# Can hard work make up for lack of talent?



## Sarah Mc

I have been training in MMA, kickboxing & karate for about 8 months. I'm 33 years old & had no prior experience.  I'm not the most uncoordinated person but teaching my body entirely new movements has not come naturally to me.  

From my first class until about 5 months I felt like I just wasn't getting anything at all.  Looking back I think that's because-

1) The sheer quantity of different moves was overwhelming - it's taken time to learn what's what, & 
2) I was sort of thrown into sparring on my first night (I was looking around trying to figure out what we were even doing - I didn't know what sparring was or what was expected), & kept sparring every class until I had a thorough complex about it - I just didn't get it & started to believe I just couldn't.  Beliefs are powerful - it's gotten in the way of forming confidence. 

At some point I broke a barrier & started seeing progress. It helped that I didn't need to re-learn the difference between all the different blocks & punches, etc, & could just do them.  I'm not frozen during sparring & can see how it's supposed to come together (I think). 

I'm saying all this to explain my question. If I keep trying, can I develop the skills to actually be good? That's probably a taboo question, but it's honest - there are people who flourish at something, & people who always barely scrape by.  And with some activities, scraping by isn't enough.   

It seems to me that a lot of it is instinct. The ability to move without thinking. I want to know if working at it will be enough to develop the needed instincts & skills? Or, does a lack of inherent instincts, & an apparently extremely slow learning curve, mean that I should adjust my expectations to scraping by at best?

I ask mainly because there's a big part of me that believes - despite what seems like evidence to the contrary - that if I just have enough time & practice, the pieces will keep falling into place, maybe just a little more slowly as I wrap my mind around everything. But, I have no interest in fooling myself, if that's what I'm doing.


----------



## Tez3

I would say that hard work nearly always trounces talent and the harder you work the luckier you get too. 

Martial arts is one of those activities that the more you work at it and depending on you learning to do techniques properly you will do them instinctively eventually. Absolutely things will fall in place after a while. It maybe longer that for other activities because there is so much of it!

A lot of fighters have started later than you would have thought and have become very good.


----------



## Headhunter

Well maybe you should just pick one system instead of 3. Karate will teach different things than Mma so no wonder you're not learning properly. Yeah hard work makes up a lot and cross training is good but you should really get a good understanding of one style before crossing over. Especially since your training 3 different types of stand up fighting (plus the ground in Mma)


----------



## Headhunter

also it's not a race keep training you'll get better eventually whether it's a month or a year you'll get better. Not everyone is going to be the best ever. But it's not about that


----------



## Buka

Yes, hard work can make up for lack of talent. Thank God for that.


----------



## JR 137

What are your expectations and how realistic are they? I’m saying that in a positive way, not in a negative way. We’re our own worst critics, and we expect that are unrealistic and/or too soon.

I find how much I’ve improved doesn’t hit me until I see someone else trying to learn something I learned a while back and it’s now relatively easy for me. 

And if you’re comparing yourself to people you started with, keep in mind that you’re most likely improving at the same pace. You couldn’t outdo him/her on day 1, now 8 months later you still can’t. Guess what? You both got better in that time.


----------



## DocWard

I will wholeheartedly say that hard work can overcome a lack of talent. Having said that, don't assume you don't have natural talent for the martial arts. Eight months, in three different disciplines, as has been suggested, may be such that you aren't developing the muscle memory necessary to progress effectively as if you were concentrating on one art.

I can give countless examples of hard work making a huge difference in sports. There's no reason you can't be the next.


----------



## JR 137

People who are talented but don’t put the work in don’t improve. They start off better than the rest, but the rest catch up and pass them by sooner or later. I’ve seen it a ton of times.

Pretty much anyone who’s consistently putting the work in will improve significantly. The longer they’re there, the less and less new people walking in will be able to hang with them. There’s no substitute for hard work and experience.


----------



## Sarah Mc

JR 137 said:


> What are your expectations and how realistic are they? I’m saying that in a positive way, not in a negative way. We’re our own worst critics, and we expect that are unrealistic and/or too soon.



I tried not to have expectations, but - while I knew I shouldn't compare myself to others - it's hard to not notice when other beginners seem at ease / are faster & more efficient than I am.   That's where all of this is coming from.  

If I look at the facts, it's not true that I can't learn (because I have) & the slower progress makes sense in light of what I know about my learning process. Still, I have never pursued a physical sport of any kind, so my self-knowledge doesn't include applying that to physical coordination and instincts.


----------



## Sarah Mc

DocWard said:


> I will wholeheartedly say that hard work can overcome a lack of talent. Having said that, don't assume you don't have natural talent for the martial arts. Eight months, in three different disciplines, as has been suggested, may be such that you aren't developing the muscle memory necessary to progress effectively as if you were concentrating on one art.



Thank you for this.  I have noticed that there is too much new information to practice everything I learn at once.  

I practice at home on a regular basis, but maybe coming up with a more organized plan of what I'm going to practice & for how long will help. So far I've just been picking whatever I have the hardest time with to practice, as opposed to basic punches that I can do easily on the bag, but have trouble applying when sparring.


----------



## Buka

Sarah Mc said:


> but have trouble applying when sparring.



You're learning how to drive the car. No worries about racing it yet.


----------



## Sarah Mc

Buka said:


> You're learning how to drive the car. No worries about racing it yet.



Thank you!!


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Sarah Mc said:


> I tried not to have expectations, but - while I knew I shouldn't compare myself to others - it's hard to not notice when other beginners seem at ease / are faster & more efficient than I am.   That's where all of this is coming from.
> 
> If I look at the facts, it's not true that I can't learn (because I have) & the slower progress makes sense in light of what I know about my learning process. Still, I have never pursued a physical sport of any kind, so my self-knowledge doesn't include applying that to physical coordination and instincts.



We all know better than to compare ourselves to others. Most of us do it, anyway. So, the good news is that you're human.

There are people I started with who were more talented than me, who I outlasted and outworked. I got better than them.

There were people who started after me and were less talented than me, but who outworked me. Some of them are now better than me.

So keep working, and keep enjoying. If you're enjoying the process and getting what you want from it, not much else really matters in the long run.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Buka said:


> You're learning how to drive the car. No worries about racing it yet.


Well said.


----------



## JR 137

Buka said:


> You're learning how to drive the car. No worries about racing it yet.


That’s one of the best things I’ve read here in quite some time.


----------



## Buka

@Sarah, you can work on sparring without actually sparring. It's supplemental training, not a replacement for sparring. But it's fun and worthwhile.


----------



## jobo

Sarah Mc said:


> I have been training in MMA, kickboxing & karate for about 8 months. I'm 33 years old & had no prior experience.  I'm not the most uncoordinated person but teaching my body entirely new movements has not come naturally to me.
> 
> From my first class until about 5 months I felt like I just wasn't getting anything at all.  Looking back I think that's because-
> 
> 1) The sheer quantity of different moves was overwhelming - it's taken time to learn what's what, &
> 2) I was sort of thrown into sparring on my first night (I was looking around trying to figure out what we were even doing - I didn't know what sparring was or what was expected), & kept sparring every class until I had a thorough complex about it - I just didn't get it & started to believe I just couldn't.  Beliefs are powerful - it's gotten in the way of forming confidence.
> 
> At some point I broke a barrier & started seeing progress. It helped that I didn't need to re-learn the difference between all the different blocks & punches, etc, & could just do them.  I'm not frozen during sparring & can see how it's supposed to come together (I think).
> 
> I'm saying all this to explain my question. If I keep trying, can I develop the skills to actually be good? That's probably a taboo question, but it's honest - there are people who flourish at something, & people who always barely scrape by.  And with some activities, scraping by isn't enough.
> 
> It seems to me that a lot of it is instinct. The ability to move without thinking. I want to know if working at it will be enough to develop the needed instincts & skills? Or, does a lack of inherent instincts, & an apparently extremely slow learning curve, mean that I should adjust my expectations to scraping by at best?
> 
> I ask mainly because there's a big part of me that believes - despite what seems like evidence to the contrary - that if I just have enough time & practice, the pieces will keep falling into place, maybe just a little more slowly as I wrap my mind around everything. But, I have no interest in fooling myself, if that's what I'm doing.


no is the answer to you main question, hard work will not over come talent if the talented person also works hard.

and then if they are talented enough then can 9ut in a third of the effort and still be three times as good as you, you can5 fight genetics,  as I have found out many times 8n my life, ( soccer, pool, guitar playing, motorbike racing)can you improve . probably  are you on the way to a UFC bout.  probably not


----------



## Tony Dismukes

jobo said:


> no is the answer to you main question, hard work will not over come talent if the talented person also works hard.
> 
> and then if they are talented enough then can 9ut in a third of the effort and still be three times as good as you, you can5 fight genetics,  as I have found out many times 8n my life, ( soccer, pool, guitar playing, motorbike racing)can you improve . probably  are you on the way to a UFC bout.  probably not


That would be relevant if the OP was looking to become an Olympic champion or world-class professional fighter. It’s true that the folks at the very top of the heap are generally the ones who have natural talent *and* start young *and* work super hard for a long time *and* get world-class coaching *and* get various other lucky breaks along the way. 99.9999% of the population will never get to that level.  Most of those who have the talent won’t work hard enough. Most of those who work hard enough won’t have the talent. Most of those who have the talent and the work ethic will have other roadblocks: injuries, finances, illnesses, inadequate coaching, family issues, etc which will prevent them from reaching that pinnacle of achievement.

