# emphasizing weapons



## thekuntawman (Jun 29, 2003)

one of the neglected parts of martial arts training, is physical conditioning when many people choose to focus on weapons. especially when they choose the blade, many people feel that physical training is not needed because the blade makes the blade holder equal, or even superior to his opponent.

yes, a smaller man (or woman) will "make" his opponent "smaller" by holding a blade. but there are many cases when superior physcial condition is needed, and is one of the most important parts of your weapons arsenal.

1. when you are strong and in good shape, it gives you confidence that you can handle yourself. especially when you cannot get to your weapon, or you have several opponents, which can reduce the intimidation of your weapon. trust in your weapon should be partnered with trust in your own body.

2. being strong and having stamina will allow yourself to last longer in a fight, especially when the fight is not over in seconds like it is in training. if you had to run from the opponent, and fight only because you could not get away, you must have energy when it is time to fight.

3. having a strong heart helps you battle fear and nervousness, which is something many martial artist do not think about. a weak heart will affect your thinking and emotions when you have to defend yourself. many times, someone who has a weapon will be afraid to use it.

4. what if you lost your weapon?

5. what if you have to struggle to keep your weapon, or to disarm him? disarms do not always just pop out of your opponent hand.

6. the strength to hold on to your weapon.

i will have to go, and post more later.


----------



## thekuntawman (Jun 29, 2003)

7. of course the obvious is, to move faster, with better balance, with more power. then there is the grappling for/with the weapon, blocking, trapping, seizing and controlling your opponent. your movement is better and more efficient when your in superior physical shape.

when teaching, your students should get a combination of academic learning AND training. when you give academic learning only, it makes students lazy, and it tells them that the most important part of martial arts training is, learning how to do the movement. even with a weapon, this is nonsense. the student should be trained well in whatever you teach them, even if it is only a few techniques. for streetfighting and defense, your weapon should be an extension on your body, not just something in your hand. the knife is not as dangerous in a hand with a weak arm, as it is in a strong arm. technique does mean something, but compared to superior strength speed and timing, technique is nothing more than a "what if". the physical ability is the application.

we have a saying, "hiding behind the weapon", which is to describe a martial artist, who is too lazy to perfect and discipline himself, instead he answered every "what if"-challenge with "my stick hurts/or my blade is sharp". well not if i break your jaw before you pull it out. the person who is studying the philippine martial arts has a very powerful weapon and great advantage over his opponents. but he should be careful he is able to back up his knowledge with the physcial tools to make these weapons work.


----------



## dearnis.com (Jun 29, 2003)

Some interesting thoughts...And I agree about the importance of physical conditioning 100%.
But the issue I always run into is this- I have limited time with my students due to career demands, other issues, etc.  Is my time with them best spent trying to impart technical knowledge, or playing "carido-cop" to ensure they stay on top of their conditioning work?
I normally try for a moderately physical class with the warning that they MUST see to their own fitness...and then once in a while throw in a burn-out class to reinforce the point.  (And I take advantage of the fact that my assistants will do a lot of physical work when I am not there!)


----------



## Sun_Helmet (Jun 29, 2003)

In my Sayoc Kali experience, I've found many of the students that seek training are in three camps:

1. VERY physically minded individuals . Elite athletes, elite military,  etc. They come to train for something else. They already have the fitness training which suits them and since some are of the highest caliber in terms of fitness, what they seek is a training method that will complement those attributes. Survival mindset are already pretty advanced and they want to fill any gaps that fitness does not cover... certain Body mechanics, Tactics which supplement their own, etc. They want to find out how someone less physical can defeat them, and counter act that weakness. You have to ***show*** that the moves work - on them.

2. Fitness trainers, sports minded people, martial arts instructors or competitors, construction workers. There's more grey areas here, but emphasis on the above, plus the addition of developing the tactical mindset. 

3. Blade collectors, newbies to martial arts in general, etc. they want to learn about how their body movement can get better, how they can adapt to situations and how to improve in the arts. Body types are often misleading. Different sizes and appearances do not tell you how someone can move, nor their endurance, and most importantly, their will to survive. You have thinner individuals who possess excellent tendon strength and core foundations, you have stockier individuals with exceptional footwork and superior speed / reaction times.

