# Technique Internalization



## NTDeveloper (Apr 14, 2005)

I have heard it said before that one must do a technique 500 times before it becomes ingrained into "muscle memory" and is thus available for spontaneous usage.

 Now, I'm rather doubtful that 500 is some magic number and of course different people will respond differently to training; however, I would presume that there is some sort of average number out there that would serve as a useful yardstick. 

 Additionally, I would also guess that technique internalization is also a function of time. That is, doing Five Swords 500 times on the same day would probably not be as beneficial as, say, doing Five Swords 5 times/day for 100 days. 

 I would be interested in others comments on this. Has there been any relevant scientific research done in this area? Are there any stories that you can relate about yourself or others with respect to technique internalization?


----------



## dubljay (Apr 14, 2005)

Well I have no data on scientific research but I do have my own experience.

 I dont know of any magic number about internalization, but you are right it is a function of time and repitition.  However I think there is more to it than that.  A person can repeat the technique over and over without actually enguaging their mind.  I know you were discussing "muscle memory" but the mind has to take an active role in guiding the body.  Repeating a technique without analyzing it and your movements is useless.  It is akin to "cramming" for an exam.  You may "read" the material, but unless you focus on the context of the material and not just the text itself  it is of no use.

 Just my opinion and I could be wrong.

 -Josh


----------



## Bill Lear (Apr 14, 2005)

How many licks does it take to get to the Tootsie Roll center of a Tootsie Roll Pop?

I would say that the number of repititions it would take someone to internalize a given technique would vary from person to person.

:idunno:


----------



## Zoran (Apr 14, 2005)

I feel that the length of time you practice the tech effects it more than the actual number of times you practice it. If your crazy enough, you could concievably do a tech 500 times in a day.:whip:



			
				dubljay said:
			
		

> Repeating a technique without analyzing it and your movements is useless.


 I agree here to a point. I find some students may focus too much on analyzing and not enough of doing. So there is a need for balance. In the beginning you should be doing a lot less thinking and more of just doing. You need to get the proper mechanics down before you can analyze it to death.


----------



## Mekosho (Apr 14, 2005)

I agree with Zoran on the OVER analyzing, as I find myself doing this way to often in class, we are given a tech. then we break it down, then I break it down more, then I break down those pieces and well then, class is over and while all else actually practiced a technique, I spent class piecing it together...discussing it, etc.

As far as the 500 times in a day as opposed to 5 at 100 days, I would imagine the idea of 100 days would be more beneficial as that gives muscle recovery time and you would always be fresh, ensuring that you do the tech with proper form each time...


----------



## pete (Apr 14, 2005)

big difference between internalizing and memorizing... 

first, muscles don't have memories. the brain does and so does the spine. internalizing means moving from the inside out, from your center to your extremities. by practicing this for years, you will learn to connect your mind with your center through the spine, thus internalize your movement and technique. 

memorization is external, and limited to how many techniques you have the mental capacity to remember the external moves to in a sequentially order... like 1.step back, 2.block, 3.punch, etc. 

this is my goal, probably since i have exhausted my mental capacity for the latter...

pete


----------



## Ray (Apr 14, 2005)

Mekosho said:
			
		

> ...ensuring that you do the tech with proper form each time...


Although the small quote may not truely express what Mekosho said, I'd still like to highlight the thought about: Proper form each time.

There is another thread conversing about some technique video clips on a particular website.  The views expressed about the clips are that the techniques are weak/poorly done.  Execution should be done at the very best possible level, otherwise we risk spontaneous medicority (or worse).

If, when learning a technique, we have to go through it slowly and "by the numbers" then we should.  We can increase our speed incrementally.  At least, that's my feeling on it.  Somebody said: practice makes permanent, perfect practice makes perfect.

I was once told that if you practice a technique 1,000 times then it's yours.  I took that to mean learn it and keep reviewing/practicing it.


----------



## dubljay (Apr 14, 2005)

Zoran said:
			
		

> You need to get the proper mechanics down before you can analyze it to death.