Fortunately the OP was asking about something much more manageable, i.e. “actually being good.” As long as she’s not defining “good” as “being a top champion”, then it’s a goal achievable by almost anyone willing to put in the work.


----------



## Sarah Mc

gpseymour said:


> There are people I started with who were more talented than me, who I outlasted and outworked. I got better than them.
> 
> There were people who started after me and were less talented than me, but who outworked me. Some of them are now better than me.
> 
> So keep working, and keep enjoying. If you're enjoying the process and getting what you want from it, not much else really matters in the long run.



I appreciate your experience. And I really am enjoying it - as long as I stay focused on improving myself, & not fear, which is why I posted here today.  I have no intention of quitting, but sometimes the fear that I'm lacking something essential overshadows my enjoyment. I figured finally I'd just ask.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Although I wasn’t fully aware of it when I started training, my natural talent for martial arts was somewhere in the bottom 1% of the general population. I’ve met a few people along the way who are as naturally untalented as I am, but none I can think of who were significantly less talented.

Funny thing, it turns out that if you train hard enough and long enough at something, you eventually get halfway decent at it. After 38 years in the martial arts, I’m an above average instructor. I spar with talented guys half my age and do okay. I’ve had pro fighters come to me for coaching. I’m certainly not the best around, but I’m better than 99.9% of martial artists will ever get. Not because I have any talent, but because most people drop out and go on to something else before they get to where I am. 

(I have known people with actual talent who have gotten to where I am in 1/2, 1/3, or even 1/4 the time that I took. They’re the exceptions. Most of those who had the talent to do that got bored or got frustrated or lacked the work ethic or had other priorities in life and didn’t stick with it.)


----------



## Sarah Mc

Buka said:


> @Sarah, you can work on sparring without actually sparring. It's supplemental training, not a replacement for sparring. But it's fun and worthwhile.



Can you suggest the type of supplemental training?  I practice in the air alone, but I'm not sure that's what you mean.  Thank you!


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Sarah Mc said:


> I appreciate your experience. And I really am enjoying it - as long as I stay focused on improving myself, & not fear, which is why I posted here today.  I have no intention of quitting, but sometimes the fear that I'm lacking something essential overshadows my enjoyment. I figured finally I'd just ask.


If you stick with it, that fear will come and go...but mostly it will go. You'll see (as Tony and others have said) talented people quit. You'll see talented people not work as hard. You'll start behind both of those groups, and probably pass both of them. Remember that - it's your tonic against that fear. Bring your best - whatever that is at any given time - and you'll do well.


----------



## Sarah Mc

Tony Dismukes said:


> Fortunately the OP was asking about something much more manageable, i.e. “actually being good.” As long as she’s not defining “good” as “being a top champion”, then it’s a goal achievable by almost anyone willing to put in the work.



You are correct - I'm not after being the best ever.  I also didn't intend to quit if the answers today suggested that inherent ability was an essential element, but rather adjust my ideas of what I can reasonably accomplish.  

For example, when I started 8 months ago, I was aware that I enjoy competition once I've become accomplished at a task.  If all I could reasonably accomplish would be basic self defense, I'd rather know now. 

As someone pointed out, I probably am asking myself these questions before I really know what I am capable of.  But I suppose it would still be good to ask the worst case scenario.


----------



## Sarah Mc

JR 137 said:


> That’s one of the best things I’ve read here in quite some time.


 
It's incredibly helpful, yes! I tend to overthink. That analogy made it very simple.


----------



## Sarah Mc

Tony Dismukes said:


> Although I wasn’t fully aware of it when I started training, my natural talent for martial arts was somewhere in the bottom 1% of the general population. I’ve met a few people along the way who are as naturally untalented as I am, but none I can think of who were significantly less talented.
> 
> Funny thing, it turns out that if you train hard enough and long enough at something, you eventually get halfway decent at it. After 38 years in the martial arts, I’m an above average instructor. I spar with talented guys half my age and do okay. I’ve had pro fighters come to me for coaching. I’m certainly not the best around, but I’m better than 99.9% of martial artists will ever get. Not because I have any talent, but because most people drop out and go on to something else before they get to where I am.
> 
> (I have known people with actual talent who have gotten to where I am in 1/2, 1/3, or even 1/4 the time that I took. They’re the exceptions. Most of those who had the talent to do that got bored or got frustrated or lacked the work ethic or had other priorities in life and didn’t stick with it.)



I really appreciate the specific experience you described.  Thank you!


----------



## Sarah Mc

gpseymour said:


> If you stick with it, that fear will come and go...but mostly it will go. You'll see (as Tony and others have said) talented people quit. You'll see talented people not work as hard. You'll start behind both of those groups, and probably pass both of them. Remember that - it's your tonic against that fear. Bring your best - whatever that is at any given time - and you'll do well.



Fear is interesting - I'm not at all afraid to take a hit or to work hard (thank goodness). It is mostly an internal issue as I interpret the meaning of what I can & cannot yet do.  Putting my mind in a "I can do this" space is probably a lot of the issue.


----------



## Bill Mattocks

Talented people often quit in my experience. Perseverance is key. Be patient with yourself.


----------



## jobo

Tony Dismukes said:


> That would be relevant if the OP was looking to become an Olympic champion or world-class professional fighter. It’s true that the folks at the very top of the heap are generally the ones who have natural talent *and* start young *and* work super hard for a long time *and* get world-class coaching *and* get various other lucky breaks along the way. 99.9999% of the population will never get to that level.  Most of those who have the talent won’t work hard enough. Most of those who work hard enough won’t have the talent. Most of those who have the talent and the work ethic will have other roadblocks: injuries, finances, illnesses, inadequate coaching, family issues, etc which will prevent them from reaching that pinnacle of achievement.
> 
> Fortunately the OP was asking about something much more manageable, i.e. “actually being good.” As long as she’s not defining “good” as “being a top champion”, then it’s a goal achievable by almost anyone willing to put in the work.


it's a continuum,  hard work still wont make up for a lack of talent, no matter were you pitch it on the scale of achievement


----------



## Danny T

There is a saying: 
Hard work will beat talent when talent doesn’t work hard.

To become top level world class in anything even when talented one has to put in a lot of hard work. 
That said I’ve had two fighters who though not talented have worked very hard for me and made it to the the top levels one in Bellator the other got a contract to fight in the UFC only to be injured requiring surgery. During his recovery the UFC dropped the 125 division. The thing is they didn’t have much talent but came in every day and worked harder that everyone else. 

Just recently Dustin Poirier won a championship in the UFC. Though Poirier didn’t train under me he did train with two other coaches we share a lot of sparring time with. Dustin is another fighter who wasn’t naturally talented but just plain outwork everyone. 

It is unusual but it does happen. The important thing is just do your best. Put forth your best to learn mentally & physically and enjoy yourself even more. You will do well.


----------



## jobo

Danny T said:


> There is a saying:
> Hard work will beat talent when talent doesn’t work hard.
> 
> To become top level world class in anything even when talented one has to put in a lot of hard work.
> That said I’ve had two fighters who though not talented have worked very hard for me and made it to the the top levels one in Bellator the other got a contract to fight in the UFC only to be injured requiring surgery. During his recovery the UFC dropped the 125 division. The thing is they didn’t have much talent but came in every day and worked harder that everyone else.
> 
> Just recently Dustin Poirier won a championship in the UFC. Though Poirier didn’t train under me he did train with two other coaches we share a lot of sparring time with. Dustin is another fighter who wasn’t naturally talented but just plain outwork everyone.
> 
> It is unusual but it does happen. The important thing is just do your best. Put forth your best to learn mentally & physically and enjoy yourself even more. You will do well.


how did you assess that these fighters had no natural talent.?


----------



## drop bear

Sarah Mc said:


> Can you suggest the type of supplemental training?  I practice in the air alone, but I'm not sure that's what you mean.  Thank you!



Make your cardio and conditioning strong. Then when you spar wrestle or roll you can consistently be on the mat learning and progressing.