Each student has a personal roadblock(s) that an instructor can assist in solving. Much has to do in developing confidence and seeking ways to progress in the arts.

I feel that if someone is "hiding behind their weapon"... they don't do the necessary training anyway, because to train it properly is very physical.

--------
---------
--------
-


----------



## thekuntawman (Jun 29, 2003)

being in shape like you would do in a gym, is not the same as being in "fighting shape". for example, a runner might have stamina, and a weight lifter can be strong, but these skills do not transfer over to fighting directly. the martial arts fighter must have a "fighter's strength", and "fighters" stamina, "fighting" flexibility, and "fighter's" speed.

running 5 miles can help build your stamina, but still does not prepare you for 5 intense rounds of fighting. bench press does build your chest and arms, but it does not develop your punching power as much as heavy bag punching. it does not matter if the student comes to you already "in shape" by a gym instructors definition. as a martial arts "fighitng" instructor, you should make sure that he is in fighting shape, and it is the instructors job to GET him into fighting shape. if he comes to class just to learn but he is not developed in the physical, did he get the most out of his training? i dont think so. "learning" to do a movement, which is all he did without the physical ability to execute and apply it, can be done on video. the benefit of learning directly from the teacher, is that you get all you can not get from a video. if a student does not have the time to devote to his training to do it right, then he is wasting his time. it is like going to medical school and not working on patience, or even worse, going to the lectures without studying.

i dont believe the martial arts student is making a good move by going to a teacher and saying, i want to learn but i cannot commit to the training. i call this half-assing. true martial arts is not for everyone, and the ones who are too busy, not interested in training, or demand what-i-want-to-do-in-this-class are only fooling themself that they really _know_  the martial arts. fighting mastery requires a lifetime of commitment and hard work, not just "learning some moves, and i'll practice it later". for the weapons student, he thinks just because he can swing a stick and thrust a knife, that he can defend himself. academic learning of a technique is something that anybody can do, even without a teacher. but the physical part, development of physical skills and application of technique, is the hardest part, that probably only 10% of martial arts students actually get.

many of the martial art students walk in already "knowing everything", especially the ones who have experience, or read the magazines books and the computer. but YOU are the expert, not them, so do you let them walk in your doors and tell you how they want to be trained? if you demand more time from them, then the ones who are committed will give it to you. many of them do not know that they need more than just learning to do a movement is not enough. to keep the philippine martial arts pure, just keep the committed ones. let the ignorant and uncommitted go to SCARS/RAT/PFS/KRAV MAGA or one of those other companies that will make them experts in one day.

_Is my time with them best spent trying to impart technical knowledge, or playing "carido-cop" to ensure they stay on top of their conditioning work? 
I normally try for a moderately physical class with the warning that they MUST see to their own fitness...and then once in a while throw in a burn-out class to reinforce the point. (And I take advantage of the fact that my assistants will do a lot of physical work when I am not there!)_ 

dearnis,
your time with your students is best spent training them in whatever techniques you have time to teach them. if you show them a bunch of techniques and release them, but you dont know if they really know it, or if they can apply it, did you do good for the FMA? i dont think so. they have just become a member of the "i know martial arts (i think)" family. the benefit of learning directly from you and not a tape is, that they can be "trained" in the art, not just learn to swing and explain a stick. there is nothing wrong with having a student come to you for class and spend his time doing his techniques 250 times. you are teaching classes, right? not seminars? then explain to your students, that, like a boxing coach, your job is to train them in the art, not just showing neat tricks everytime you see them. trust me, as they get stronger and more skilled they will appreciate it. hard training once in a while is not good enough.

back to the weapons training. does a fencer go his classes and spar and practice movements over and over? how about boxers? or football players? singing students? athletes? see, if these people came and learned new things everytime they go, when do they master there learning? i would say they would suck unless they do, or the coach will have to make up new things so every time they come, they wont get bored. to fight with a weapon is more than _knowing_  how to swing a strike and cut. many of todays "weapons/combative experts" have not learned this, or they are simply entertaining students. the ones who lose are the students who think they will be able to use there weapons well in a fight when it matters.


