# Perceiving The Elephant



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 2, 2019)

A classic story involves blind men encountering an elephant.  Each described what they perceived with their hands, and decided that they knew what an elephant was based on their perception.  We laugh at the story because the blind men are all wrong, and we can easily know this because we can 'see' an elephant.

Blind men and an elephant - Wikipedia

Similarly, people with sight might see a martial art technique and decide that they know what it is, what it is for, and decided whether or not it is of value, without any true understanding of the true reasons behind the technique.

This gives rise to several errors.  The first is obvious - there is a technique which will be rejected by some because they do not 'see' how it could possibly work.  The second is more insidious - it involves those trained but apparently not to the extent that they grasp the concept either.  These will also claim that a technique, or even a style of martial arts, is valueless because they either could not grasp it or it was not taught to them by a person who understood it.

I have heard this expressed in many contexts, usually over the traditional martial arts.

Kata is one.  Individual techniques or training methods.  Ways of standing and moving.  Even basic concepts like respect shown on the training floor via traditions like bowing and terms of respect.

If you are a student being shown these things, I would urge you to show patience and trust your instructors.  If it is not becoming clear to you, ask questions, seek clarification.  A competent instructor should always be able and willing to demonstrate the 'why' of what you are training.  

If you're an instructor, I hope that you understand these things and are passing them along as best you can.  

And if you're just an observer, or a specialist in another style,  who thinks they know what a kata or a technique or a practice is for, I would urge you to try to find out more before condemning it out of hand.

Otherwise, the elephant is just a snake because you touched its tail and think you understand it.


----------



## skribs (Jan 2, 2019)

Bill Mattocks said:


> If you are a student being shown these things, I would urge you to show patience and trust your instructors. If it is not becoming clear to you, ask questions, seek clarification. A competent instructor should always be able and willing to demonstrate the 'why' of what you are training.
> 
> If you're an instructor, I hope that you understand these things and are passing them along as best you can.
> 
> And if you're just an observer, or a specialist in another style, who thinks they know what a kata or a technique or a practice is for, I would urge you to try to find out more before condemning it out of hand.



I'll add to this:  if someone is asking these questions, don't talk down to them as if they're inferior because they don't already know the answer, or because they have a different answer in mind than you do.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 2, 2019)

skribs said:


> I'll add to this:  if someone is asking these questions, don't talk down to them as if they're inferior because they don't already know the answer, or because they have a different answer in mind than you do.



Quite true and well said.  I take your point.

I would also add that quite often, questions are asked with a loaded intent.  In other words, the person asking the question already has what they consider the 'correct' answer in mind and will accept no other.  They did not ask to get an answer, they asked to get the answer they wanted to hear.  Human nature.


----------



## Martial D (Jan 2, 2019)

Bill Mattocks said:


> A classic story involves blind men encountering an elephant.  Each described what they perceived with their hands, and decided that they knew what an elephant was based on their perception.  We laugh at the story because the blind men are all wrong, and we can easily know this because we can 'see' an elephant.
> 
> Blind men and an elephant - Wikipedia
> 
> ...


Yet sometimes they can see the elephant for what it is and realize a horse is much more efficient and useful for transport.


----------



## wab25 (Jan 2, 2019)

Bill Mattocks said:


> A classic story involves blind men encountering an elephant. Each described what they perceived with their hands, and decided that they knew what an elephant was based on their perception. We laugh at the story because the blind men are all wrong, and we can easily know this because we can 'see' an elephant.
> 
> Blind men and an elephant - Wikipedia
> 
> ...


I've never seen that happen here...

I always try to look at the things I have learned, as being only a small part of the whole. If I can keep reaching out on the part I am touching now I will continue to learn more. But, if I come at it from another direction, it may be something else entirely. While I try to move around and come at things from all directions, I try to appreciate how hard it would be for a blind person to get to all directions of a living animal, surely I miss a few directions and certainly there are gaps.

This is why places like this are good, and talking and or training with other martial artists from other styles is so valuable. They have touched different parts, and learned things they can share with me... and hopefully vice versa.

An important part of this story to me, is to imagine myself as the blind guy and other people I talk or train with as blind guys as well. No one is trying to mislead the other, only share what they have found. When you find people honestly trying to experience the elephant, I have found that I get more by listening to their explanation and then trying to explore what they found... in order to add it to what I have found. Its not a "right or wrong" thing, its not an "either or" thing. Its an "and" thing. I found the tail, you found the leg, another guy found the tusk... An elephant is not a tusk or a leg or a tail. An elephant is a tusk and a leg and tail and a whole lot of parts in between, on top of and underneath that I haven't even imagined yet. So much to learn.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jan 2, 2019)

skribs said:


> I'll add to this:  if someone is asking these questions, don't talk down to them as if they're inferior because they don't already know the answer, or because they have a different answer in mind than you do.



How many karateka does it take to change a light a lightbulb? One to do it, and ninety-nine to complain "He's doing it wrong cause thats not the way, I was taught".


----------



## skribs (Jan 2, 2019)

TSDTexan said:


> How many karateka does it take to change a light a lightbulb? One to do it, and ninety-nine to complain "He's doing it wrong cause thats not the way, I was taught".



He wouldn't need to change the light bulb if he was more careful with his nunchucks.


----------



## Buka (Jan 2, 2019)

How many Karateka does it take to change a light bulb?

Wait...you want to change something? Nooooooo!


----------



## drop bear (Jan 2, 2019)

And now the story of the emperors new clothes...........


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 2, 2019)

Ill add that sometimes things are simply outside the realm of one’s experience.  When that is true, perhaps one ought to resist proclaiming his uneducated opinion as fact.

Sometimes ya just don’t know what ya just don’t know.

Welcome back Bill.  As you can see, some things haven’t changed.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 2, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> Ill add that sometimes things are simply outside the realm of one’s experience.  When that is true, perhaps one ought to resist proclaiming his uneducated opinion as fact.
> 
> Sometimes ya just don’t know what ya just don’t know.
> 
> Welcome back Bill.  As you can see, some things haven’t changed.



The part that grinds my gears is where a person says "I don't like the way you guys do X."  I reply that I don't do X the way he perceived it.  "Oh, yes you do.  This is how you do it and I don't like it."  Funny.  Not only do they know what it is 'we' do, they know what *I* am thinking when I do it.  I had no idea they were such good mind readers.


----------



## Martial D (Jan 2, 2019)

Bill Mattocks said:


> The part that grinds my gears is where a person says "I don't like the way you guys do X."  I reply that I don't do X the way he perceived it.  "Oh, yes you do.  This is how you do it and I don't like it."  Funny.  Not only do they know what it is 'we' do, they know what *I* am thinking when I do it.  I had no idea they were such good mind readers.



I'm pretty sure nobody has done that. Do you have any examples?


----------



## skribs (Jan 2, 2019)

Martial D said:


> I'm pretty sure nobody has done that. Do you have any examples?



Look up my posts.  Then read the people who reply to me!


----------



## skribs (Jan 2, 2019)

Bill Mattocks said:


> The part that grinds my gears is where a person says "I don't like the way you guys do X."  I reply that I don't do X the way he perceived it.  "Oh, yes you do.  This is how you do it and I don't like it."  Funny.  Not only do they know what it is 'we' do, they know what *I* am thinking when I do it.  I had no idea they were such good mind readers.



I am so glad I'm not the only one who experiences this.

Or the assumption that if I didn't say something, it means we don't do it or I don't know it, and then I get ridiculed for not teaching right.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 2, 2019)

Let's not open the door to every crazy idea out there that anyone can invent and profit from.

Ok. So there is kind of two ideas at play here. 

We can have a functional expert who performs well using a method that might be a bit left of field.  (hand weights don't help hand speed/strength. But Tripple G does it.)