----------



## JR 137

Bill Mattocks said:


> Talented people often quit in my experience. Perseverance is key. Be patient with yourself.


I think the talented ones quit a little while after everyone catches up to them.


----------



## drop bear

jobo said:


> it's a continuum,  hard work still wont make up for a lack of talent, no matter were you pitch it on the scale of achievement



It factors in to a lot of talents that people interpret as magic. 

So you go to MMA and you get that stronger fitter guy who has more discipline, more heart and always aggressively wins positions or wins the hard exchanges. And people suggest that is the individual.

But that can all be trained.


----------



## drop bear

And otherwise MMA is about being smashed for maybe your first year. It is not like Krav. You don't drop five guys without breaking a sweat.

You fight like a dog to get an inch on one guy.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Sarah Mc said:


> I tried not to have expectations, but - while I knew I shouldn't compare myself to others - it's hard to not notice when other beginners seem at ease / are faster & more efficient than I am.   That's where all of this is coming from.
> 
> If I look at the facts, it's not true that I can't learn (because I have) & the slower progress makes sense in light of what I know about my learning process. Still, I have never pursued a physical sport of any kind, so my self-knowledge doesn't include applying that to physical coordination and instincts.


It's already been stated, but pay attention and you'll see that a lot of those guys who are improving quickly and at ease either a: had previous experience, or b: will quit within a year or so.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

As an aside, I seriously hope you can get good from hard work but no talent. Otherwise, I've wasted 20 years of my life, and probably quite a bit more going forwards.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

jobo said:


> it's a continuum,  hard work still wont make up for a lack of talent, no matter were you pitch it on the scale of achievement


By the same token, talent won't make up for a lack of hard work.


----------



## KenpoMaster805

Yea its better to pick 1 than 3 because you gonna get confuse just stick to 1


----------



## Bill Mattocks

JR 137 said:


> I think the talented ones quit a little while after everyone catches up to them.



I've never been able to figure it out, but I think people value things more when they have to work for them.


----------



## Danny T

jobo said:


> how did you assess that these fighters had no natural talent.?


Ohh...I don't know Jobo...Wild *** guess cause I don't know anything about training people.


----------



## Headhunter

drop bear said:


> And otherwise MMA is about being smashed for maybe your first year. It is not like Krav. You don't drop five guys without breaking a sweat.
> 
> You fight like a dog to get an inch on one guy.


Well I've taken way more punches in Krav than I've taken in even boxing. In our Krav club we spar every week in Mma gloves and go pretty hard at times and against multiple opponents, when we grapple we have Mma gloves on and the guy on the bottom is punching us trying to stop us doing the technique and we work hard on ground and pound. So Krav Maga does do hard sparring and contact. Maybe not all places do but ours certainly does


----------



## drop bear

Headhunter said:


> Well I've taken way more punches in Krav than I've taken in even boxing. In our Krav club we spar every week in Mma gloves and go pretty hard at times and against multiple opponents, when we grapple we have Mma gloves on and the guy on the bottom is punching us trying to stop us doing the technique and we work hard on ground and pound. So Krav Maga does do hard sparring and contact. Maybe not all places do but ours certainly does



The guy on the bottom is doing what now?


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Bill Mattocks said:


> I've never been able to figure it out, but I think people value things more when they have to work for them.


I think to some extent it's the same effect psychology studies found with kids who were praised for being smart. They tended to work less hard at tasks they might fail at, giving up rather than failing, presumably because it challenged their view of themselves as smart. Replace "smart" with "talented" and the mental task with a sport, and you would get the same effect.


----------



## jobo

Danny T said:


> Ohh...I don't know Jobo...Wild *** guess cause I don't know anything about training people.


well you cant instal talent by training someone, it must have always been there !


----------



## jobo

gpseymour said:


> I think to some extent it's the same effect psychology studies found with kids who were praised for being smart. They tended to work less hard at tasks they might fail at, giving up rather than failing, presumably because it challenged their view of themselves as smart. Replace "smart" with "talented" and the mental task with a sport, and you would get the same effect.


and telling kids they are stupid ( or hopeless at sport), means they have a habit of believing you.


----------



## jobo

drop bear said:


> It factors in to a lot of talents that people interpret as magic.
> 
> So you go to MMA and you get that stronger fitter guy who has more discipline, more heart and always aggressively wins positions or wins the hard exchanges. And people suggest that is the individual.
> 
> But that can all be trained.


well sort of, most people can get better at most things, with dedication, but there is a genetic limit on how far that can work, they can only be so fast or so strong. yes you can win fights just on aggression, until you run in to a more talented fighter who is equally aggressive,  then your sat on your bum.

aggression is also a genetic trait,  well that or steroids


----------



## Gerry Seymour

jobo said:


> well sort of, most people can get better at most things, with dedication, but there is a genetic limit on how far that can work, they can only be so fast or so strong. yes you can win fights just on aggression, until you run in to a more talented fighter who is equally aggressive,  then your sat on your bum.
> 
> aggression is also a genetic trait,  well that or steroids


What you're saying is that hard work doesn't overcome hard work and talent/genetics. But that wasn't the OP's question.


----------



## dvcochran

Sarah Mc said:


> Thank you for this.  I have noticed that there is too much new information to practice everything I learn at once.
> 
> I practice at home on a regular basis, but maybe coming up with a more organized plan of what I'm going to practice & for how long will help. So far I've just been picking whatever I have the hardest time with to practice, as opposed to basic punches that I can do easily on the bag, but have trouble applying when sparring.


Which of the three styles you are training interests you the most? Or you could ask which one seems to come the easiest to you. In the grand scheme of things, 8 months is not very long for one style, let alone 3. Starting you MA journey by mashing 3 three styles together may not be the best utilization of your time. It is entirely possible the systems could conflict with each other, especially considering you are just getting started. Find a base to build your skills on. Get proficient in one style then I think you will find your training curve will accelerate.
Honestly, it sounds to me like you are progressing at about the normal rate. It is a marathon, not a sprint.


----------



## Xue Sheng

> Can hard work make up for lack of talent?



Yup


----------



## Danny T

jobo said:


> well you cant instal talent by training someone, it must have always been there !


You seem to have some difficulty comprehending some of the posts.
I did not say anything about installing talent. I did speak of some fighters who, though not gifted with talent, worked very hard and became very good fighters.


----------



## jobo

Danny T said:


> You seem to have some difficulty comprehending some of the posts.
> I did not say anything about installing talent. I did speak of some fighters who, though not gifted with talent, worked very hard and became very good fighters.


no you said they had NO natural talent , now you've introduced an undefined term of " gifted " 

so did they have natural talent or not, if not where did the talent they later displayed come from, ?


----------



## jobo

gpseymour said:


> What you're saying is that hard work doesn't overcome hard work and talent/genetics. But that wasn't the OP's question.


that's very much the question in the thread title .?

and I'm also saying that in quit a lot of cases, talent with out hard work will over come little talent and hard work.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

dvcochran said:


> Which of the three styles you are training interests you the most? Or you could ask which one seems to come the easiest to you. In the grand scheme of things, 8 months is not very long for one style, let alone 3. Starting you MA journey by mashing 3 three styles together may not be the best utilization of your time. It is entirely possible the systems could conflict with each other, especially considering you are just getting started. Find a base to build your skills on. Get proficient in one style then I think you will find your training curve will accelerate.
> Honestly, it sounds to me like you are progressing at about the normal rate. It is a marathon, not a sprint.


I tend to agree with this...unless they are all taught at the same facility. MMA gyms, for instance, do a good job of teaching multiple styles at the same time. I'm pretty much okay with someone starting two styles at once (it slows the start, but I think they make up that time a year or two later, and probably move a bit faster), but three separate styles seems a heavy load.

At the same time, if I had a student who was doing that and enjoying it, I'd just advise them to pick which is the "primary" art for now (they can always change it later), and focus their personal practice time there.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

jobo said:


> no you said they had NO natural talent , now you've introduced an undefined term of " gifted "
> 
> so did they have natural talent or not, if not where did the talent they later displayed come from, ?


That all depends how you define talent.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

jobo said:


> that's very much the question in the thread title .?
> 
> and I'm also saying that in quit a lot of cases, talent with out hard work will over come little talent and hard work.


No, it asks if hard work can make up for a lack of talent. It doesn't make a comparison to hard work PLUS lack of talent.


----------



## Danny T

jobo said:


> no you said they had NO natural talent , now you've introduced an undefined term of " gifted "
> 
> so did they have natural talent or not, if not where did the talent they later displayed come from, ?


*Talent;  *natural skill or abilities. The natural endowments or skills of a person.

*Gifted; *having great natural ability.

I didn't say they displayed talent. (someone not knowing them but seeing only the product of many years of training, practicing, and working very hard may think it to be talent)
I said they worked hard and became very good fighters.