 Good point Zoran. Analyze was a bad choice of a word but it was the best I could come up with. What I was trying to imply was that often times people have a tendency to go through the motions and "tune out" their mind. As pete pointed out "muscle memory" is reliant on the mind and the spinal cord, the mind has to be involved to gain "muscle memory". Its like the difference between _listening_ to a lecture and _taking notes_ during a lecture. Takeing notes has more value than the notes themselves for future reference, the act of writing the notes forces the person to first interperate the words of the lecture then reproduce them. So when working techniques (whether you "know" them or not) dont rush blindly thrugh them, take your time and make mental notes (or actual notes if that helps too) of your timing and body mechanics.


----------



## distalero (Apr 14, 2005)

I think it's a combination of both repetition and time as the general condition, with no set parameters, but it's also the person and all the variables (individual anatomy and  physiology, intent, price of tea in China, etc)  that are brought to the practice by that person. Interesting thread because it sort of obliquely touches on another "discussion", had primarily by teachers, about imposing a ridgidly specific set of movements on a student (for whatever benefit) vs. teaching the motion and allowing them to find their eventual best expression, THEIR underlying "sweet spot" in each aspect of a technique. (There is a tendency to presuppose that one is more valid or advanced than the other. Welllllll, maybe, maybe not.  In my view there's only a small distinction between the two at best). I think, actually I know from personal experience, that time and repetition also can bring something else to movement, although I hesitate to mention it. (Insert weird Twilight Zone music here) Maybe someone else out there can relate to this: with time and repetition, against a number of workout opponents, perhaps more in sparring than in technique practice per se, comes not only an internalization of specific moves, but also a kind of "awareness" or "knowing" that I'm not able to really describe. It's a kind of non physical "contact" or engagement with the opponent that allows you to somehow feel where they are in relation to you, and how to move your position accordingly. In other words, internalizing moves is not the end to it all. Doing this is only a kind of "pilot light" that will possibly be lit if you continue on. In still other words, internalized movement, as necessary as it is,  is still not quite living movement. It has nothing to do with science, or mental concepts, or hypervigilance, or thinking at all. You'll know it, if and when you experience it. Have you?


----------



## KenpoDave (Apr 14, 2005)

When movement is practiced under adrenal stress conditions, the "muscle memory" happens much faster.


----------



## Doc (Apr 15, 2005)

pete said:
			
		

> big difference between internalizing and memorizing...
> 
> first, muscles don't have memories. the brain does and so does the spine. internalizing means moving from the inside out, from your center to your extremities. by practicing this for years, you will learn to connect your mind with your center through the spine, thus internalize your movement and technique.
> 
> ...


Actually Pete, muscles do have memory. Th entire body is a conduit of learned memories and experiences that can and do operate outside conscious and directed thought.


----------



## Doc (Apr 15, 2005)

KenpoDave said:
			
		

> When movement is practiced under adrenal stress conditions, the "muscle memory" happens much faster.


Actually subjecting "muscle memory' to an Adrenal Dump does not develop synaptic pathways of execution any faster. A foundation or "soft muscle memory" must be developed first.


----------



## bdparsons (Apr 15, 2005)

Doc said:
			
		

> Actually subjecting "muscle memory' to an Adrenal Dump does not develop synaptic pathways of execution any faster. A foundation or "soft muscle memory" must be developed first.



Bingo, you hit the nail right on the head. There is a common miconception that in any and all adrenal dump situations the body defaults to gross body movements. This only holds true if fine motor skills have not been trained properly. If through proper repetition the increased stress level is trained, then the finer motor skills do in fact not disappear.The key is repeated proper executions in a non-stress evironment coupled with more repetitions in progressively more stressful environments.

Respects,
Bill Parsons
Triangle Kenpo Institute


----------



## SION (Apr 15, 2005)

Remember the old saying "Practice makes perfect" I have heard an updated one, due to the fact that, if you keep practicing something that is incorrect, you will only compound a possible problem. So remember "Perfect practice makes perfect"

Go slow make the moves large then round of the corners over time.



