# Aliveness Training



## IMAA (May 17, 2003)

All JKD practicioners,

Hello, I am going to start a topic that is designed for JKD'ers... I don't know if this topic has been discussed before or not.

But let's get some opinion's on Training drills.  Such like:

Static vs. Non-Static training
Aliveness training...  Is it better?

Does working drills on a constant basis make you a good JKD man?  Do you think taking a dead / or non-static say trapping progression drill and running it in the ground with what say 40 or so different variations will give the student a better understanding, vs. "gloving up" and going in with a partner and working full speed sparring Staticly or Aliveness style with all no punches pulled....?

I know alot of JKD schools and practicioners practice aliveness training, but thier are a few im sure that does not.....just some imput is all im looking for....

thanks


----------



## Mormegil (May 17, 2003)

I think the question is stated a little biased.  "Do you think training dead is a good idea?"  type question.

I think there needs to be a progression (and I'm no sifu).  Starting with no punches pulled from the very beginning will instill fear in many a student, discouraging them.  I think sparring should be started lightly, to learn timing and learn to see openings, then progress to full speed and power.  

Starting full on will work for some, but I think a progression works for most.

I also think structure needs to be taught to beginning students.  Not just "punch as hard as you can!"  They need to be taught the mechanics of the strikes.  If that's dead training, then I guess I'm for some dead training.


----------



## IMAA (May 17, 2003)

I appologize that I didn't make that clear in the statement.  I agree with you on that sense.

For beginer's to learn and understand the progressions of technique, then  yes they should learn patterns, drills, and less contact vs. the more advanced student.

  My meaning behind this statement was, in alot of schools JKD or otherwise,  I think Too Much focus is put on Patterns, Drills, Trapping Progressions, even in Karate like Forms. 

Not enough time is spent preparing us to train in real time situations.  I agree that a newbie that comes into a school and if he starts taking blows right away in a full contact scenerio, he'll shy away.... For teaching purposes Drills are great, but thier has to be boundry line.  You can train a drill, and technique for many years but that does not mean you can pull it off in real life if you dont practice it, in real full out Training....Learning to hunt, feel, move to find it against an opponent, training partner that is not giving you the chance to catch onto that technique.  

I appologize I did not make that more clear....Biased I am not!  Just trying to get something moving here.....


----------



## sweeper (May 18, 2003)

my instructor has us doing about 75% sparring of some kind, it's not all full contact, some of it's limited in other ways like no kicking for example, and also he realy doesn't push us, if someone doesn't want to they don't have to, so only the people who like it excel. I personaly would like to spend a gretwer amount of time working sensitivity and footwork as those are my weakest areas.. Realy I think alot of time should be spent on footwork, I have seen various people come to my class from a bunch f diffrent schools, some of their footwork is good, some bad..  but I don't think footwork drills can hurt any. Also I would like to see less all out sparring and more limited sparring to work on specific attributes, I would rather do limited sparring than focus mit work or something like that.

So basicly after you learn the stuff the only time I think you need to not be sparring to some degree is when strengthening a very specific attribute.


----------



## twinkletoes (May 26, 2003)

I think that the SBG camp has shown that Aliveness is key in skill development--however, I think there's an important distinction between sparring and alive drilling.  Sparring is a kind of alive training, but it isn't the only one.

For instance, let's say we're working on the kimura (bent armlock).  We could do some alive drilling by having one person using the guard and going for the kimura, while they other person resists or counters or tries to escape.  It's not sparring, but it's alive training.  Striking has parallel approaches.

I think alive training is crucial, and I'm trying to work with the SBG "I method" in my classes (introduce, isolate, integrate).  It's not as hard as I thought it would be, and everybody learns and develops skill faster and more effectively.  

Of course, to qualify my response against the initial question, all three "I's" are needed:  Introduce the skill (pad work, bag work), isolate the skill (alive training/drilling), integrate the skill (into sparring).

~Chris


----------



## James Kovacich (May 30, 2003)

There needs to be a balance in ones training that will allow the natural progression of the individual fighters abilities to grow. To say that this is right or this is better is wrong. 

Sweeper gave a decent description of how I train and teach. Aliveness training is more than just full contact. My way is a lot of sensitivity training. The sensitivity is a must, it helps in all of my arts including submisission fighting. 

Full contact is important but is not the emphasis of what I teach. I teach Jun Fan from the beginning and I teach the ground grappling positions and work them into grappling transitions. In the beginning its a lot of technique.

By the time that their sensitivity starts to develop, their ground work begins to take off. I teach them to put all the ranges together as one. Their goal is to be able to flow in any range and in any situation. 

That can be done training primarily full contact but the technique will suffer. The fighter thats able to find the right balance between controlled and heavy training will be a more skilled and stronger fighter.

Controlled sparring along with submission grappling is good  to start and will eventually lead to full contact. But you shouldn't force anyone to fight full contact. Not everyone can handle it including some in the JKD community. I don't have a problem with it because I teach more ground grappling than what I've seen in most JKD schools. If we are to "equal" standing up, then I'll find the range where you are weak. 

Thats the way I teach. My students don't get what they can't handle but they are expected "be functional" in all ranges.

:asian:


----------