Maybe 'if' you worked hard at it you will understand.


----------



## jobo

Danny T said:


> *Talent;  *natural skill or abilities. The natural endowments or skills of a person.
> 
> *Gifted; *having great natural ability.
> 
> I didn't say they displayed talent. (someone not knowing them but seeing only the product of many years of training, practicing, and working very hard may think it to be talent)
> I said they worked hard and became very good fighters.
> 
> Maybe 'if' you worked hard at it you will understand.


no you said they had no natural talent, that's twice iv3 had to tell you what you clearly posted. so where did the talent they later had as " good fighters" come from, ?


----------



## jobo

gpseymour said:


> No, it asks if hard work can make up for a lack of talent. It doesn't make a comparison to hard work PLUS lack of talent.


what ? now your rambling


----------



## Headhunter

I wonder if there'll ever be a thread where jobo doesn't start an argument


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Danny T said:


> *Talent;  *natural skill or abilities. The natural endowments or skills of a person.
> 
> *Gifted; *having great natural ability.
> 
> I didn't say they displayed talent. (someone not knowing them but seeing only the product of many years of training, practicing, and working very hard may think it to be talent)
> I said they worked hard and became very good fighters.
> 
> Maybe 'if' you worked hard at it you will understand.


I'm pretty sure he's suggesting anyone who succeeds at a competitive level must have talent. Which is bollocks, but convenient for him because then none of us can give him an example that he would accept as refuting him. Either they haven't proven they can beat the talented, or they actually were talented you just failed to notice.


----------



## Danny T

jobo said:


> no you said they had no natural talent, that's twice iv3 had to tell you what you clearly posted. so where did the talent they later had as " good fighters" come from, ?


The term *talent* refers to an inborn and the special ability of a person to do something without having to learn it (in our case here; fighting). 
A *skill* is an expertise, which is acquired by the person by learning. *
Talent* is a nature gifted ability, whereas *Skill* is an ability in which you put your time and efforts to learn and develop.
Having the *Capability *to gain a *Skill *(in our case here; fighting) is not the same as having *Talent .*
I feel for you and your seeming lack of talent and skill to understand or maybe is more you just don't want to understand.
I hope you enjoy the rest of your day.


----------



## marques

Sarah Mc said:


> I have been training in MMA, kickboxing & karate for about 8 months. I'm 33 years old & had no prior experience.  I'm not the most uncoordinated person but teaching my body entirely new movements has not come naturally to me.
> 
> From my first class until about 5 months I felt like I just wasn't getting anything at all.  Looking back I think that's because-
> 
> 1) The sheer quantity of different moves was overwhelming - it's taken time to learn what's what, &
> 2) I was sort of thrown into sparring on my first night (I was looking around trying to figure out what we were even doing - I didn't know what sparring was or what was expected), & kept sparring every class until I had a thorough complex about it - I just didn't get it & started to believe I just couldn't.  Beliefs are powerful - it's gotten in the way of forming confidence.
> 
> At some point I broke a barrier & started seeing progress. It helped that I didn't need to re-learn the difference between all the different blocks & punches, etc, & could just do them.  I'm not frozen during sparring & can see how it's supposed to come together (I think).
> 
> I'm saying all this to explain my question. If I keep trying, can I develop the skills to actually be good? That's probably a taboo question, but it's honest - there are people who flourish at something, & people who always barely scrape by.  And with some activities, scraping by isn't enough.
> 
> It seems to me that a lot of it is instinct. The ability to move without thinking. I want to know if working at it will be enough to develop the needed instincts & skills? Or, does a lack of inherent instincts, & an apparently extremely slow learning curve, mean that I should adjust my expectations to scraping by at best?
> 
> I ask mainly because there's a big part of me that believes - despite what seems like evidence to the contrary - that if I just have enough time & practice, the pieces will keep falling into place, maybe just a little more slowly as I wrap my mind around everything. But, I have no interest in fooling myself, if that's what I'm doing.


Yes, hard (but also smart) work works. I was also rubbish when started and perhaps feeling the same as you. My progression was slower than everyone else that started at roughly the same time as me. But after years training I was the most senior in the club and quite effective. On the other hand, not everyone can become world champion...

Eventually, I stopped and after years without training, I was still able to get bored at sparring senior people in a few clubs I visited. Training still working without training!

8 months is nothing. Look back after 8 years training. I would also select 1 or 2 out of the 3. I would be surprised if you can train seriously 3 things in the long run.


----------



## Buka

Sarah Mc said:


> Can you suggest the type of supplemental training?  I practice in the air alone, but I'm not sure that's what you mean.  Thank you!



Yes, sure. But first, are you talking about MMA sparring, kick boxing sparring or Karate sparring?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

MA involves

- skill development, and
- ability development.

Your talent may help your faster skill development. But your talent won't help your ability development.


----------



## jobo

Danny T said:


> The term *talent* refers to an inborn and the special ability of a person to do something without having to learn it (in our case here; fighting).
> A *skill* is an expertise, which is acquired by the person by learning.
> *Talent* is a nature gifted ability, whereas *Skill* is an ability in which you put your time and efforts to learn and develop.
> Having the *Capability *to gain a *Skill *(in our case here; fighting) is not the same as having *Talent .*
> I feel for you and your seeming lack of talent and skill to understand or maybe is more you just don't want to understand.
> I hope you enjoy the rest of your day.


no that's not the definition of talent, there are NOT many TALENTED musicians,  that never had a " lession " to learn to play. I
even if it was a lession in a book


----------



## Martial D

Sarah Mc said:


> I have been training in MMA, kickboxing & karate for about 8 months. I'm 33 years old & had no prior experience.  I'm not the most uncoordinated person but teaching my body entirely new movements has not come naturally to me.
> 
> From my first class until about 5 months I felt like I just wasn't getting anything at all.  Looking back I think that's because-
> 
> 1) The sheer quantity of different moves was overwhelming - it's taken time to learn what's what, &
> 2) I was sort of thrown into sparring on my first night (I was looking around trying to figure out what we were even doing - I didn't know what sparring was or what was expected), & kept sparring every class until I had a thorough complex about it - I just didn't get it & started to believe I just couldn't.  Beliefs are powerful - it's gotten in the way of forming confidence.
> 
> At some point I broke a barrier & started seeing progress. It helped that I didn't need to re-learn the difference between all the different blocks & punches, etc, & could just do them.  I'm not frozen during sparring & can see how it's supposed to come together (I think).
> 
> I'm saying all this to explain my question. If I keep trying, can I develop the skills to actually be good? That's probably a taboo question, but it's honest - there are people who flourish at something, & people who always barely scrape by.  And with some activities, scraping by isn't enough.
> 
> It seems to me that a lot of it is instinct. The ability to move without thinking. I want to know if working at it will be enough to develop the needed instincts & skills? Or, does a lack of inherent instincts, & an apparently extremely slow learning curve, mean that I should adjust my expectations to scraping by at best?
> 
> I ask mainly because there's a big part of me that believes - despite what seems like evidence to the contrary - that if I just have enough time & practice, the pieces will keep falling into place, maybe just a little more slowly as I wrap my mind around everything. But, I have no interest in fooling myself, if that's what I'm doing.


8 months is nothing. It sounds like you are progressing normally to me. Keep at it!


----------



## Gerry Seymour

jobo said:


> no that's not the definition of talent, there are NOT many TALENTED musicians,  that never had a " lession " to learn to play. I
> even if it was a lession in a book


Didn't you say talent can't be instilled? What do the lessons do?


----------



## Danny T

jobo said:


> no that's not the definition of talent, there are NOT many TALENTED musicians,  that never had a " lession " to learn to play. I
> even if it was a lession in a book


Cambridge Dictionary
Talent: having a natural ability to be good at something especially without being taught.

Vocabulary.Com
Talent: natural abilities or qualities; a person who possess unusual innate ability in some field or activity. (innate: ability that is already present in a person or animal when they are born)

Oxford Dictionary
Talent: A natural aptitude or ability one is born with.

Collins Dictionary
Talent: The natural or innate ability to do something. A natural endowment to be able to do something.
     Synonym note under talent in the Collins Dictionary:
       Talent implies an apparent innate ability for a specific pursuit; a gift; a special ability bestowed upon one, as by nature, and not acquired through effort.

Merriam-Webster Dictionary
Talent: the natural endowments of a person
    (endowment:  power or ability given by nature)


----------



## oftheherd1

Headhunter said:


> I wonder if there'll ever be a thread where jobo doesn't start an argument



Unsubstantiated rumor has it that in early Apr 17, he had at least one, and maybe two threads he entered without causing arguments.  (I wish I could confirm that.)