KJM


----------



## MJS (Apr 15, 2005)

Bill Lear said:
			
		

> How many licks does it take to get to the Tootsie Roll center of a Tootsie Roll Pop?
> 
> I would say that the number of repititions it would take someone to internalize a given technique would vary from person to person.
> 
> :idunno:



I agree with Billy.  Each person will progress at different levels.  I do feel though that the more you do something, the better you'll be at it.  Look at our daily activities...tie our shoes, driving, performing our daily duties at our job.  These are all things that we do without having to think.  The more you do something, anything, the less we have to think about it.  Its more of a second nature.

Mike


----------



## Rick Wade (Apr 16, 2005)

Bill Lear said:
			
		

> How many licks does it take to get to the Tootsie Roll center of a Tootsie Roll Pop?
> 
> I would say that the number of repititions it would take someone to internalize a given technique would vary from person to person.
> 
> :idunno:



:idea: 3 at least that is what the owl said on that commercial during the 70s.  Am I dating myself?


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 16, 2005)

Mekosho said:
			
		

> I agree with Zoran on the OVER analyzing, as I find myself doing this way to often in class, we are given a tech. then we break it down, then I break it down more, then I break down those pieces and well then, class is over and while all else actually practiced a technique, I spent class piecing it together...discussing it, etc.
> 
> ...


This statement bothers me a little. I think class time is well spent when you are being taught something you don't already know. If you want to repeat a tech on bodies get toguether after class, and schedule other times with your fellow students to do the busy work. It sounds to me like you are getting your money's worth. 
Sean


----------



## KenpoDave (Apr 16, 2005)

Doc said:
			
		

> Actually subjecting "muscle memory' to an Adrenal Dump does not develop synaptic pathways of execution any faster. A foundation or "soft muscle memory" must be developed first.



The research that I have read states otherwise.  It may not be synaptic pathways of execution that I am speaking of though.  What I have read is that you can spend a lifetime practicing movements and then during an adrenal dump, they are not available to you.  On the other hand, movements practiced under adrenal stress are.


----------



## KenpoDave (Apr 16, 2005)

bdparsons said:
			
		

> If through proper repetition the increased stress level is trained, then the finer motor skills do in fact not disappear.The key is repeated proper executions in a non-stress evironment coupled with more repetitions in progressively more stressful environments.
> 
> Respects,
> Bill Parsons
> Triangle Kenpo Institute



Thank you.  Your explanation is much clearer than mine!


----------



## Jagdish (Apr 17, 2005)

Sir:

What do you think about super slow training? Example: extending your arm forward during one exhalation and retreating the arm inward during the inhalation.

Do you think this type of training has it's place here or should we discard it?

Yours,

Jagdish




			
				Doc said:
			
		

> Actually subjecting "muscle memory' to an Adrenal Dump does not develop synaptic pathways of execution any faster. A foundation or "soft muscle memory" must be developed first.


----------



## Doc (Apr 17, 2005)

Jagdish said:
			
		

> Sir:
> 
> What do you think about super slow training? Example: extending your arm forward during one exhalation and retreating the arm inward during the inhalation.
> 
> ...


There is nothing wrong with this kind of training. It was created because when training slow your mistakes, once you know the material, are morely easily discerned by you. However, this type of training is very slow in inculcating the information, and even then it is in "soft muscle memory."

A good teacher can get you up to speed but it takes close scruitiny and the eye of a super teacher, and not just a so-called instructor to get you there. You need someone who sees everything and knows how to correct it from many years of experience in and teaching the science. Many would like to claim the position, but would be exposed in a second in the presence of the real deal.


----------



## MHeeler (Apr 17, 2005)

Doc said:
			
		

> Actually Pete, muscles do have memory. Th entire body is a conduit of learned memories and experiences that can and do operate outside conscious and directed thought.


Just curious as to what is meant by this.  Muscles, technically speaking, only serve two functions: to contract and relax.  The cells which make up muscle groups are incapable of storing any information.  The term "muscle memory" is often bandied about when referring to the ability to remember movement sequences.  The correct term for this is "motor memory" or "procedural memory."  But, this has nothing to do with the muscle cells.  Recent research suggests that the cerebellum (along with the basal ganglia and hippocampus among others) is mainly responsible for this phenomenon.