And we have a theoretical expert who has a specialized method. (David wolf and avocados for cancer treatment. And hey what does a Surgical oncologist know about avocados to be dismissing that)

Form follows function.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 2, 2019)

Bill Mattocks said:


> The part that grinds my gears is where a person says "I don't like the way you guys do X."  I reply that I don't do X the way he perceived it.  "Oh, yes you do.  This is how you do it and I don't like it."  Funny.  Not only do they know what it is 'we' do, they know what *I* am thinking when I do it.  I had no idea they were such good mind readers.



Yeah. Everyone is the exception. Everyone is the guy who makes that work. Nobody has proof. 

I am a unicorn not a horse.


----------



## Buka (Jan 2, 2019)

skribs said:


> I am so glad I'm not the only one who experiences this.
> 
> Or the assumption that if I didn't say something, it means we don't do it or I don't know it, and then I get ridiculed for not teaching right.



Hey, Skribs, F'em. You train hard, you're passionate, you teach, you're learning and gaining experience, your articulate and you always just lay it out there. Rock on, brother.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 2, 2019)

So here is a left field idea about how technique isn't the king of success.





But we dont give that idea weight because of some esoteric success that nobody can see or prove.

Real observable consistent success.

Keenan Cornelius - Wikipedia


----------



## skribs (Jan 2, 2019)

drop bear said:


> So here is a left field idea about how technique isn't the king of success.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Medical students go back and forth between the classroom ("technique") and then practical training ("experience").  They have to learn policies and procedures, terminology for effective communication, and all sorts of things about the human body and how it interacts.  This is the equivalent of the "technique" training.

But then there's the actual experience of going to see patients and trying to figure out what this kind of cough means, or what the patient means when they say "I have this pain here".  They have to practice their bedside manner, the manual dexterity of working with a patient to feel what's wrong (i.e. swelling) or to do basic procedures (i.e. sticking a needle in them).

What a martial artist gets out of that is the ability to read their opponents, react quicker, and simply to have confidence going in.

This is where techniques and drills (which I would put into the classroom portion of martial arts) differ from resistance training and sparring (which fit more into the practical training).  Both are important.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 2, 2019)

skribs said:


> Medical students go back and forth between the classroom ("technique") and then practical training ("experience").  They have to learn policies and procedures, terminology for effective communication, and all sorts of things about the human body and how it interacts.  This is the equivalent of the "technique" training.
> 
> But then there's the actual experience of going to see patients and trying to figure out what this kind of cough means, or what the patient means when they say "I have this pain here".  They have to practice their bedside manner, the manual dexterity of working with a patient to feel what's wrong (i.e. swelling) or to do basic procedures (i.e. sticking a needle in them).
> 
> ...



In martial arts when you do technique you are learning the wrong technique. 

Because you are copying someone elses technique.


----------



## skribs (Jan 2, 2019)

drop bear said:


> In martial arts when you do technique you are learning the wrong technique.
> 
> Because you are copying someone elses technique.



I'm not sure of anything you can learn without copying someone's technique.

Language, walking, martial arts, musical instruments, writing, typing, throwing a ball, swinging a bat, playing video games...every single thing humans do is learned by copying someone else.

Later on, they may modify the techniques for themselves, and some people even innovate, but everyone is copying someone else when they start to learn something.  That's how humans teach.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 2, 2019)

skribs said:


> I'm not sure of anything you can learn without copying someone's technique.
> 
> Language, walking, martial arts, musical instruments, writing, typing, throwing a ball, swinging a bat, playing video games...every single thing humans do is learned by copying someone else.
> 
> Later on, they may modify the techniques for themselves, and some people even innovate, but everyone is copying someone else when they start to learn something.  That's how humans teach.



Correct.


----------



## skribs (Jan 2, 2019)

drop bear said:


> Correct.



Then I'm not sure what the point of your previous post was.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jan 2, 2019)

drop bear said:


> Let's not open the door to every crazy idea out there that anyone can invent and profit from.
> 
> Ok. So there is kind of two ideas at play here.
> 
> ...



Form also follows dysfunction.
this is proved out with the following observation:
When the biomechanics are wrong, the form is sloppy.


----------



## dvcochran (Jan 2, 2019)

Bill Mattocks said:


> A classic story involves blind men encountering an elephant.  Each described what they perceived with their hands, and decided that they knew what an elephant was based on their perception.  We laugh at the story because the blind men are all wrong, and we can easily know this because we can 'see' an elephant.
> 
> Blind men and an elephant - Wikipedia
> 
> ...



Very well said. The party line that someone else's style is flawed is just wrong. Taking a negative attitude toward a fellow Martial Artist can have a very bad effect on someone new to MA. Very counter to the traditional MA's I have been exposed to. We should do our best to think and reflect first and try to treat everyone in the Martial Spirit, having and more importantly showing respect. It is infectious.


----------



## dvcochran (Jan 2, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> Ill add that sometimes things are simply outside the realm of one’s experience.  When that is true, perhaps one ought to resist proclaiming his uneducated opinion as fact.
> 
> Sometimes ya just don’t know what ya just don’t know.
> 
> Welcome back Bill.  As you can see, some things haven’t changed.


Hence my favorite saying when starting a meeting: "Let's get all the liars in the same room". Sometimes people get really offended because they do not understand. Lets get all the ideas on the table and sort them out. Some will be good, some will be removed from the equation. Making this known from the start really makes a meeting go smoother most of the time. I am certain we seldom touch the whole elephant.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 2, 2019)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Similarly, people with sight might see a martial art technique and decide that they know what it is, what it is for, and decided whether or not it is of value, without any true understanding of the true reasons behind the technique.


Let's discuss this with a concrete example. I cannot figure out any meaningful application for it. What do you think this move is for? 

The possibility are:

1. There is a meaningful application that I have not figure out yet.
2. This move was done wrong in order to hide something.
3. This move was taught wrong.
4. This move was created wrong.
5. ...

What's the truth?


----------



## dvcochran (Jan 2, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Let's discuss this with a concrete example. I cannot figure out any meaningful application for it. What do you think this move is for?
> 
> The possibility are:
> 
> ...


Looks like Boris Karloff portraying the original Frankenstein.


----------



## Hanzou (Jan 2, 2019)

There is nothing wrong with questioning the questionable, and pointing out obvious and clear flaws in a visibly flawed methodology. If someone points out that there's a clear disconnect between kata and the actual fighting form, that's a discrepancy that needs to be accounted for because it is clear and evident. To say that that person merely doesn't understand what they're seeing is nothing more than a lazy excuse to avoid the truth.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 2, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Let's discuss this with a concrete example. I cannot figure out any meaningful application for it. What do you think this move is for?
> 
> The possibility are:
> 
> ...


I'd tend toward "5. This is an exercise, not a technique." Though that could still include 1-4, because we'd have to figure out what the purpose of the exercise is.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 2, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I'd tend toward "5. This is an exercise, not a technique." Though that could still include 1-4, because we'd have to figure out what the purpose of the exercise is.


Will you be able to see the application from this? What's the difference?


----------



## drop bear (Jan 2, 2019)

skribs said:


> Then I'm not sure what the point of your previous post was.



Also correct.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 3, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Will you be able to see the application from this? What's the difference?


I'd give the same answer, taking it in that small snippet. I can invent an application for it, but I don't know what the purpose of the form is. So, to me, it looks like an exercise. The motion has application - with a little tweak, I can even give it application from something I already do, but that's a backwards approach, IMO. 

Of course, I'd say the same about almost any form I don't know, and can't immediately recognize the techniques in. Forms are tools, and they can be used in whatever way we find them useful, but trying to divine their purpose seem, to me, to be a waste of effort.