Anyway, we who have watched, have seen him work harder and harder all the time and eventually overcome his lack of talent.  



Sorry Jobo, I just couldn't resist given the OP's question and the gist of the answers.


@Sarah Mc, I think @Bill Mattocks  has a better word, perseverance.  I studied TKD briefly a lot of years ago.  I found I hit a lot of plateaus and got discouraged.  I kept at it and all of a sudden I would realize I had progressed a lot without realizing it.

When later in life I began studying Hapkido, I never felt so uncoordinated in my whole life.  As time went by, I learned how to make things work.  Perseverance kept me going and I learned nuances of grip and or foot placement to make things work as expected.

I expect you will learn as well.  I do agree with those who have questioned taking 3 different arts as a beginner in each.  I don't doubt you can make it work, but wonder if you will learn as quickly as you could taking only one, or at most two.  I am inclined to think learning just one to a certain level of competence would be a better idea before branching to another art.  But ultimately it is your life to do with as seems best to you.


----------



## JR 137

JR 137 said:


> That’s one of the best things I’ve read here in quite some time.


@DocWard 
Out of curiosity, why disagree with this post?


----------



## DocWard

JR 137 said:


> @DocWard
> Out of curiosity, why disagree with this post?



Apparently because I goofed. I meant to agree! My apologies, I fixed it.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

oftheherd1 said:


> Unsubstantiated rumor has it that in early Apr 17, he had at least one, and maybe two threads he entered without causing arguments.  (I wish I could confirm that.)
> 
> Anyway, we who have watched, have seen him work harder and harder all the time and eventually overcome his lack of talent.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry Jobo, I just couldn't resist given the OP's question and the gist of the answers.
> 
> 
> @Sarah Mc, I think @Bill Mattocks  has a better word, perseverance.  I studied TKD briefly a lot of years ago.  I found I hit a lot of plateaus and got discouraged.  I kept at it and all of a sudden I would realize I had progressed a lot without realizing it.
> 
> When later in life I began studying Hapkido, I never felt so uncoordinated in my whole life.  As time went by, I learned how to make things work.  Perseverance kept me going and I learned nuances of grip and or foot placement to make things work as expected.
> 
> I expect you will learn as well.  I do agree with those who have questioned taking 3 different arts as a beginner in each.  I don't doubt you can make it work, but wonder if you will learn as quickly as you could taking only one, or at most two.  I am inclined to think learning just one to a certain level of competence would be a better idea before branching to another art.  But ultimately it is your life to do with as seems best to you.


You hit on something i generally forgwt. We all know we're in our plateaus while we're in them. But we dont tend to realize when we leave them, unless someone else points it out, or something significant happens to shove our progress in our faces. So we spend time thinking about the frustrating part, and forget to congratulate ourselves for the rewarding part.

Its similar IMO to pain from an injury. When the pains tbere, you're very aware of it. But when it goes away, or lessens, you kind of forget about it until someone asks you how your injury is doing, or you do something that would normally hurt a lot more if it was still injured (walking without a cast for instance).


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Danny T said:


> Cambridge Dictionary
> Talent: having a natural ability to be good at something especially without being taught.
> 
> Vocabulary.Com
> Talent: natural abilities or qualities; a person who possess unusual innate ability in some field or activity. (innate: ability that is already present in a person or animal when they are born)
> 
> Oxford Dictionary
> Talent: A natural aptitude or ability one is born with.
> 
> Collins Dictionary
> Talent: The natural or innate ability to do something. A natural endowment to be able to do something.
> Synonym note under talent in the Collins Dictionary:
> Talent implies an apparent innate ability for a specific pursuit; a gift; a special ability bestowed upon one, as by nature, and not acquired through effort.
> 
> Merriam-Webster Dictionary
> Talent: the natural endowments of a person
> (endowment:  power or ability given by nature)


Sure, that's 5 dictionaries with common definitions...but can you find a 6th source?


----------



## Gerry Seymour

DocWard said:


> Apparently because I goofed. I meant to agree! My apologies, I fixed it.


I'll just warn you, we don't forget that stuff. I still give @Mark Lynn hell about doing that on one of my posts...oh, 3 years ago I think it was. (Yeah, Mark, I'm still lookin' at you. )


----------



## Gerry Seymour

kempodisciple said:


> You hit on something i generally forgwt. We all know we're in our plateaus while we're in them. But we dont tend to realize when we leave them, unless someone else points it out, or something significant happens to shove our progress in our faces. So we spend time thinking about the frustrating part, and forget to congratulate ourselves for the rewarding part.
> 
> Its similar IMO to pain from an injury. When the pains tbere, you're very aware of it. But when it goes away, or lessens, you kind of forget about it until someone asks you how your injury is doing, or you do something that would normally hurt a lot more if it was still injured (walking without a cast for instance).


So true. This makes those "lightbulb moments" (Richard Bowe's term for them - often used to remind you "not all the lights are on" ) when you suddenly "get" a technique, and realize it works for you when you used to struggle with it, so enjoyable. Most of the time we don't get that sudden moment, we just progress out of a plateau and don't see the progress because it's a small change day over day.

Now quit talking about legs and casts so I can stop wishing I could run right now, damnit!


----------



## DocWard

gpseymour said:


> I'll just warn you, we don't forget that stuff. I still give @Mark Lynn hell about doing that on one of my posts...oh, 3 years ago I think it was. (Yeah, Mark, I'm still lookin' at you. )



I said I'm sorry!!!


----------



## Gerry Seymour

DocWard said:


> I said I'm sorry!!!


You'll never be sorry enough, Doc. Never.


----------



## Sarah Mc

gpseymour said:


> I tend to agree with this...unless they are all taught at the same facility. MMA gyms, for instance, do a good job of teaching multiple styles at the same time. I'm pretty much okay with someone starting two styles at once (it slows the start, but I think they make up that time a year or two later, and probably move a bit faster), but three separate styles seems a heavy load..



Yes, I learn all of them from the same sensei.  He makes sure to show how they can all work together.  I spend the least time on MMA & about equal time on kickboxing & karate. I really enjoy both of them & would prefer to focus there, absolutely.


----------



## Sarah Mc

Buka said:


> Yes, sure. But first, are you talking about MMA sparring, kick boxing sparring or Karate sparring?



Primarily kickboxing sparring.  Karate comes much more easily to me than kickboxing somehow.


----------



## Sarah Mc

kempodisciple said:


> You hit on something i generally forgwt. We all know we're in our plateaus while we're in them. But we dont tend to realize when we leave them, unless someone else points it out, or something significant happens to shove our progress in our faces. So we spend time thinking about the frustrating part, and forget to congratulate ourselves for the rewarding part.



Man is that ever me.  I think the majority of my struggle is from being held back from the idea that I'm lacking something the others have. Then when I do make progress, I miss it, or think it's not enough.


----------



## Sarah Mc

dvcochran said:


> Which of the three styles you are training interests you the most? Or you could ask which one seems to come the easiest to you. In the grand scheme of things, 8 months is not very long for one style, let alone 3. Starting you MA journey by mashing 3 three styles together may not be the best utilization of your time. It is entirely possible the systems could conflict with each other, especially considering you are just getting started. Find a base to build your skills on. Get proficient in one style then I think you will find your training curve will accelerate.
> Honestly, it sounds to me like you are progressing at about the normal rate. It is a marathon, not a sprint.



I appreciate that. Karate comes the easiest to me. I think there's an order to it that my mind grasps more fluidly.


----------



## dvcochran

Sarah Mc said:


> Man is that ever me.  I think the majority of my struggle is from being held back from the idea that I'm lacking something the others have. Then when I do make progress, I miss it, or think it's not enough.


Agree, when we get too spread out, progress comes in very, very small pieces.


----------



## DocWard

gpseymour said:


> You'll never be sorry enough, Doc. Never.



You have no idea how sorry I can be. Just ask my wife! Wait... Scratch that...


----------



## jobo

gpseymour said:


> Didn't you say talent can't be instilled? What do the lessons do?


that's a really good question, what do they do ..? your a teacher, what talents do you think you can give them that they didn't have already. skills are dependent on their innate abilities to to learn and execute movement. the skills they develop there for are totally dependent on there innate abilities and there stick ability also an innate traits. you can help them , perhaps inspire them to reach the max potential of the talents they posses,  but not give them talent or indeed ever increase there performance above their pre existing potential

I've noted through life,  that " teachers like to take credit for success, but distance themselves from failure as the student was " genetically " or attitude  challenged. when its large genetics and attitude that lead to any success rather than the teacher


----------



## jobo

Sarah Mc said:


> I appreciate that. Karate comes the easiest to me. I think there's an order to it that my mind grasps more fluidly.


well that leaves you then with a choice, gravitate, as most people do, to a sport that best suits your attributes OR pick the one that is most challenging as that may give you the most benifits. you really cant continue doing all three, as at best your not dedicating enough time to any of them to get the progression you desire


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Sarah Mc said:


> Yes, I learn all of them from the same sensei.  He makes sure to show how they can all work together.  I spend the least time on MMA & about equal time on kickboxing & karate. I really enjoy both of them & would prefer to focus there, absolutely.