The term "muscle memory" was actually introduced to describe a phenomenon in weight-lifting.  When a trained weight-lifter comes back to training after a long break, he may find that he re-acquires his strength much quicker than he gained it the first time.  This is because the muscles fibers have become accustomed to stress.  Therefore, it is easier for trained muscles to recruit additional motor units within the muscle in order to adapt to said stress.

Was the above quote meant as an esoteric statement, or was there something specific you were referring to?

Thanks,
MH


----------



## distalero (Apr 17, 2005)

Can't speak for anyone else, of course, but one theory has it that, similar to true reflex arcs, the impulses for certain movement can travel "imprinted" (if you will) pathways. Your point's well taken, though: movement, sensation, intent are components of a symphony, not a single instrument.


----------



## pete (Apr 17, 2005)

MHeeler said:
			
		

> Muscles, technically speaking, only serve two functions: to contract and relax. The cells which make up muscle groups are incapable of storing any information. The term "muscle memory" is often bandied about when referring to the ability to remember movement sequences. The correct term for this is "motor memory" or "procedural memory." But, this has nothing to do with the muscle cells. Recent research suggests that the cerebellum (along with the basal ganglia and hippocampus among others) is mainly responsible for this phenomenon.


 this is also what i was taught. i was also told that in 2002 science had discovered that 'memory' also ran down the spine. this accounts for the ability to train/remember reflex actions.     pete.


----------



## Drifter (Apr 17, 2005)

Do it right first, break it down second, do it right and fast last. Practice every day. 

If you do three reps of every technique you have a day, for a year, correctly, that's 1095 correct repetitions of all that you have in your arsenal. 

In five years, that's 5478 correct repetitions (gotta include the leap year), not including any class time, extra review, etc. 

That's just more incentive to practice hard every day. If you do only one rep a day of each technique, it takes you close to three years to get up to 1000 reps. Work hard.


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Apr 18, 2005)

MHeeler said:
			
		

> Just curious as to what is meant by this. Muscles, technically speaking, only serve two functions: to contract and relax. The cells which make up muscle groups are incapable of storing any information. The term "muscle memory" is often bandied about when referring to the ability to remember movement sequences. The correct term for this is "motor memory" or "procedural memory." But, this has nothing to do with the muscle cells. Recent research suggests that the cerebellum (along with the basal ganglia and hippocampus among others) is mainly responsible for this phenomenon.
> 
> The term "muscle memory" was actually introduced to describe a phenomenon in weight-lifting. When a trained weight-lifter comes back to training after a long break, he may find that he re-acquires his strength much quicker than he gained it the first time. This is because the muscles fibers have become accustomed to stress. Therefore, it is easier for trained muscles to recruit additional motor units within the muscle in order to adapt to said stress.
> 
> ...


Go back through your notes from neuro. Most brain parts, including basal ganglia, remain "not fully known" with respect to function as it relates to motor/proprioceptive control, RAS, and many other wonderful things. The colloquialism "muscle memory" has been used well before body-builders (early strong men) knew what a motor unit was, or about the nature of recruitment. Which, by the way, also remains under investigation. (i.e., diff btw "all or nothing", peripheral or collateral recruitment, and so on...if Mezner's right, then we should have the damndest time putting coffee to our lips without knocking our teeth out).

Muscle memory, in the sense of multiple motor units governed by similar LMN & UMN reflex arcs is still very much an entity alive and under investigation by different sides of the coin, with one group substantiating that such a critter is very real, and the other side substantiating that the critter must be renamed because it just ain't so. I'm thinking, if cellular memory can be demonstrated in the contractile cells of flatworms, it's a bit arrogant to assume it don't exist in us.