----------



## dvcochran (Jan 3, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> There is nothing wrong with questioning the questionable, and pointing out obvious and clear flaws in a visibly flawed methodology. If someone points out that there's a clear disconnect between kata and the actual fighting form, that's a discrepancy that needs to be accounted for because it is clear and evident. To say that that person merely doesn't understand what they're seeing is nothing more than a lazy excuse to avoid the truth.


You are correct to question. But you seem to go in to your question already knowing there is something wrong or imperfect. While that of course could be true, it could just as easily mean what you see someone doing is being performed incorrectly either through their own fault or from their teaching. It does not conclusively mean the technique or method is flawed. It is harder for anyone to see another way and not question it. But for the process of questioning to have any value you have to investigate all sides. I think the better argument for more modern training methods, MMA for example, is to acknowledge the root of a technique and reconcile that you simply practice a modern application of the method.


----------



## Steve (Jan 3, 2019)

If being really good at kata is the goal, I think this all makes sense.  I declare this thread ironic in the name of the queen.


----------



## Hanzou (Jan 3, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> You are correct to question. But you seem to go in to your question already knowing there is something wrong or imperfect. While that of course could be true, it could just as easily mean what you see someone doing is being performed incorrectly either through their own fault or from their teaching.



Well nothing is perfect so of course it's true. The problem is that too many people treat this as some sort of religion instead of what it actually is. I've been in situations where people think you've committed a crime if you alter a technique during sparring practice.



> It does not conclusively mean the technique or method is flawed. It is harder for anyone to see another way and not question it. But for the process of questioning to have any value you have to investigate all sides. I think the better argument for more modern training methods, MMA for example, is to acknowledge the root of a technique and reconcile that you simply practice a modern application of the method.



Which begs the question; Wouldnt a more modern application be more applicable in a modern setting than a traditional application designed for a completely different time/society?


----------



## Bruce7 (Jan 3, 2019)

It is only natural that we defend what we know and are suspect of something different.
Walking an H form may seem silly to most people,
because that was not the way they were taught.
If they had been taught the main purpose of walking the forms was to learn balance.
To be able to stop at any point in the H form and be in balance.
It might make more sense.
Walking H forms is not taught today, because students were not patient enough and could not see the benefit. 
So a better method for the student was develop,
of teaching stances and punches at the same time.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 3, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> I've been in situations where people think you've committed a crime if you alter a technique during sparring practice.


I've seen that, too. It drives me batty.


----------



## Hanzou (Jan 3, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I've seen that, too. It drives me batty.



Its simply the nature of martial arts that come from the East. There's a certain mysticism to them that people simply can't shake. Magic is more attractive than reality, so you believe that the Asian founder of your MA style could beat 100 armed Manchu warriors with his Monkey Kung Fu when in reality you put that guy on the mat and he'd probably get dropped on his head by your average high school wrestler.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 3, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> people think you've committed a crime if you alter a technique during sparring practice.


I was taught the opposite. If you have no ability to change whatever you have learned, you are just a copy machine, no more and no less.


----------



## dvcochran (Jan 3, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Well nothing is perfect so of course it's true. The problem is that too many people treat this as some sort of religion instead of what it actually is. I've been in situations where people think you've committed a crime if you alter a technique during sparring practice.
> 
> 
> 
> Which begs the question; Wouldnt a more modern application be more applicable in a modern setting than a traditional application designed for a completely different time/society?


My point is if the technique is correct they are the same thing. Painting a black horse white doesn't make it a black horse. Trying to differentiate the technique by time/society (especially society) makes zero sense.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 3, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Its simply the nature of martial arts that come from the East. There's a certain mysticism to them that people simply can't shake. Magic is more attractive than reality, so you believe that the Asian founder of your MA style could beat 100 armed Manchu warriors with his Monkey Kung Fu when in reality you put that guy on the mat and he'd probably get dropped on his head by your average high school wrestler.


I think it's common there, but I don't think it's inherent in them. My perception is that it's an oddity that happened when they changed cultures (East to West) without much adjustment of approach. Sometimes it was mysticism, but more often it was the overblown assumption of what a "black belt" or "master" was, assuming an infallibility of knowledge. Most of the good martial artists I know - regardless of the origin of their art - take a similar view: learn the techniques as closely as you can to what's taught until you understand them, then figure out how to make them work best. That often includes making adjustments to techniques. I think it's unfortunate that so many instructors still think it's the instructor's job to manage that change - that's best done by active students who've gained enough knowledge, IMO.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 3, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I was taught the opposite. If you have no ability to change whatever you have learned, you are just a copy machine, no more and no less.


Not what I was taught by some instructors, but absolutely my opinion.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 3, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Let's discuss this with a concrete example. I cannot figure out any meaningful application for it. What do you think this move is for?
> 
> The possibility are:
> 
> ...


This is a very very short snippet of movement, clearly taken from something larger.  It may be too small of a piece to be able to interpret a direct application.  You might have identified a piece of something larger that does have application.

At the very least though, it is practicing moving/turning with the body in unison.


----------



## dvcochran (Jan 3, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I think it's common there, but I don't think it's inherent in them. My perception is that it's an oddity that happened when they changed cultures (East to West) without much adjustment of approach. Sometimes it was mysticism, but more often it was the overblown assumption of what a "black belt" or "master" was, assuming an infallibility of knowledge. Most of the good martial artists I know - regardless of the origin of their art - take a similar view: learn the techniques as closely as you can to what's taught until you understand them, then figure out how to make them work best. That often includes making adjustments to techniques. I think it's unfortunate that so many instructors still think it's the instructor's job to manage that change - that's best done by active students who've gained enough knowledge, IMO.


I think it takes both the student and the instructor. And this is the emphasis of the whole thread. IMHO, Peoples bodies and the subsequent mechanics are different. So the student has to learn, adapt, and change their body to be able to perform a technique to their best ability. It is the instructors job to teach them the technique within the boundaries of their physique and their current ability, always striving for perfection. Yes perfection. If not, why do we work so hard? 
One of the hardest jobs for the instructor. It takes a lot of time and physical feedback and honest mental maturation to get to that experience level on any one technique, let alone putting them all together to make a form.


----------



## Hanzou (Jan 3, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> My point is if the technique is correct they are the same thing. Painting a black horse white doesn't make it a black horse. Trying to differentiate the technique by time/society (especially society) makes zero sense.



If the technique is correct. However, the technique might not be correct and is simply there because of tradition, which means it may need to be revamped or adapted. Sometimes the system itself might need an overhaul because it has a good chasis but it could use a better engine. The evolution of Jujitsu, Judo, and BJJ are an example of this process.

Some systems (typically western MAs) embrace that mindset while other systems (typically Eastern MAs) think their founder already solved the fight puzzle and no changes need to be made. The latter sounds absolutely crazy when you think about it.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 3, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> If the technique is correct. However, the technique might not be correct and is simply there because of tradition, which means it may need to be revamped or adapted. Sometimes the system itself might need an overhaul because it has a good chasis but it could use a better engine. The evolution of Jujitsu, Judo, and BJJ are an example of this process.
> 
> Some systems (typically western MAs) embrace that mindset while other systems (typically Eastern MAs) think their founder already solved the fight puzzle and no changes need to be made. The latter sounds absolutely crazy when you think about it.


I wonder if that is true of Eastern MA when in their native culture, or if that's the result of carrying it across cultures without proper adjustment and often by less-experienced instructors.


----------



## Hanzou (Jan 3, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I wonder if that is true of Eastern MA when in their native culture, or if that's the result of carrying it across cultures without proper adjustment and often by less-experienced instructors.



Considering what is occurring with Chinese MA and its dealings with MMA in China I think it's a feature of anciet MAs  coming out of Asia. However you could very well be correct. There is a lot of stomach churning Asia worship going on.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 3, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Considering what is occurring with Chinese MA and its dealings with MMA in China I think it's a feature of anciet MAs  coming out of Asia. However you could very well be correct. There is a lot of stomach churning Asia worship going on.