This is a different situation than training 3 entirely different systems. By that, I mean that an instructor teaching all 3, knowing there are crossover students - will often teach the commonalities and differences in a way that makes them parts of a larger system for the student.


----------



## Sarah Mc

gpseymour said:


> This is a different situation than training 3 entirely different systems. By that, I mean that an instructor teaching all 3, knowing there are crossover students - will often teach the commonalities and differences in a way that makes them parts of a larger system for the student.



Yes, that's exactly what he does.  

I think what others have said about muscle memory makes sense - I may be making very slow progress because there's so much that's new, I'm only learning / practicing so much at one time.  

Over the weekend I started setting additional time aside to practice some of the basics that I feel comfortable with on the bag, & so haven't been practicing at home.  I can do them but that doesn't mean my body remembers them without having to think about it each time.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Sarah Mc said:


> I think the majority of my struggle is from being held back from the idea that I'm lacking something the others have.


May be you need some

1. speed training - such as jump in the air, throw 3 punches, before landing back down. You will need to loose your shoulder joint, elbow joint, and wrist joint. When you move your hand so fast that you can't even see it, your opponent can't see your hand either.

2. power training - such as to compress to the maximum, and then release to the maximum. Different styles use different methods.


----------



## Sarah Mc

Kung Fu Wang said:


> May be you need some
> 
> - speed training (such as jump in the air, throw 3 punches, before landing back down).
> - power training (such as to compress to the maximum, and then release to the maximum).



Specific suggestions are very helpful. I'll try this. Speed / reaction time seems to be one of my main shortcomings.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Sarah Mc said:


> Specific suggestions are very helpful. I'll try this. Speed / reaction time seems to be one of my main shortcomings.


Here is a simple drill that you

- jump up.
- throw 3 punches (with the same hand). This is harder than throw both hands punches.
- before land back down.


----------



## Sarah Mc

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Here is a simple drill that you
> 
> - jump up.
> - throw 3 punches (with the same hand). This is harder than throw both hands punches.
> - before land back down.



Awesome, I will.  Thank you!


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Sarah Mc said:


> Specific suggestions are very helpful. I'll try this. Speed / reaction time seems to be one of my main shortcomings.


Most of the reaction time difference comes from two areas:

Not having to think about a response. This is the "muscle memory" - where the conscious brain doesn't have to contribute.
Having a strong pattern recognition system to recognize what you're reacting to. This, again, takes it away from the conscious brain, giving the unconscious processes control (and they are much faster).


----------



## Sarah Mc

gpseymour said:


> Most of the reaction time difference comes from two areas:
> 
> Not having to think about a response. This is the "muscle memory" - where the conscious brain doesn't have to contribute.
> Having a strong pattern recognition system to recognize what you're reacting to. This, again, takes it away from the conscious brain, giving the unconscious processes control (and they are much faster).



I think there is a "cause & effect" that I'm still catching on to. Meaning, I'm busy trying to do the movements correctly, & so I don't catch how my movements affect the other person, or how I need to react to the other person.  

I know in theory that these reactions occur, but in practice I find knowing what to do & how to react to be a bit baffling.  I figure it's some combination of overthinking what I personally am doing, & lack of experience recognizing what & how reactions occur.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Speed training is to

- Make one move.
- Read your opponent's respond,
- You then react to it.

This is why the 3 punches (while jumping in the air) is used to train speed.

- You throw 1 punch (1st punch).
- Your opponent intends to block it.
- Before your opponent's arm blocks your arm, you pull your punching arm back.
- You use the other hand to re-block his block (same direction).
- You then punch back with the same hand (2nd punch) through the other side of his blocking arm.
- Again, your opponent tries to block it.
- You pull your punching hand back, use the other hand to re-block it, and punch again (3rd punch) through the other side of his blocking arm.

If you train this drill long enough, you will be able to read your opponent's move during his "initial" stage. This will give you plenty of time to react.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Sarah Mc said:


> I think there is a "cause & effect" that I'm still catching on to. Meaning, I'm busy trying to do the movements correctly, & so I don't catch how my movements affect the other person, or how I need to react to the other person.


That's because you're human, Sarah. 



> I know in theory that these reactions occur, but in practice I find knowing what to do & how to react to be a bit baffling.  I figure it's some combination of overthinking what I personally am doing, & lack of experience recognizing what & how reactions occur.


This again, is because you're human. Your brain is forming a lot of new connections right now. They're not terribly well organized, because your brain lacks context for organizing them. The confusion starts to clear when your brain figures out how to connect things well. The recognition come from hundreds of repetitions of seeing something "kinda like that" happen (so, if you see a bunch of round kicks coming at you, you eventually learn to recognize it without thought). The response is a combination. First, you have to teach your body (actually, your brain) how to do the movement, until you can do it without thought (get that punch where you can punch pretty well without having to think about the parts). Then your brain has to add in the link that the punch is a good response to the pattern it has for that round kick.

Once you've managed all of that, your brain - without telling "you" - says, "Hey, look - that's a round kick coming. Toss a punch in to interrupt it." And you do, without experiencing all that thought.


----------



## Sarah Mc

gpseymour said:


> That's because you're human, Sarah.
> 
> 
> This again, is because you're human. Your brain is forming a lot of new connections right now. They're not terribly well organized, because your brain lacks context for organizing them. The confusion starts to clear when your brain figures out how to connect things well. The recognition come from hundreds of repetitions of seeing something "kinda like that" happen (so, if you see a bunch of round kicks coming at you, you eventually learn to recognize it without thought). The response is a combination. First, you have to teach your body (actually, your brain) how to do the movement, until you can do it without thought (get that punch where you can punch pretty well without having to think about the parts). Then your brain has to add in the link that the punch is a good response to the pattern it has for that round kick.
> 
> Once you've managed all of that, your brain - without telling "you" - says, "Hey, look - that's a round kick coming. Toss a punch in to interrupt it." And you do, without experiencing all that thought.



Wow. That makes complete & utter sense.  Explained that way, it's completely doable.  I think what I needed was help making sense of how the learning process evolves, especially regarding not just the body but the brain, so being at a particular stage of it doesn't seem wrong.  I haven't had any context for *physical* learning until now.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Here are some interested speed tests:

1. Belly punch and face punch:

- You throw a right punch to your opponent's belley.
- You opponent drops down his right arm to block it.
- Before his right arm touches your right punching arm, you pull your right arm back, and punch to his face.

2. Leading arm punch back shoulder.

- Both you and your opponent has right side forward with arms drop next to the knees.
- You try to use leading right hand to punch your opponent's back left shoulder.
- Your opponent tries to raise his right leading arm to lock your punch.

If you succeed, you win that round. test it for 15 rounds, and have the winner for that day.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Sarah Mc said:


> Wow. That makes complete & utter sense.  Explained that way, it's completely doable.  I think what I needed was help making sense of how the learning process evolves, especially regarding not just the body but the brain, so being at a particular stage of it doesn't seem wrong.  I haven't had any context for *physical* learning until now.


I'm glad I could help. Now, get out there and work on those neural pathways, newbie!


----------



## Sarah Mc

gpseymour said:


> I'm glad I could help. Now, get out there and work on those neural pathways, newbie!



100%


----------



## MetalBoar

Something I haven't seen anyone talking about on the thread (though I could have missed it) is basic physical conditioning. Especially if you were fairly sedentary before you started training, 8 months isn't very long to both develop things like strength and flexibility from a martial arts program. If you were to focus some attention on areas like this where you might have some weaknesses you could see fairly dramatic improvement in your performance. Training in your art(s) will improve these things but frequently not as quickly nor anywhere near as efficiently as a specialized routine.

Taking flexibility as an example - Back in my 20's I studied Hapkido for about 5 years. I am not naturally flexible, in fact I'm naturally inflexible, especially my legs and hips. When I started I progressed more quickly than the average student when it came to punching and grappling techniques but any kick higher than my opponents' knee was absolute garbage and I felt like I just couldn't learn them. It wasn't a problem with my brain or innate ability but it sure felt like it. It wasn't until I made a dedicated effort outside of class to really do some research and follow a dedicated flexibility program that I started to make any progress in that area. I'm sure if I'd just kept with the class I'd have eventually developed the flexibility to do the kicks properly but it would have taken far longer because I was _so_ much less flexible than the average student that what we did for class wasn't enough for me. Strength can also be a limiting factor in the same way. If your legs are weaker than they need to be it makes it harder to be coordinated when you kick, etc. and a good strength training program will make you stronger _*much*_ faster than a martial arts class.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

MetalBoar said:


> a good strength training program will make you stronger _*much*_ faster than a martial arts class.