Remember: Muscles contract in concert to demand, with greater demands exhibiting the ability of a contracting muscle cell to place enough tension on the walls of neighboring cells to get them to contract as well, even without the initial executive command from the governing neuron of the motor unit of the second system. They can, like any other cell, be conditioned. Increasingly, evidence in surfacing that suggests that memory over function is not resident in the neurological system, but by the cells themselves.

One study in support of a position does not a revolution make.

Regards,

Dave


----------



## Jagdish (Apr 18, 2005)

Doc said:
			
		

> There is nothing wrong with this kind of training. It was created because when training slow your mistakes, once you know the material, are morely easily discerned by you. However, this type of training is very slow in inculcating the information, and even then it is in "soft muscle memory."
> 
> A good teacher can get you up to speed but it takes close scruitiny and the eye of a super teacher, and not just a so-called instructor to get you there. You need someone who sees everything and knows how to correct it from many years of experience in and teaching the science. Many would like to claim the position, but would be exposed in a second in the presence of the real deal.



Sir:

If one is forced to train alone and wants to  do slow training:

Do you recomend doing it everyday as sole training or mixing it up with more fastest and powerful moves( monday to sunday?).

How many techniques can one work on in one single session? In my experience 5/6 techniques is quite good (both side took into account) but doing more can exhaust the nervous system. Note: working very technique more than 10 times.Is this correct?

Thanks in advance.   

Yours,

Jagdish


----------



## Doc (Apr 18, 2005)

Jagdish said:
			
		

> Sir:
> 
> If one is forced to train alone and wants to  do slow training:
> 
> ...



I'm sorry but I think you miss my point. You need an instructor to perfect the movement(s) for you, which are forever changing and ongoing. Singular Execution Training still requires teacher scruitiny. A person may only practice what the teacher approves and when he approves it, until the teacher changes it. To mimic is the lowest form of learning and produces minimal skill at best, and certainly nothing worthy of rank. The instructor trains and corrects you until he is satisfied with a movement. Then he may suggest you "work on it" for a period alone. Then he will move you on to something else repeating the process. You will spend far more time under a direct instructors guidance than without.

Football is a game with minimal fundamental skills in comparison, but watching and mimicking a video will never get you into a game with skill. Not even Pop Warner. Fighting puts your life on the line and is much more dynamic, complex, and lethally unforgiving in reality.

There is no such thing as "forced to train alone." There are viable ways to do something and there are not. In life there are somethings that will not be accessable when we want them. Some things may never be obtained. We must take care that time invested is spent wisely and wasting time on something that produces minimal use is a personal decision.

Those who produce and sell videos would like you to believe they are providing a service to you. They are not. What they are doing is making money, and that is not necessarily a bad thing. Just remember you usually get what you pay for, and let the buyer beware. When you compare the cost of classes over time to the one time cost of a video, you begin to realize the worth of what you have. Me, I'd rather read a book than pretend I'm learning how to protect myself by watching a video. It's just not going to happen, no matter how much we want it to happen.

The real world has standards that must be met, or we fail. No matter how good we feel about ourselves because of somethng we did, those standards don't change. We meet or exceed them, or you don't. Sometimes when you don't, you die. Its that serious for me. For you, only you can say.


----------



## SION (Apr 18, 2005)

> Sir:
> 
> If one is forced to train alone and wants to do slow training:


Jagdish, I see that you are from Madrid and a member of the IKKA, do you not have a training partner? If not you should look up Carlos.
Why would you want to train alone? all the major benefits of training with an instructor of good repute can I am sure be yours in that area.


----------



## Jagdish (Apr 18, 2005)

Doc said:
			
		

> I'm sorry but I think you miss my point. You need an instructor to perfect the movement(s) for you, which are forever changing and ongoing. Singular Execution Training still requires teacher scruitiny. A person may only practice what the teacher approves and when he approves it, until the teacher changes it. To mimic is the lowest form of learning and produces minimal skill at best, and certainly nothing worthy of rank. The instructor trains and corrects you until he is satisfied with a movement. Then he may suggest you "work on it" for a period alone. Then he will move you on to something else repeating the process. You will spend far more time under a direct instructors guidance than without.
> 
> Football is a game with minimal fundamental skills in comparison, but watching and mimicking a video will never get you into a game with skill. Not even Pop Warner. Fighting puts your life on the line and is much more dynamic, complex, and lethally unforgiving in reality.
> 
> ...