And it's not really limited to the "ancient" arts. It happens to some extent in newer ones, too - though they often (as my primary art does) refer back to the age of the art they derive from (even when that age is questionable).


----------



## Steve (Jan 3, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> My point is if the technique is correct they are the same thing. Painting a black horse white doesn't make it a black horse. Trying to differentiate the technique by time/society (especially society) makes zero sense.


 Wouldn't the painted horse still be black?  Or are you saying it would be white?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 3, 2019)

Steve said:


> Wouldn't the painted horse still be black?  Or are you saying it would be white?


I think it was a typo - I think it was meant to say "doesn't make it a white horse." At least, that's how I read it the first time.


----------



## dvcochran (Jan 3, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> If the technique is correct. However, the technique might not be correct and is simply there because of tradition, which means it may need to be revamped or adapted. Sometimes the system itself might need an overhaul because it has a good chasis but it could use a better engine. The evolution of Jujitsu, Judo, and BJJ are an example of this process.
> 
> Some systems (typically western MAs) embrace that mindset while other systems (typically Eastern MAs) think their founder already solved the fight puzzle and no changes need to be made. The latter sounds absolutely crazy when you think about it.


You know, there are very few people left that fit your opinion of eastern MA's. That description eastern MA is what is just crazy.


----------



## dvcochran (Jan 3, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I think it was a typo - I think it was meant to say "doesn't make it a white horse." At least, that's how I read it the first time.


Oops, I did not catch my mistake. Thanks for pointing it out.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 3, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> You know, there are very few people left that fit your opinion of eastern MA's. That description eastern MA is what is just crazy.



Culture of how they varify success remains. You can update your system all you want. But if you are not held accountable then you may not be improving.


----------



## Steve (Jan 3, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I think it was a typo - I think it was meant to say "doesn't make it a white horse." At least, that's how I read it the first time.


Okay. I understamd now.  So tell me why the black horse that's been painted  white isn't white?


----------



## CB Jones (Jan 3, 2019)

Steve said:


> Okay. I understamd now.  So tell me why the black horse that's been painted  white isn't white?



Wondering this myself


----------



## Hanzou (Jan 3, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> You know, there are very few people left that fit your opinion of eastern MA's. That description eastern MA is what is just crazy.



I disagree. Take Aikido and Ueshiba for example. I'm sure there are many Aikidoka who don't believe there is anyone better than Ueshiba at Aikido. I'm sure there's plenty of Wing Chunners out there who don't believe that anyone is better at Wing Chun than Yip Man. However, you'd be hard pressed to find a Bjj exponent who doesn't believe that the modern elite BJJ black belts wouldn't wipe the floor with Helio Gracie and the Gracie Boys.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 3, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> I disagree. Take Aikido and Ueshiba for example. I'm sure there are many Aikidoka who don't believe there is anyone better than Ueshiba at Aikido. I'm sure there's plenty of Wing Chunners out there who don't believe that anyone is better at Wing Chun than Yip Man. However, you'd be hard pressed to find a Bjj exponent who doesn't believe that the modern elite BJJ black belts wouldn't wipe the floor with Helio Gracie and the Gracie Boys.


I see a fair bit of that from some folks in TMA. It's something that individual instructors foster when they don't ever really treat anyone at the school as a peer and create the impression/expectation that they are personally the best in the school at everything. I'm not even sure why that's a desirable thing - I'd love to have students who are better than me at some stuff. I keep hoping I'll develop a student who is overall better than me before my body degrades and makes that too low a bar to set.

And if that can happen, realistically, to me with a small program, why wouldn't it be likely to happen to someone like Ueshiba, with many thousands of people practicing the art he started?


----------



## dvcochran (Jan 3, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> I disagree. Take Aikido and Ueshiba for example. I'm sure there are many Aikidoka who don't believe there is anyone better than Ueshiba at Aikido. I'm sure there's plenty of Wing Chunners out there who don't believe that anyone is better at Wing Chun than Yip Man. However, you'd be hard pressed to find a Bjj exponent who doesn't believe that the modern elite BJJ black belts wouldn't wipe the floor with Helio Gracie and the Gracie Boys.


I don't doubt that is true and a valid argument. Two big variables is the age of many MA's. Akido by comparison is not that old and I have zero experience there so I have no opinion. The other is the sheer number of practitioners. I am sure it is true in BJJ or MMA that there are those exceptions who believe theirs is the best or only way. So it is condescending when you rail on TMA when the same arguments can be made in FMA. You don't care, that is fine but you need to hear it. TMA is so much more rounded as it trains the body, mind & spirit (go ahead and laugh) it is only natural that it takes longer and is more comprehensive.


----------



## dvcochran (Jan 3, 2019)

Steve said:


> Okay. I understamd now.  So tell me why the black horse that's been painted  white isn't white?


It is the creamy filled center.


----------



## Steve (Jan 3, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> It is the creamy filled center.


You're being flippant but the question is genuine (both literally and in the context of the metaphor).


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jan 3, 2019)

Steve said:


> You're being flippant but the question is genuine (both literally and in the context of the metaphor).


For literal, because if you wash the horse well enough, the white goes away, and the brown never would. Hopefully that helps with the metaphor too, but I cant help you there


----------



## Steve (Jan 3, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> For literal, because if you wash the horse well enough, the white goes away, and the brown never would. Hopefully that helps with the metaphor too, but I cant help you there


So if you paint a chair white, it's not really white because the wood underneath is brown?  That sounds a little silly to me.  

Figuratively, context matters.  This entire thread disregards context.  Like a horse that was black, but is now white, and could be black again.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jan 3, 2019)

Steve said:


> So if you paint a chair white, it's not really white because the wood underneath is brown?  That sounds a little silly to me.
> 
> Figuratively, context matters.  This entire thread disregards context.  Like a horse that was black, but is now white, and could be black again.


To me, the chair's not really white. There are a few at my home that are red, but half-peeled so you see the brown wood underneath. I have to repaint them every so often to make them red. IMO, if I have to repaint them every few years, they're not red, they just appear to be red.

Again, none of that is for the metaphorical or figurative aspects. Just an answer to the literal question.


----------



## Hanzou (Jan 4, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> I don't doubt that is true and a valid argument. Two big variables is the age of many MA's. Akido by comparison is not that old and I have zero experience there so I have no opinion. The other is the sheer number of practitioners. I am sure it is true in BJJ or MMA that there are those exceptions who believe theirs is the best or only way. So it is condescending when you rail on TMA when the same arguments can be made in FMA. You don't care, that is fine but you need to hear it. TMA is so much more rounded as it trains the body, mind & spirit (go ahead and laugh) it is only natural that it takes longer and is more comprehensive.



In BJJ or MMA there is a way to prove that your way is the best or only way. If you're not proving it, people don't take you seriously when you make such claims. 

BTW, BJJ trains the mind, body, and spirit as well. IMO it does it better because it has an inherent ego check that is sorely missing in many of the traditional styles.


----------



## Buka (Jan 4, 2019)

As for the horse analogy, it actually fits rather well in Martial Arts discussions, because it complicates the idea of the horse itself. Just as Martial Artists like to complicate, oh, I don't know, _everything_.

Just ride that sucker.


----------



## dvcochran (Jan 4, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> In BJJ or MMA there is a way to prove that your way is the best or only way. If you're not proving it, people don't take you seriously when you make such claims.
> 
> BTW, BJJ trains the mind, body, and spirit as well. IMO it does it better because it has an inherent ego check that is sorely missing in many of the traditional styl
> 
> ...