I call that "ability" training. There is no short cut for this and talent won't matter.


----------



## drop bear

Sarah Mc said:


> Yes, I learn all of them from the same sensei.  He makes sure to show how they can all work together.  I spend the least time on MMA & about equal time on kickboxing & karate. I really enjoy both of them & would prefer to focus there, absolutely.



I don't see learning all three as an issue. Let's put it this way. Doing multiple arts will progress you faster than doing one and going home early to watch tv.


----------



## drop bear

jobo said:


> well sort of, most people can get better at most things, with dedication, but there is a genetic limit on how far that can work, they can only be so fast or so strong. yes you can win fights just on aggression, until you run in to a more talented fighter who is equally aggressive,  then your sat on your bum.
> 
> aggression is also a genetic trait,  well that or steroids



Why would aggression be genetic? Humans are free willed you can choose to be whatever you want.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> Why would aggression be genetic? Humans are free willed you can choose to be whatever you want.


I may be wrong in this, DB, but I think I read something some unspecified time ago (is that vague enough??) about genetic components for aggression. Or maybe it was a genetic component of inhibition.

In any case, here's a page that touches on the topic: Genetics of Aggression - Oxford Scholarship


----------



## jobo

drop bear said:


> Why would aggression be genetic? Humans are free willed you can choose to be whatever you want.


humans have practically no free will, between genetic traits and conditioning, they have very few actually free choices to make

you cant choose to be agresive, like you can5 choose to b3 emphathic ,you can choose not to be either and  you can fake both, but 5hats not the same thing


----------



## Gerry Seymour

jobo said:


> humans have practically no free will, between genetic traits and conditioning, they have very few actually free choices to make
> 
> you cant choose to be agresive, like you can5 choose to b3 emphathic ,you can choose not to be either and  you can fake both, but 5hats not the same thing


There's a question about what defines free will. If someone chooses to develop their empathy (which is possible, within limitations), then it could be argued they're choosing to be empathetic. It's not something that can really be chosen in the moment, but can be chosen in advance. The same goes for many habits and conditioned responses - we can choose to develop different ones.


----------



## dvcochran

Sarah Mc said:


> Yes, that's exactly what he does.
> 
> I think what others have said about muscle memory makes sense - I may be making very slow progress because there's so much that's new, I'm only learning / practicing so much at one time.
> 
> Over the weekend I started setting additional time aside to practice some of the basics that I feel comfortable with on the bag, & so haven't been practicing at home.  I can do them but that doesn't mean my body remembers them without having to think about it each time.


Hey, I have been doing TKD since 1982. I still have to "think" about technique. It does get natural and muscle memory is a very real thing I think. But when our mind gets sliced into a dozen pieces by demands of the day it is not uncommon to have to stop and remember something you have already learned.


----------



## dvcochran

gpseymour said:


> There's a question about what defines free will. If someone chooses to develop their empathy (which is possible, within limitations), then it could be argued they're choosing to be empathetic. It's not something that can really be chosen in the moment, but can be chosen in advance. The same goes for many habits and conditioned responses - we can choose to develop different ones.


Agree, but jobo said emphatic.


----------



## jobo

gpseymour said:


> There's a question about what defines free will. If someone chooses to develop their empathy (which is possible, within limitations), then it could be argued they're choosing to be empathetic. It's not something that can really be chosen in the moment, but can be chosen in advance. The same goes for many habits and conditioned responses - we can choose to develop different ones.


no you either have empathy or you dont, if you dont nothing on earth will give it to you.


----------



## jobo

dvcochran said:


> Agree, but jobo said emphatic.


if you going to posted every time I do a typo, then your odds on to be top poster of the month


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

jobo said:


> if you going to posted every time I do a typo, then your odds on to be top poster of the month


hmm that's an idea


----------



## Gerry Seymour

jobo said:


> no you either have empathy or you dont, if you dont nothing on earth will give it to you.


If someone entirely lacks it (a psychopath), you're correct. But someone who simply doesn't empathize well can develop that ability.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

kempodisciple said:


> hmm that's an idea


It'll never work. Give up the dream.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

gpseymour said:


> It'll never work. Give up the dream.


Yup, just checked. Even if I reply to every one of his posts with corrections, I'd still be only at 2/3rds your posts.


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> I may be wrong in this, DB, but I think I read something some unspecified time ago (is that vague enough??) about genetic components for aggression. Or maybe it was a genetic component of inhibition.
> 
> In any case, here's a page that touches on the topic: Genetics of Aggression - Oxford Scholarship



There is a theory that nature effects nurture while nurture also effects nature.

Your actions can alter brain chemistry.
How Nurture Affects Nature – FABBS


----------



## drop bear

jobo said:


> humans have practically no free will, between genetic traits and conditioning, they have very few actually free choices to make
> 
> you cant choose to be agresive, like you can5 choose to b3 emphathic ,you can choose not to be either and  you can fake both, but 5hats not the same thing



How Nurture Affects Nature – FABBS


----------



## jobo

kempodisciple said:


> Yup, just checked. Even if I reply to every one of his posts with corrections, I'd still be only at 2/3rds your posts.


yes but then you have your own normal posts, go for it


----------



## jobo

drop bear said:


> How Nurture Affects Nature – FABBS


yea, I'm not that impressed  with rat studies that apply to humans?  and I've seen it postulated that putting people in a dangerous high stress environment ( like prison)switches on the muscle growth gene, which is why despite no coaches, poor diet and little in the way of equipment a seemingly high percentage of prisons are ripped. or maybe the stress of there being an imminent risk of being beaten to death makes them train harder ?

but my point remains between genetic disposition and conditioning( enviroment) people have little free will to exercise


----------



## jobo

gpseymour said:


> If someone entirely lacks it (a psychopath), you're correct. But someone who simply doesn't empathize well can develop that ability.


so how do you measure this small improvement .?


----------



## Tez3

You can certainly 'teach' aggression, or at the very least bring it out of people. Military training does this. To be honest most people can wind someone else up until they become very aggressive. There's also certain circumstances that will bring aggression out of people such as attacking loved ones etc.  I can decide when to be aggressive. 

On empathy.

_"According to the latest neuroscience research, 98% of people (the exceptions include those with psychopathic tendencies) have the ability to empathise wired into their brains - an in-built capacity for stepping into the shoes of others and understanding their feelings and perspectives. _

_The problem is that most don't tap into their full empathic potential in everyday life"_
Can you teach people to have empathy?


----------



## jobo

Tez3 said:


> You can certainly 'teach' aggression, or at the very least bring it out of people. Military training does this. To be honest most people can wind someone else up until they become very aggressive. There's also certain circumstances that will bring aggression out of people such as attacking loved ones etc.  I can decide when to be aggressive.
> 
> On empathy.
> 
> _"According to the latest neuroscience research, 98% of people (the exceptions include those with psychopathic tendencies) have the ability to empathise wired into their brains - an in-built capacity for stepping into the shoes of others and understanding their feelings and perspectives. _
> 
> _The problem is that most don't tap into their full empathic potential in everyday life"_
> Can you teach people to have empathy?


but only people who are ok with slaughter fellow humans join the military in the first place and they throw out any non aggressive empathic people that get through the interview  by mistaken,  so it's not really a representative sample


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> There is a theory that nature effects nurture while nurture also effects nature.
> 
> Your actions can alter brain chemistry.
> How Nurture Affects Nature – FABBS


We can even affect our genetics. While actions we take won't predictably alter the DNA, some things do cause genes to switch on and off. We don't know a lot of this yet - it's relatively new knowledge - but it seems likely we are capable of more control than genetic predisposition used to indicate.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

jobo said:


> yea, I'm not that impressed  with rat studies that apply to humans?  and I've seen it postulated that putting people in a dangerous high stress environment ( like prison)switches on the muscle growth gene, which is why despite no coaches, poor diet and little in the way of equipment a seemingly high percentage of prisons are ripped. or maybe the stress of there being an imminent risk of being beaten to death makes them train harder ?
> 
> but my point remains between genetic disposition and conditioning( enviroment) people have little free will to exercise


It seems likely a lack of alternative activities factors a lot in that.


----------



## DocWard

jobo said:


> but only people who are ok with slaughter fellow humans join the military in the first place and they throw out any non aggressive empathic people that get through the interview  by mistaken,  so it's not really a representative sample



That, Sir, is pure, unadulterated, hogwash.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

jobo said:


> so how do you measure this small improvement .?


I don't. You'd have to check the research to see how they did.

