what real violence encompasses in its multitude of manifestations in comparison to what many martial arts practitioners do during training. I do believe in and respect progressive learning but often students never even progress to the edges or boarders of realistic training.
> Violence is unscripted, it is not fair, honorable or flowery (also its painful), generally speaking rabbits don't attack lions, gold fish don't attack sharks and experienced violent human predators don't attack people that can easily defeat them either but listen to how far in fantasy land many martial arts practitioners heads are when they discuss how after a couple of weeks on a sanitized, soft, flat surface drilling a couple of scripted moves they got that fighting part down and out of the way,



Yeah but you have two skill sets.  Concepts and technical skills.  Concepts are about unfair fights and all the schoolyard stuff.

Technical ability generally needs to be trained in a sanitised manner.

If you need to throw 3000 punches to be able to effectively punch.  You can't train bare knuckle on a brick wall. Even if your end game is to hit bare knuckle.

Then you take that usable skill and apply it to the situation. Work the concepts out.


----------



## Sami Ibrahim (Jan 22, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Yeah but you have two skill sets.  Concepts and technical skills.  Concepts are about unfair fights and all the schoolyard stuff.
> 
> Technical ability generally needs to be trained in a sanitised manner.
> 
> ...



Progressive training is fine as long as it eventually leads to realistic training not acceptance of mediocrity and comfort blanket statements about how "fighting" is no big deal and easily attained in a short time etc.


----------



## Sami Ibrahim (Jan 22, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> So you are talking about a few of people from one style?



It has come up before from others and not just within the Kenpo Arts, I have personally witnessed it in many schools in America and Asia I guess it really matters to you how many people etc. So when I started this post it was about a popular American Kenpo lineage whose head instructor (a 10th degree black belt) is fond of making that statement and some of whose students now parrot statements along those same lines. having just heard those statements made, I thought I would post about it. I think the statement has a lot to do with commercialization, when making money and keeping paying customers happy is more important than preparing them for the real thing. (It has been some time since I posted on a large Martial Arts Forum like this one, What is your background Paul D.)


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jan 23, 2017)

Fighting is easy.  It's similar to putting a wood beam on the ground and walking across it....simple.  however put that same beam 5 stories up between two buildings and walk across. Not so easy when it actually matters.
Problem with most people is they have no idea about reality. It's all theory in their heads.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 23, 2017)

Sami Ibrahim said:


> I think it is because I see a huge disconnect between what real violence encompasses in its multitude of manifestations in comparison to what many martial arts practitioners do during training. I do believe in and respect progressive learning but often students never even progress to the edges or boarders of realistic training.
> Violence is unscripted, it is not fair, honorable or flowery (also its painful), generally speaking rabbits don't attack lions, gold fish don't attack sharks and experienced violent human predators don't attack people that can easily defeat them either but listen to how far in fantasy land many martial arts practitioners heads are when they discuss how after a couple of weeks on a sanitized, soft, flat surface drilling a couple of scripted moves they got that fighting part down and out of the way,


Well, I also am unimpressed with a lot of the training that I see people doing.  That doesn't mean that you are the only person who takes their training, and the realities of violence, seriously.

There is plenty of room to discuss this stuff, but in the end, it is each persons responsibility to make decisions about their training, and the results that follow.


----------



## Sami Ibrahim (Jan 23, 2017)

Flying Crane said:


> Well, I also am unimpressed with a lot of the training that I see people doing.  That doesn't mean that you are the only person who takes their training, and the realities of violence, seriously.
> 
> There is plenty of room to discuss this stuff, but in the end, it is each persons responsibility to make decisions about their training, and the results that follow.



I agree with you there is plenty of room to discuss this stuff and in the end each person is responsible for their own decisions and training choices, my old history teacher was fond of saying that we could do anything as long as we were willing to accept the consequences.


----------



## Paul_D (Jan 24, 2017)

Sami Ibrahim said:


> I have personally witnessed it in many schools in America and Asia


Different part of the world from me, so that explains it


----------



## Headhunter (Feb 24, 2017)

This is an old thread but I just saw it and honestly I've trained with some top kenpo people. I started my training with lee wedlake who trained directly under ed Parker and he never said anything like that nor have any of the top people I've worked with. I'm not saying some wont say it but it's a lie a couple of individuals may say but it's absolutely not a rule for kenpo


----------



## Touch Of Death (Feb 24, 2017)

JP3 said:


> I've no bone to pick with Kenpo on this (the O/P), but I've heard other art's instructors, not only/just Kenpo, say that sortr of thing to their student body.
> 
> Fighting skills are, to a point, frangible and decrease with time. I would say that, once a person has practiced in something for 30 years, most of those fundamentals are now ingrained and part of the person and won't be forgotten.  That's not to say that the physical ability wn't erode, but if they had to erupt into violent action, they could. Then, maybe they'd fall over from exhaustion, have a stroke, have fifteen muscle pulls and joint strains, etc.
> 
> But, to tell folks, "You are now Billy Bad-*** since we've awarded you the speckled hen certificate, waved the wand of Badjiju over your hands and feet, and given you that awesome magenta belt," it's a bad idea.


As an old Kenpo person, I have worked to master the idea of hurting people without hurting myself.


----------



## DanT (Feb 25, 2017)

It's like any sport, do you honestly believe a professional soccer player could take a year off and then come back at the top of his game? Obviously not. Skills have to be maintained otherwise they decrease. It's just like paddling a boat upstream, the moment you stop, you go back. Fighting is no different, it takes years of training to go from average joe to a "decent" fighter. I honestly believe that however long it takes to acquire a skill, it takes half as long to lose it. If it took you 1 year to go from benching 100 lbs to 200 lbs, if you stop working out, almost guaranteed within 6 months you'll be back to where you started.