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 4, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> In BJJ or MMA there is a way to prove that your way is the best or only way. If you're not proving it, people don't take you seriously when you make such claims.
> 
> BTW, BJJ trains the mind, body, and spirit as well. IMO it does it better because it has an inherent ego check that is sorely missing in many of the traditional styles.


You're confounding things, Hanzou. There are traditional styles that have competition, and competition is the factor you're actually talking about. Lack of competition happens in recent styles, too. Where there's no competition, people have to work harder to keep that ego in check (especially for the instructor).


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 4, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> My best guess it you have had exposure so some powder puff TMA school and it left a bad impression. Sure, I believe there are BJJ schools that, because the instructor teaches an eclectic mix of MA style influences, can say they teach body, mind, & spirit. So at best, it is different school to school. And the circular argument begin.


It wouldn't have to be a "powder puff" school, by any stretch, DV. Ego stuff is not at all uncommon within the MA, and most of my experience is in the more traditional side of things. And I don't think someone has to teach anything more than basic BJJ to be able to say they help develop mind, body, and spirit. Unless you and I have very different definitions of "spirit", a coach working in any sport can help develop all three if he coaches good teamwork, encourages leadership, keeps egos (including his) in check, etc.


----------



## Hanzou (Jan 4, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> My best guess it you have had exposure so some powder puff TMA school and it left a bad impression. Sure, I believe there are BJJ schools that, because the instructor teaches an eclectic mix of MA style influences, can say they teach body, mind, & spirit. So at best, it is different school to school. And the circular argument begin.



Nope, it's your standard run of the mill BJJ.



gpseymour said:


> You're confounding things, Hanzou. There are traditional styles that have competition, and competition is the factor you're actually talking about. Lack of competition happens in recent styles, too. Where there's no competition, people have to work harder to keep that ego in check (especially for the instructor).



It's not the competitive aspect, it's the sparring aspect. In BJJ you completely submit to your partner in the roll. While other arts have sparring and competition, it usually goes back and forth with no one completely giving in to their partner's technique unless there's an accidental knock out.

When you tap in BJJ you're acknowledging your defeat, and that has a pretty wild effect on people's ego because not everyone can accept the fact that they suck. I've seen people refuse to tap and end up getting choked out or a limb broken. I've seen regulars who avoid the roll because they don't want to get tapped, get the confidence to roll, get tapped repeatedly and never return.

It takes a stronger mind and spirit to stick around and get tapped over and over again, and it's partially what makes BJJ such an effective system.


----------



## Martial D (Jan 4, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Nope, it's your standard run of the mill BJJ.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Oh man, you got that right. Myself, I've never minded tapping. Some of the guys I roll with are wizards and I'm grateful for that. Yet, it's a pretty regular event for wounded egos to lead to arguments and quitting.

At this point I don't even bother learning names till their third or fourth class.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 4, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Nope, it's your standard run of the mill BJJ.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I agree. When I speak of competition, I include internal and informal competition - sparring to win, even when it's light sparring (as opposed to the kind of sparring/rolling that is just to try some stuff out).


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 4, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Oh man, you got that right. Myself, I've never minded tapping. Some of the guys I roll with are wizards and I'm grateful for that. Yet, it's a pretty regular event for wounded egos to lead to arguments and quitting.
> 
> At this point I don't even bother learning names till their third or fourth class.


Having someone beat you with something that feels like magic is almost as much fun as managing one day to defeat them.


----------



## Hanzou (Jan 4, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I agree. When I speak of competition, I include internal and informal competition - sparring to win, even when it's light sparring (as opposed to the kind of sparring/rolling that is just to try some stuff out).



I know, but I'm pointing out to you that there's a difference in the mentality of the two types of sparring. When I did sparring in Karate there was always this bubble around me where I felt safe and I would sit back and exchange technique. Even if I was against someone who was better than me, I never completely submitted to that person, and since it was light contact, I never got the sense that I was beaten. It really is a completely different animal than what you experience in a Roll. The roll ends when one person has surrendered to another person, and the act of surrendering can make you feel EXTREMELY vulnerable.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 4, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> I know, but I'm pointing out to you that there's a difference in the mentality of the two types of sparring. When I did sparring in Karate there was always this bubble around me where I felt safe and I would sit back and exchange technique. Even if I was against someone who was better than me, I never completely submitted to that person, and since it was light contact, I never got the sense that I was beaten. It really is a completely different animal than what you experience in a Roll. The roll ends when one person has surrendered to another person, and the act of surrendering can make you feel EXTREMELY vulnerable.


Agreed. We can safely go a lot further in grappling, in general, during class than with striking.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 4, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> I know, but I'm pointing out to you that there's a difference in the mentality of the two types of sparring. When I did sparring in Karate there was always this bubble around me where I felt safe and I would sit back and exchange technique. Even if I was against someone who was better than me, I never completely submitted to that person, and since it was light contact, I never got the sense that I was beaten. It really is a completely different animal than what you experience in a Roll. The roll ends when one person has surrendered to another person, and the act of surrendering can make you feel EXTREMELY vulnerable.


The 1st time that you step into the boxing ring, you feel that your opponent tries to knock you down ASAP and you also try to knock him down ASAP. That's the only time that you can feel fighting is like "shirt catch on fire". On the wrestling mat, you won't have that feeling.

IMO, everybody should fight "golden glove boxing" at least once in his life time. He will feel that he is fighting against animal and not against human being. He will experience the "shirt catch on fire" feeling.


----------



## Steve (Jan 4, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> To me, the chair's not really white. There are a few at my home that are red, but half-peeled so you see the brown wood underneath. I have to repaint them every so often to make them red. IMO, if I have to repaint them every few years, they're not red, they just appear to be red.
> 
> Again, none of that is for the metaphorical or figurative aspects. Just an answer to the literal question.


Oh, come on.  Really?  Sounds like a Abbot and Costello sketch.

"Hey, have a seat in the brown chair." 
"Which one?  You mean the red one?" 
"No, it's brown... just painted red, but I consider it to be brown because I have to repaint it every so often.  It just appears to be red." 

Come on.


----------



## Steve (Jan 4, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I agree. When I speak of competition, I include internal and informal competition - sparring to win, even when it's light sparring (as opposed to the kind of sparring/rolling that is just to try some stuff out).


When I speak of competition, I include all kinds of things, from kata to visualization to shadow boxing to eating sushi at the baseball game.  Why not?   Even if it's bad sushi, it can still be competitive.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 4, 2019)

So examples of training mind body and spirit in MMA and combat sports in general.

Because if it exists it can be found on YouTube.











And some really good ninjitsu.............
Oh wait.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jan 4, 2019)

Steve said:


> Oh, come on.  Really?  Sounds like a Abbot and Costello sketch.
> 
> "Hey, have a seat in the brown chair."
> "Which one?  You mean the red one?"
> ...


That sounds like an awesome sketch. I might write out a full script for it at some point.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 4, 2019)

Steve said:


> When I speak of competition, I include all kinds of things, from kata to visualization to shadow boxing to eating sushi at the baseball game.  Why not?   Even if it's bad sushi, it can still be competitive.



If it's bad sushi, and there's a line at the restroom, it can be VERY competitive.


----------



## Steve (Jan 4, 2019)

Dirty Dog said:


> If it's bad sushi, and there's a line at the restroom, it can be VERY competitive.


Why not?  If anything can mean anything, have at it.  If competition is the difference between what that guy does and what I do, rather than compete, I'll just redefine the term and call what I do competition.  If application is the difference, I'll just redefine the term and start calling my training a form of "application."

Rather than exercise to lose weight, I'll just redefine muscle so that it also includes fat, and then I will be muscular.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 4, 2019)

Steve said:


> Why not?  If anything can mean anything, have at it.  If competition is the difference between what that guy does and what I do, rather than compete, I'll just redefine the term and call what I do competition.  If application is the difference, I'll just redefine the term and start calling my training a form of "application."
> 
> Rather than exercise to lose weight, I'll just redefine muscle so that it also includes fat, and then I will be muscular.