Sir:

Excuse my words, what i was referring for was once you got the instruction and when you have time for lone practice, (you know, others practicioners tend to do general physical preparation,or jogging, or hitting heavy bag or cross train in other arts, or take yoga clasess,etc.) do you consider within these circumstances and as part of lone training if slow training of more than 5/6 techniqies is adequate?  I am referring from a advance student point of view.

For me slow training means to remove all unnecessary tension from the body and building proper neuro pathways. (I think chinese masters already knew this but they tend not to be very informative. Then the mystic of qi took over.)The less tension in the body the best possible performance one can do,it means to be effective with the technique.

Also when discussing with practicioners of other arts who seem to try too hard when performing their techniques and when you just suggest slow training they tend to look at you as they are talking to a freaky/weird.

You suggest that they should take it eady and try slow training for a season but in this world everybody seem to know.

Thanks for taking your time ,sir. :asian: 

Yours,

Jagdish

P.S:May be i am thinking too much.


----------



## MHeeler (Apr 18, 2005)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> Go back through your notes from neuro. Most brain parts, including basal ganglia, remain "not fully known" with respect to function as it relates to motor/proprioceptive control, RAS, and many other wonderful things. The colloquialism "muscle memory" has been used well before body-builders (early strong men) knew what a motor unit was, or about the nature of recruitment. Which, by the way, also remains under investigation. (i.e., diff btw "all or nothing", peripheral or collateral recruitment, and so on...if Mezner's right, then we should have the damndest time putting coffee to our lips without knocking our teeth out).
> 
> Muscle memory, in the sense of multiple motor units governed by similar LMN & UMN reflex arcs is still very much an entity alive and under investigation by different sides of the coin, with one group substantiating that such a critter is very real, and the other side substantiating that the critter must be renamed because it just ain't so. I'm thinking, if cellular memory can be demonstrated in the contractile cells of flatworms, it's a bit arrogant to assume it don't exist in us.
> 
> ...


 
Absolutely.  No specific part of the brain is "fully known" as it pertains to anything.  The brain truly will be the final frontier of medicine.  However, that does not in any way suggest anything about the role of muscle tissue in procedural memory.  Recruitment, I agree, is an interesting phenomenon.  But, once again, this is not any form of "memory."  At best, it would be the loosest definition of the word.  Similarly, any tissue in the body could be said to have memory of its own function, when the truth is rather that these functions are simply encoded in DNA and then carried out by the tissues that are formed as a result of DNA transcription.

You yourself referred to upper and lower motor neurons as the key player in reflex arcs.  These are not muscle tissue, but nervous tissue.  I have no argument with you here.  The arc consists of receptor, afferent neuron, interneuron (possibly), efferent neuron, and effector organ (muscle, in this case).  The muscle itself does not house any memory of this function; it simply follows the direction of the incoming nervous impulse.  Rather, it is the nervous tissue and the synaptic interactions that carry out the meat of this phenomenon.

You once again refer to recruitment with regard to greater contractile demand.  But, as I said earlier, this would have to be a very loose definition of "memory."  As far as your reference to "surfacing," I must admit that I am unaware of the term.  I've not come across it before, but if you wouldn't mind, please explain.

I'm not sure which singular study you are referencing.  The information I have written above has been extensively studied and peer reviewed.  Granted, there is still some ongoing discourse as to specific mechanisms, but that is the nature of scientific inquiry.  The fact that we are still attempting to explain "how" something happens, does not negate the fact that it does indeed happen.

Thanks for the dialog.
MH


----------



## MHeeler (Apr 19, 2005)

After re-reading the posts, I realize that you probably meant to say "evidence IS surfacing" rather than referring to "surfacing" as a specific phenomenon.  So, chalk it up to me being a retard and disregard the last part of my post.  Still, I am curious as to what evidence you're citing.

Thanks,
MH


----------