----------



## JP3 (Mar 5, 2017)

DanT said:


> If it took you 1 year to go from benching 100 lbs to 200 lbs, if you stop working out, almost guaranteed within 6 months you'll be back to where you started.



I think it's lost faster than that, actually.  But, it comes back faster once you've gone up the hill, as well.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 6, 2017)

JP3 said:


> I think it's lost faster than that, actually.  But, it comes back faster once you've gone up the hill, as well.


Not linearly, though, in either uphill or down. Speaking of the degradation of skill, it drops slowly (first month), then quickly (first year or two), then more slowly on a curving slope. With long-term skill development, it's never entirely lost (I haven't played soccer in many years, but can still dribble, kick, and defend as well as most folks who've played just a few years). Fitness, of course, is a different matter. All of fitness can, in fact, be lost if one tries hard enough, though there tends to be some natural inclination after many years (my legs are still quite strong, in spite of the fact I don't do leg strength work because of my knees).


----------



## Steve (Mar 6, 2017)

Its a mistake, I think, to equate what we need and do to the skills of someone "at the top if their game."   

I also think the comment abive regarding fitness is very relevant.   Skills don't diminish but ones fitness to execute certainly does.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Mar 6, 2017)

DanT said:


> It's like any sport, do you honestly believe a professional soccer player could take a year off and then come back at the top of his game? Obviously not. Skills have to be maintained otherwise they decrease. It's just like paddling a boat upstream, the moment you stop, you go back. Fighting is no different, it takes years of training to go from average joe to a "decent" fighter. I honestly believe that however long it takes to acquire a skill, it takes half as long to lose it. If it took you 1 year to go from benching 100 lbs to 200 lbs, if you stop working out, almost guaranteed within 6 months you'll be back to where you started.





JP3 said:


> I think it's lost faster than that, actually.  But, it comes back faster once you've gone up the hill, as well.



Actual motor skills take a while to fade. Conditioning goes first, then reflexes. If you've trained long enough so that you can throw a good clean technical punch or kick, then that skill will last quite a long time even if you don't keep up your practice. Your timing will lose its precision, your reflexes will get slow, and you'll be sucking wind the first time you come back to a hard training session, but the fundamental movement skills don't disappear that quickly.

As far as a professional athlete taking time off and coming back "at the top of his game", you have to remember that elite professional athletes are typically pushing the limits of human capacity and their success or failure is determined by tiny percentages in their performance. An athlete operating at 50% of potential is a hobbyist. An athlete operating at 80% of potential is a high-level amateur. An athlete operating at 95% of potential may be a professional. An athlete operating at 99% of potential is an elite professional. An athlete operating at 99.9% of potential is likely a champion. Maintaining that last few percentage points or fractions of a percentage point does require constant practice and losing a couple of percentage points can mean the difference between a loss and a win even if the athlete retains 95+% of his skill.


----------



## wingerjim (Mar 6, 2017)

Teach 


Sami Ibrahim said:


> In some American Kenpo circles an Instructor says "I can teach anyone to fight in a relatively quick time frame" and this is usually followed up by explaining that the reason students stay in the art beyond that point is for other personal reasons.
> 
> On the surface this may seem like a harmless statement that is elevating a pugilistic endeavor into some noble and higher purpose but actually it is not true. It is a misleading statement about fighting and can cause some to shift the focus of their training from the practical to the impractical, leaving them vulnerable.
> 
> ...


them to fight or teach them to win a fight? Big difference.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 6, 2017)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Actual motor skills take a while to fade. Conditioning goes first, then reflexes. If you've trained long enough so that you can throw a good clean technical punch or kick, then that skill will last quite a long time even if you don't keep up your practice. Your timing will lose its precision, your reflexes will get slow, and you'll be sucking wind the first time you come back to a hard training session, but the fundamental movement skills don't disappear that quickly.
> 
> As far as a professional athlete taking time off and coming back "at the top of his game", you have to remember that elite professional athletes are typically pushing the limits of human capacity and their success or failure is determined by tiny percentages in their performance. An athlete operating at 50% of potential is a hobbyist. An athlete operating at 80% of potential is a high-level amateur. An athlete operating at 95% of potential may be a professional. An athlete operating at 99% of potential is an elite professional. An athlete operating at 99.9% of potential is likely a champion. Maintaining that last few percentage points or fractions of a percentage point does require constant practice and losing a couple of percentage points can mean the difference between a loss and a win even if the athlete retains 95+% of his skill.


Add to that the fact that most elite athletes take time off because of an issue, be it health-related (injury) or mental (something else in life going wrong). That time off may only be part of the problem with their come-back - the cause of the time off may be at least as large a part of the problem.


----------



## Sami Ibrahim (Mar 11, 2017)

In looking back at my post I may have come off like I am bashing Kenpo practitioners or the art in general. That was not my intention, I am a Kenpo practitioner and I have met many who don't hold silly illusions about the nature of violence because they have had great instruction and real world experience to reference. These excellent Kenpo practitioners are an inspiration. As for losing ability, I absolutely agree, it can happen from injuries in life, one minute your a flexible, agile, lightening quick, well-oiled machine, a few injuries later you can barely walk with a cane, if that should happen to you, don't lose heart, consider it a challenge, a new body to reforge and master within the confines of its limitations. (I am loving the the exploration of the Cane)


----------



## Grandmaster Yue men quan (Mar 15, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> Would the time it takes to train someone to fight an unskilled and untrained opponent be relatively quick time frame, in comparison to teaching them to fight a highly skilled opponent?


Nope it would take the same amount of time probably more to fight a,unskilled person without hurting them.


----------