Do you have a point, Steve, or are you just itching for an argument? I'm not feeling very argumentative today, so I don't think I'll be much help if it's the latter.


----------



## Steve (Jan 4, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Do you have a point, Steve, or are you just itching for an argument? I'm not feeling very argumentative today, so I don't think I'll be much help if it's the latter.


My point is you are very liberal with language, and have no problem coopting a word and changing its meaning fundamentally to suit your purpose.   But, let's be real.   You know that,.  If you didn't understand the point, you wouldn't be so defensive.  I think you're very argumentative but really, that could mean anything.  Right?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 4, 2019)

Steve said:


> My point is you are very liberal with language, and have no problem coopting a word and changing its meaning fundamentally to suit your purpose.   But, let's be real.   You know that,.  If you didn't understand the point, you wouldn't be so defensive.  I think you're very argumentative but really, that could mean anything.  Right?







That second definition there doesn't really say anything about it being formal or open. People can compete without being in any formal competition. Not sure what your problem is. 

It would be different if I said "a competition", because that clearly connotes (and probably denotes) a specific event focused on competing.

But you knew that.


----------



## Steve (Jan 4, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> View attachment 22022
> 
> That second definition there doesn't really say anything about it being formal or open. People can compete without being in any formal competition. Not sure what your problem is.
> 
> ...


You're doing for competition what Trump does for... Everything.  

Even the example of the second definition is contrary to your very liberal use of the term.  You're conflating the trait of being competitive with the noun competition.   The second definition also doesn't say anything about informal competition... At all, but it does reference a formal competition.

But more to my point, which you said you were interested in, context is important.   Being competitive in martial arts is not the same as training for a competition.  Just like training like a cop is not the same as training because you are a cop.  Or confusing a fitness bootcamp for actual boot camp because you're going to be deployed to Syria.

If I seem a little frustrated, it's because this is, to me, such an obvious, fundamental truth that I am confounded how you and others fail to understand it.  And I hold you to a higher standard because your business is adult learning.


----------



## dvcochran (Jan 4, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Nope, it's your standard run of the mill BJJ.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Oh, I just assumed everyone that just sucked ended up leaving. I have never taken BJJ. I have knocked people out and been knocked out. If you cannot understand that what you are saying is ridiculous, ….why do I even try.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 4, 2019)

Steve said:


> You're doing for competition what Trump does for... Everything.
> 
> Even the example of the second definition is contrary to your very liberal use of the term.  You're conflating the trait of being competitive with the noun competition.   The second definition also doesn't say anything about informal competition... At all, but it does reference a formal competition.
> 
> ...


Yeah, and I never said anything about training for competition, so I'm not really sure why that showed up.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 4, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> Oh, I just assumed everyone that just sucked ended up leaving. I have never taken BJJ. I have knocked people out and been knocked out. If you cannot understand that what you are saying is ridiculous, ….why do I even try.


I can't agree with you on that. What's so ridiculous about what he's saying?

Everybody sucks until they don't. Most of us continue to suck at some things, even when we don't suck, overall. Where there's some aspect of competition involved - especially the kind that often ends with someone having to tap out - it becomes more obvious what we suck at. That is hard for some people to deal with, so they leave.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 4, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Yeah, and I never said anything about training for competition, so I'm not really sure why that showed up.



The more important a competition is. The more pronounced effects it has. People work harder and develop more to win. And have to develop greater courage to loose.

And is the development of this warrior ethos.

So being competitive in a club where competition isn't considered a viable training tool. Doesn't really do the same job as one that does. It protects peoples egos a bit more. And you will find they will often have issues with entitlement a bit more.

Which is also Hanzou,s point about grappling. When you loose you really loose.
Which means you deal with a lot more elements regarding mental and emotional development.

I don't think it is defined by striking/grappling as I can make someone cry doing either.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 4, 2019)

drop bear said:


> The more important a competition is. The more pronounced effects it has. People work harder and develop more to win. And have to develop greater courage to loose.
> 
> And is the development of this warrior ethos.
> 
> ...


I get that the importance (to the individual) makes a difference. I'm just not sure why Steve is worked up about me clarifying that when I say "competition", I'm including the informal stuff, too. Losing when you are trying to win isn't easy, and folks who want to keep developing in an environment where they will lose part of the time have to come to grips with that.

I think it's more common in classes with grappling, because you can actually get to a point where you've undeniably "lost" every time, without much risk of injury (BJJ submissions are a good example). That's harder to do with the same safety with strikes. But you're right, it can happen there, too.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 5, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I get that the importance (to the individual) makes a difference. I'm just not sure why Steve is worked up about me clarifying that when I say "competition", I'm including the informal stuff, too. Losing when you are trying to win isn't easy, and folks who want to keep developing in an environment where they will lose part of the time have to come to grips with that.
> 
> I think it's more common in classes with grappling, because you can actually get to a point where you've undeniably "lost" every time, without much risk of injury (BJJ submissions are a good example). That's harder to do with the same safety with strikes. But you're right, it can happen there, too.



It is like sparring.  We can both be doing it and be doing completely different things


----------



## Hanzou (Jan 5, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> Oh, I just assumed everyone that just sucked ended up leaving. I have never taken BJJ. I have knocked people out and been knocked out. If you cannot understand that what you are saying is ridiculous, ….why do I even try.



Are you and your classmates knocking each other out everytime you spar in class? If not, then it isn't the same thing.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 5, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Are you and your classmates knocking each other out everytime you spar in class? If not, then it isn't the same thing.


It wouldn't have to be actual KO's, but it would have to be either hits hard enough to make the outcome undeniable, or just completely overwhelming with pressure (to the same end). As you say, without that, it's not quite the same as the consistent submitting that is possible with grappling.


----------



## dvcochran (Jan 5, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Are you and your classmates knocking each other out everytime you spar in class? If not, then it isn't the same thing.


Yes, it is. The mental acuity needed in any sparring scenario paramount. Predicting what your opponent will do and getting them to do what you want them to do is well over half the challenge. If, as you say, I go into a match knowing all I have to do is tap to get out of a pinch I could easily let my guard down.


----------



## dvcochran (Jan 5, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I can't agree with you on that. What's so ridiculous about what he's saying?
> 
> Everybody sucks until they don't. Most of us continue to suck at some things, even when we don't suck, overall. Where there's some aspect of competition involved - especially the kind that often ends with someone having to tap out - it becomes more obvious what we suck at. That is hard for some people to deal with, so they leave.


I knew my comment would get this reaction. But that is not the way I read @Hanzou 's comment. I heard more of the "you will never be any good at this so why are you here" inference. 
I agree we all "suck" , from the early days of working out to our current level. The mindset that tapping out is the ultimate way or only correct way to spar is just incorrect however.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 5, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> I knew my comment would get this reaction. But that is not the way I read @Hanzou 's comment. I heard more of the "you will never be any good at this so why are you here" inference.
> I agree we all "suck" , from the early days of working out to our current level. The mindset that tapping out is the ultimate way or only correct way to spar is just incorrect however.


It's certainly not the only way. For me, it's about having a chance to experience the suckitude. I've been in classes where that never really happened, and there were people involved who could have benefited (why in the world doesn't that word have two t's??) from it. There's a difference in what's developed between sparring and randori (I use the former to refer to primarily striking, and the latter to refer to primarily grappling). There's more of a price to even the small losses in sparring, when actual contact is used. I'd much rather get submitted several times than get hit once. I like to play to win, but have never really minded losing when I felt I was doing my best and everyone was playing by the rules (whatever they were at the time), so getting submitted never bothered me. And it's much more fun being dismantled by someone much better in grappling than it is with striking.