----------



## Sun_Helmet (Jun 30, 2003)

dearnis.com,

If you are seeking to teach survival and non sports oriented martial arts:

Break down the movements, deconstruct their application and teach moves that only work in real time.

Drill to emphasize improving on those movements.
Develop their tactical mindset.
Improve on the student's physical durability and body mechanics, so that they can acquire an exceptional proficiency in whatever you teach them.
Allow them to explore and learn outside your system as well.

If a student gets bored...   the same idea can be taught in a new way that gives the student a different perspective. You'll often see a lightbulb go off in their head when a drill they've been doing for some time and might have taken for granted is shown to have another level.

Another tip is to never stop learning yourself. 

best,
--Rafael--
----------
----------
----------


----------



## Airyu@hotmail.com (Jul 1, 2003)

Hello Everyone,

Great thread! 

As an Instructor/Coach, and a dedicated student, physical fitness is always something on my agenda. Whether in class or on my own, I train to develop fighting attributes that are enhanced by various methods of physical training. The students at my school are also, led thru exercises, attribute development drills as well as just plain old training. The emphasis is always made that they need to enhance their "in house' training, with self training outside the school. I have seen strong, physically fit students run out of gas during sparring, while the so called little guy continues on non stop. Physical fitness training should be a staple of any Instructor/Coach's personal regimen. Without the BTDT(been there done that) how can one honestly tell their students to do something, they are not a living example of? 

A well rounded routine should encompass the areas of cardiovascular/endurance training, strength building, and flexibility.  Starting off in a program that should first enhance the total conditioning level of the athlete to a level where they can handle much more sport specific exercises is important as well.

One of the myths of martial arts training is the long distance approach, to the neglect of short term anaerobic conditioning. One good method to train for thsoe short term, high intensity conflicts is to add a program that pushes both the cardio level up high as well as the muscular endurance level as well. Here is a short example.

20 yrd sprint, drop down and do 20 push ups, get back up and 20 yrd sprint, drop down and do 20 front crunches, get back up and 20 yrd sprint, grab your sticks and 60 seconds non stop striking to a target. Rest up to 2 minutes and repeat the cycle. This is only one of many variants on a theme, but I think you can see the end result is a fighter who is training for a short duration match. This is not to the exclusion of aerobic capacity development but only one aspect of the training game plan.

Gumagalang
Guro Steve L.


----------



## dearnis.com (Jul 1, 2003)

A few points:
 Kuntawman...yes, training for a five round fight is not like training for a five mile run.  Read my post  again; I did not say I do not conduct physical classes.  Where I should have been more clear is that I do not see spending 1 1/2 hours of a two hour class on mindless calesthenics.  That is the student's responsibility; mine is to steer them that way by a combination of drills and matches so that they see where they need to be.

Tuhon Raf-
 I like to think that my arnis has evolved quite a bit after 1 1/2 years with the Upper Darby group.  And your suggestions are what I try to pass on, though perhaps not worded so well.

Gumangalang.


----------



## Sun_Helmet (Jul 1, 2003)

Thanks Chad.
btw -  I heard those Upper Darby folks from Philly are pretty good with the blade. 

--Rafael--


----------



## dearnis.com (Jul 2, 2003)

Only when we are not in time out.....


----------



## twinkletoes (Jul 5, 2003)

I think what people are talking about is the difference between "learning" a skill and "developing" a skill.  The job of the instructor is to help a student develop his skills.

I know plenty of people in the martial arts, of all different ranks, who talk a good game and can discuss principles at length, but can't glove up and show it.  I think we all have students like that.  Our goal as instructors is to help our students develop self-defense skills.  This is different from "teaching them self-defense."  To teach is to show someone an idea.  It's like show and tell.  It doesn't necessarily help them any.  

To help them develop their skills is to guide them in improving their own (physical) performance.  That means that the students develop appropriate attributes (timing, reflexes, strength, speed, coordination, appropriateness, and the like) while learning and improving self-defense abilities.  They build these attributes in the context of their own capacity to effectively utilize the techniques.  This means that THEY IMPROVE in their own personal ability to USE what we teach.  Isn't that the goal?

Best,

~Chris


----------