----------



## Hanzou (Jan 5, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> It wouldn't have to be actual KO's, but it would have to be either hits hard enough to make the outcome undeniable, or just completely overwhelming with pressure (to the same end). As you say, without that, it's not quite the same as the consistent submitting that is possible with grappling.



Yeah, a TKO would work too. The point is to be beaten to the point where you cant continue. Grappling arts have a mechanism that can do that without causing lasting damage, and that has always been its advantage over striking arts. 

It really is a testament to the genius of Jigoro Kano.


----------



## Hanzou (Jan 5, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> Yes, it is. The mental acuity needed in any sparring scenario paramount. Predicting what your opponent will do and getting them to do what you want them to do is well over half the challenge.



Half the challenge of what? Are you beating your training partner to the point where they cant stand and have to be carried out? No? Well hen again, it isnt the same thing. Playing foot and fist tag certainly has benefits and should be done whenever possible, but no one in that exercise is going to have to surrender to their training partner and both will come out of it as "winners". That leads to an entire host of negative consequences.



> If, as you say, I go into a match knowing all I have to do is tap to get out of a pinch I could easily let my guard down.



Why would you let your guard down? Do you want to be placed in a choke or a joint lock?


----------



## Martial D (Jan 5, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> I knew my comment would get this reaction. But that is not the way I read @Hanzou 's comment. I heard more of the "you will never be any good at this so why are you here" inference.
> I agree we all "suck" , from the early days of working out to our current level. The mindset that tapping out is the ultimate way or only correct way to spar is just incorrect however.


It has nothing to do with an 'ultimate way' It's a matter of apples and oranges.

Sparring is a learning tool, in both grappling and sparring. The major, and undeniable difference, is that when you roll there is a clear victor every round(or at least, the potential for there to be..some rolls just go the 3 or 5 minutes).


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 5, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Are you and your classmates knocking each other out everytime you spar in class? If not, then it isn't the same thing.



Are you and your classmates breaking each others limbs every time you spar in class? If not, then it isn't the same thing.


----------



## Martial D (Jan 5, 2019)

Dirty Dog said:


> Are you and your classmates breaking each others limbs every time you spar in class? If not, then it isn't the same thing.



There is a serious difference here though. There is no comparable point of no return(besides being knocked unconscious) with striking as there is with submissions. You tap before you go to sleep, and before your arm breaks, to prevent these things. If you refuse to tap you WILL sleep, and your arm WILL break.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 5, 2019)

Martial D said:


> There is a serious difference here though. There is no comparable point of no return(besides being knocked unconscious) with striking as there is with submissions. You tap before you go to sleep, and before your arm breaks, to prevent these things. If you refuse to tap you WILL sleep, and your arm WILL break.



Same applies to striking. I don't hit routinely people full force and try to knock them out. But with appropriate students, I hit them hard enough that we both know I _could_ have knocked them out. And, frankly, if a student insists that the strikes could not possibly have knocked them out, then they get knocked out. Not surprisingly, the vast majority of people will know that they could have been knocked out and accept it without actually being knocked out. Just as most will accept that they would have gone to sleep without actually going to sleep.
I do have one guy who refuses to tap on chokes, though. He's been asleep a few times because of it. He's smart enough not to get knocked out, though.


----------



## Steve (Jan 5, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Yeah, and I never said anything about training for competition, so I'm not really sure why that showed up.


Really?  You can't follow the train of thought?  Okay.  That explains a lot.


----------



## Hanzou (Jan 5, 2019)

Dirty Dog said:


> Are you and your classmates breaking each others limbs every time you spar in class? If not, then it isn't the same thing.



Technically yes. When you tap you're acknowledging that your partner has successfully beaten you to the point where you can no longer fight.  You're in a sense asking your partner for mercy because you are helpless.

I'm not aware of a comparable mechanism in striking arts beyond actually beating down, crippling or knocking out your partner. Kyokushin and similar karate styles are the only non-sport striking MA where I've seen it done, but those guys actually beat the hell out of each other.

In arts that have zero sparring, that type of mental development is completely nonexistent.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 5, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Technically yes. When you tap you're acknowledging that your partner has successfully beaten you to the point where you can no longer fight.  You're in a sense asking your partner for mercy because you are helpless.



So in other words, no. You're not.
You don't need to break their arm for them to know you could have. I don't need to knock them out for them to know I could have.
Same same.


----------



## Hanzou (Jan 5, 2019)

Dirty Dog said:


> So in other words, no. You're not.
> You don't need to break their arm for them to know you could have. I don't need to knock them out for them to know I could have.
> Same same.



Yeah, except it's not. There is no "if I hit them hard enough they know I could have knocked them out". That's utter nonsense. You either knock them out or you dont knock them out. What you're saying is skin to someone saying that they grabbed their arm, thus they could have broken it.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 5, 2019)

Dirty Dog said:


> I don't need to knock them out for them to know I could have.


The problem is in "control sparring", you won't experience "shirt catch on fire" feeling. The fear of being knock out is one price that you have to pay to experience a real fight.

To spar with plastic knifes (you can relax) is different from to spar with real knifes (you cannot relax). Old soldiers are more valuable than new soldiers because old soldiers have experience "killing".


----------



## drop bear (Jan 5, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, a TKO would work too. The point is to be beaten to the point where you cant continue. Grappling arts have a mechanism that can do that without causing lasting damage, and that has always been its advantage over striking arts.
> 
> It really is a testament to the genius of Jigoro Kano.



Body shots.


----------



## Hanzou (Jan 5, 2019)

drop bear said:


> Body shots.



Yeah, that's why I brought up Kyokushin. Getting blasted like that as you move up belts, and then finishing it off with a 30 vs 1 kumite to get your black belt will definitely build character.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 5, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, that's why I brought up Kyokushin. Getting blasted like that as you move up belts, and then finishing it off with a 30 vs 1 kumite to get your black belt will definitely build character.



Yeah. It is also what we do when we want to send someone a message.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 5, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The problem is in "control sparring", you won't experience "shirt catch on fire" feeling. The fear of being knock out is one price that you have to pay to experience a real fight.
> 
> To spar with plastic knifes (you can relax) is different from to spar with real knifes (you cannot relax). Old soldiers are more valuable than new soldiers because old soldiers have experience "killing".



I don't get any such feeling when I'm in a real fight. After, I might have all sorts of reactions. But not during.
As for 'control sparring'... I don't know how you're defining it. I'm certainly not talking about tap tap stuff. Maybe 75-80%. You feel it. It hurts. But nothing gets broken.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 5, 2019)

Just like control sparring and full contact sparring, there is difference between rock climbing with rope,







and rock climbing without rope.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 5, 2019)

Dirty Dog said:


> So in other words, no. You're not.
> You don't need to break their arm for them to know you could have. I don't need to knock them out for them to know I could have.
> Same same.


I don’t find all sparring partners are that convincing to each other.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 5, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Just like control sparring and full contact sparring, there is difference between rock climbing with rope,
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I’ve done both. The difference is less than I expected.


----------



## Buka (Jan 5, 2019)

I don’t know how anybody else’s spars in their striking art, but in sparring that I know, when you’re finished with the sparring session everybody involved knows who was better that day.

Kind of hard not to.


----------



## Hanzou (Jan 5, 2019)

Buka said:


> I don’t know how anybody else’s spars in their striking art, but in sparring that I know, when you’re finished with the sparring session everybody involved knows who was better that day.
> 
> Kind of hard not to.



Yeah, but nothing beats the look on the face of a huge burly man when he got tapped-out multiple times by a woman half his size.

Well, nothing except those big burly men getting choked out and then pooping in their shorts (true story).


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 5, 2019)

Buka said:


> I don’t know how anybody else’s spars in their striking art,


I had trained seriously full contact for 8 months (4 times a week, 2 hours per section). During that 8 months, my body was always in pain. One thing that I had learned was I didn't mind to get punched on my body. But I tried to protect my head as much as I could. That was how I got the "rhino guard" idea.

It's good feeling that when my opponent tries to knock me down but I'm still standing.


----------



## Buka (Jan 5, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, but nothing beats the look on the face of a huge burly man when he got tapped-out multiple times by a woman half his size.
> 
> Well, nothing except those big burly men getting choked out and then pooping in their shorts (true story).



I’ve enjoyed that as well while grappling. But what I’ve enjoyed just as much was when the big, burly guy throws something at you, especially with intent, and you kick his feet out and smack him upside the head WHILE he’s going down.

And that look stays there as he’s getting up. Priceless.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 5, 2019)

Buka said:


> I’ve enjoyed that as well while grappling. But what I’ve enjoyed just as much was when the big, burly guy throws something at you, especially with intent, and you kick his feet out and smack him upside the head WHILE he’s going down.
> 
> And that look stays there as he’s getting up. Priceless.


In Chinese wrestling, nothing can be more fun than to throw your opponent down while you are still standing on single leg balance and look at him.


----------



## Martial D (Jan 5, 2019)

Dirty Dog said:


> So in other words, no. You're not.
> You don't need to break their arm for them to know you could have. I don't need to knock them out for them to know I could have.
> Same same.


Except it's not the same. When you are sparring on the feet, some things land clean, some don't, angles are always in flux, etc. If you are going light contact, there's really no way to tell what strike might stop you if it were full power. That's not the point of light sparring.

At full power some shots that look good might glance off, while shots that don't look like much might send you off for a nap.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 5, 2019)

Martial D said:


> If you are going light contact, there's really no way to tell what strike might stop you if it were full power.


Agree! In full contact, sometimes you may have to punch your opponent 2 or 3 times on the same spot to knock him down.


----------



## dvcochran (Jan 5, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Half the challenge of what? Are you beating your training partner to the point where they cant stand and have to be carried out? No? Well hen again, it isnt the same thing. Playing foot and fist tag certainly has benefits and should be done whenever possible, but no one in that exercise is going to have to surrender to their training partner and both will come out of it as "winners". That leads to an entire host of negative consequences.
> 
> 
> 
> Why would you let your guard down? Do you want to be placed in a choke or a joint lock?


Sure, why not? All I have to do is tap out.


----------



## dvcochran (Jan 5, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Half the challenge of what? Are you beating your training partner to the point where they cant stand and have to be carried out? No? Well hen again, it isnt the same thing. Playing foot and fist tag certainly has benefits and should be done whenever possible, but no one in that exercise is going to have to surrender to their training partner and both will come out of it as "winners". That leads to an entire host of negative consequences.
> 
> 
> 
> Why would you let your guard down? Do you want to be placed in a choke or a joint lock


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 5, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I don’t find all sparring partners are that convincing to each other.



That's a problem with those sparring partners. Not with sparring.



Hanzou said:


> Yeah, but nothing beats the look on the face of a huge burly man when he got tapped-out multiple times by a woman half his size.



Unless it's the look on the face of a huge burly man when he gets knocked down multiple times by a person (I'm not going to be sexist and assume it has to be a woman) half his size.



Martial D said:


> Except it's not the same. When you are sparring on the feet, some things land clean, some don't, angles are always in flux, etc. If you are going light contact, there's really no way to tell what strike might stop you if it were full power. That's not the point of light sparring.



Nice strawman. Nobody said anything about light sparring. I said, quite clearly, that I'm talking about going 75-80% power. It hurts. It just doesn't injure.



> At full power some shots that look good might glance off, while shots that don't look like much might send you off for a nap.



And some choke holds that look good are escaped.

Same same.
It's not necessary to break someones arm grappling. Nor is it necessary to knock someone out striking.


----------



## Martial D (Jan 5, 2019)

Dirty Dog said:


> That's a problem with those sparring partners. Not with sparring.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, I assumed light sparring because I assumed you trained smart. It's not smart to go hard in sparring regularly. Too many negatives. 

Besides that doesn't seem to jibe with your statement that 'the other guy knows I could have knocked him out' maybe I'm missing something? If you are already going 80%, a clean shot to the button with good structure WILL ko people(more times than not). There doesn't seem to be a need for speculation about  'could have'  at that point.

Secondly, if you can escape the hold/choke, you don't tap. Still not the same. You tap when a: you feel the world slipping away or b: when you feel your joint twist in a way you know to be critical and can't escape.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jan 5, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, but nothing beats the look on the face of a huge burly man when he got tapped-out multiple times by a woman half his size.
> 
> Well, nothing except those big burly men getting choked out and then pooping in their shorts (true story).


I'm a short little twerpy dude. I've sparred with a sumo wrestler, and quite a few weightlifters. They still acknowledged when they were outmatched (not that I'm great...just that they were new). One time a weightlifter came in with a pretty big attitude for his first few months, and I was an assistant instructor. He made comments about how he could whip me, so I offered a sparring match. I kept weaving around his punches as he got frustrated with me and as a result his punches got harder and harder towards my face. Once he tired himself out, I (lightly) pummeled him. Incredibly incredibly dangerous thing to do, I'm not sure I'd be able to any more, but that guy absolutely new he was outplayed by a little twerp. He stuck around for a few years, and would mention it to newcomers, which is probably the only reason I remember it.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jan 18, 2019)

skribs said:


> Medical students go back and forth between the classroom ("technique") and then practical training ("experience").  They have to learn policies and procedures, terminology for effective communication, and all sorts of things about the human body and how it interacts.  This is the equivalent of the "technique" training.
> 
> But then there's the actual experience of going to see patients and trying to figure out what this kind of cough means, or what the patient means when they say "I have this pain here".  *They have to practice their bedside manner*, the manual dexterity of working with a patient to feel what's wrong (i.e. swelling) or to do basic procedures (i.e. sticking a needle in them).
> 
> ...



Bedside manner as I see it is one of the more important things a doctor can have.  If a doctor has good bedside manner, his patients will feel more at ease to discuss things (some of which will turn out to be important), and will be more positive in their response to the doctor's suggestions.

Martial arts instructors need that good "bedside manner" as well.  Students will react more positively to training.

To your credit, the way you describe how you teach, I think you have that.



drop bear said:


> In martial arts when you do technique you are learning the wrong technique.
> 
> Because you are copying someone else's technique.



Some of the old masters seem to have figured out what techniques or subtle moves in a technique work best.  They have taught them to their students who passed them down.  Don't be to quick to put their 'old' techniques down as useless.

That said, in the Hapkido I learned, I was taught what seemed to be the best way to do a technique, one that worked best for most people.  I was also taught if there was a way that made it easier for me to properly do the technique, I should do it that way.  My instructors would allow it if it did indeed work better for me.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 18, 2019)

oftheherd1 said:


> Some of the old masters seem to have figured out what techniques or subtle moves in a technique work best. They have taught them to their students who passed them down. Don't be to quick to put their 'old' techniques down as useless.
> 
> That said, in the Hapkido I learned, I was taught what seemed to be the best way to do a technique, one that worked best for most people. I was also taught if there was a way that made it easier for me to properly do the technique, I should do it that way. My instructors would allow it if it did indeed work better for me.



Yeah. But you still have to make the technique work.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jan 19, 2019)

drop bear said:


> Yeah. But you still have to make the technique work.



Of course.  It was rare that I would need to make a change.  Usually I would find it was my lack of understanding of the proper application.  Actually I can't recall it being any other way after I had time to work more on the technique.  To me, the 'old' tried and true way always seemed best after I had a chance to really work on it.

YMMV


----------