One thing they found is that people who read fiction (it doesn't seem to matter whether it's "great" fiction, or just popular fiction) have a higher empathy level. I'm not sure if they've established causal direction on that, though.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

jobo said:


> but only people who are ok with slaughter fellow humans join the military in the first place and they throw out any non aggressive empathic people that get through the interview  by mistaken,  so it's not really a representative sample


Give just a little proof of either half of that statement.


----------



## jobo

DocWard said:


> That, Sir, is pure, unadulterated, hogwash.


no, 
, people who are kind to animals dont join a company 5hat clubs seals to death, people who believe in the sanctity of life dont join an organisation that  bombs cities


----------



## jobo

gpseymour said:


> Give just a little proof of either half of that statement.


what you want proof they have a selection tion process, to weed out people who arnt aggressive enough or that they fail people in training who dont display a disregard  for human life. just say I'm sorry I'm not shooting this man shaped target  asI have no intention of ever killing anybody and your out,  or you get a job in the stores


----------



## Tez3

jobo said:


> but only people who are ok with slaughter fellow humans join the military in the first place and they throw out any non aggressive empathic people that get through the interview  by mistaken,  so it's not really a representative sample




Now that is an example of a genuinely ignorant comment. It's clear you don't actually know what the military in this country at least actually do nor how they train or even recruit. There's also countries that still have conscription.
Unbridled aggression in the military is considered a very bad thing, empath is considered a good thing. You can't have soldiers rampaging around like football hooligans, you need empathy to be able to lead effectively as well as understand the enemy. 

The days are long gone when soldiers lined up in a row opposite a row of enemy soldiers and when someone shouted 'charge' they went at it. Often now the military are used as peacekeepers to keep apart warring sides, actual warfare is also very different now when our enemies use innocents as shields.

New model army: Sandhurst's officers of the future


----------



## Gerry Seymour

jobo said:


> what you want proof they have a selection tion process, to weed out people who arnt aggressive enough or that they fail people in training who dont display a disregard  for human life. just say I'm sorry I'm not shooting this man shaped target  asI have no intention of ever killing anybody and your out,  or you get a job in the stores


Proof that they reject people who aren't highly aggressive, and/or proof that people who apply are willing to slaughter.

You're attempting in this post to show that someone who is highly non-aggressive toward people will be rejected (actually, the US army has had "conscientious objectors" serving many times). That doesn't show they reject all but the highly aggressive, nor does it show that only those willing to slaughter will join (in fact, your statement implies quite the opposite).


----------



## jobo

Tez3 said:


> Now that is an example of a genuinely ignorant comment. It's clear you don't actually know what the military in this country at least actually do nor how they train or even recruit. There's also countries that still have conscription.
> Unbridled aggression in the military is considered a very bad thing, empath is considered a good thing. You can't have soldiers rampaging around like football hooligans, you need empathy to be able to lead effectively as well as understand the enemy.
> 
> The days are long gone when soldiers lined up in a row opposite a row of enemy soldiers and when someone shouted 'charge' they went at it. Often now the military are used as peacekeepers to keep apart warring sides, actual warfare is also very different now when our enemies use innocents as shields.
> 
> New model army: Sandhurst's officers of the future


ok to be fair they just want weak people who are aggressive enough to   follow orders to kill people or get themselves killed


----------



## jobo

gpseymour said:


> Proof that they reject people who aren't highly aggressive, and/or proof that people who apply are willing to slaughter.
> 
> You're attempting in this post to show that someone who is highly non-aggressive toward people will be rejected (actually, the US army has had "conscientious objectors" serving many times). That doesn't show they reject all but the highly aggressive, nor does it show that only those willing to slaughter will join (in fact, your statement implies quite the opposite).


I didn't say that ..?


----------



## Tez3

jobo said:


> what you want proof they have a selection tion process, to weed out people who arnt aggressive enough or that they fail people in training who dont display a disregard  for human life. just say I'm sorry I'm not shooting this man shaped target  asI have no intention of ever killing anybody and your out,  or you get a job in the stores




Now that is hugely amusing. People don't just wander in to an army recruiting office on a whim thinking 'oh it might be fun in the army'. They'd be thrown out for being very unintelligent.
Recruits, and I have known many as well as the instructors and the course do not throw out people who aren't willing to take human life, that would be extremely stupid. *Of all the people who don't want to take human life it's going to be the military, the ones who have actually had to do it so you don't have to.
*
Don't forget all the things the military has had to do so that you don't get your lilywhite hands dirty and can denigrate the troops. The D Day commemorations are coming next month, how awful all those men died just so you can post on here how awful the military are.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

jobo said:


> I didn't say that ..?


You said half of that pretty clearly. The other half, you're now working to make into a pretty weak statement that seems unrelated to the first. In the context of the first statement, it seems unlikely you originally meant they rejected people who were unwilling to fight under any circumstances.


----------



## DocWard

So, pray tell, how much time did you serve in the military? Or, if you attempted to join, which I doubt, were you kept out due to physical, mental, emotional, or other reasons? I'm curious.



jobo said:


> no,
> , people who are kind to animals dont join a company 5hat clubs seals to death, people who believe in the sanctity of life dont join an organisation that  bombs cities



This, by the way, is a poorly constructed False Analogy fallacy.


----------



## jobo

Tez3 said:


> Now that is hugely amusing. People don't just wander in to an army recruiting office on a whim thinking 'oh it might be fun in the army'. They'd be thrown out for being very unintelligent.
> Recruits, and I have known many as well as the instructors and the course do not throw out people who aren't willing to take human life, that would be extremely stupid. *Of all the people who don't want to take human life it's going to be the military, the ones who have actually had to do it so you don't have to.
> *
> Don't forget all the things the military has had to do so that you don't get your lilywhite hands dirty and can denigrate the troops. The D Day commemorations are coming next month, how awful all those men died just so you can post on here how awful the military are.


they were to a large extent conscripts sent to be slaughtered on the beaches of Normandy, and those who we foolish enough to volunteer couldnt opt out. I have great sympathy they died, but cant get passed the fact they they were sacrificed in their many thousands on a whim of the high command.
the war was already lost, it was just an exercise 8n the Americans getting as much territory as they could before the Russian got it


----------



## jobo

gpseymour said:


> You said half of that pretty clearly. The other half, you're now working to make into a pretty weak statement that seems unrelated to the first. In the context of the first statement, it seems unlikely you originally meant they rejected people who were unwilling to fight under any circumstances.


no I don't say any of it, read it again then ask me to justify what I actually said


----------



## jobo

DocWard said:


> So, pray tell, how much time did you serve in the military? Or, if you attempted to join, which I doubt, were you kept out due to physical, mental, emotional, or other reasons? I'm curious.
> 
> 
> 
> This, by the way, is a poorly constructed False Analogy fallacy.


I think that a pretty fair comparison, I wont buy tuna because of the number of dolphins caught in the tuna nets, I wouldn't club seals and I wouldn't be even associated with an organisation set up with the only intention of killing people. 

people of course buy into the lie it's about defending their country , but then dont seem to question why they are bouncing round a desert thousands of miles from home


----------



## Tez3

jobo said:


> ok to be fair they just want weak people who are aggressive enough to   follow orders to kill people or get themselves killed






jobo said:


> they were to a large extent conscripts sent to be slaughtered on the beaches of Normandy, and those who we foolish enough to volunteer couldnt opt out. I have great sympathy they died, but cant get passed the fact they they were sacrificed in their many thousands on a whim of the high command.
> the war was already lost, it was just an exercise 8n the Americans getting as much territory as they could before the Russian got it



Your grasp of history is as good as your spelling I see.


----------



## jobo

DocWard said:


> So, pray tell, how much time did you serve in the military? Or, if you attempted to join, which I doubt, were you kept out due to physical, mental, emotional, or other reasons? I'm curious.
> 
> 
> 
> This, by the way, is a poorly constructed False Analogy fallacy.


when I was a lad, there was a bit of high unemployment, and the army used it as an opportunity to exploit poor iut of work lads, by advertising,  join the army learn a trade, see the world etc with out mentioning killing or getting killed, to be fair there was t much going on in terms of war, I of course had a trade, so no reason to inconvenience myself just to escape poverty.


----------



## Tez3

jobo said:


> I think that a pretty fair comparison, I wont buy tuna because of the number of dolphins caught in the tuna nets, I wouldn't club seals and I wouldn't be even associated with an organisation set up with the only intention of killing people.
> 
> people of course buy into the lie it's about defending their country , but then dont seem to question why they are bouncing round a desert thousands of miles from home




Well, there's always line caught tuna. As usual you just say the first thing you can think of  that you think will annoy people and try to justify it afterwards with ridiculous arguments. It's basic troll behaviour. Happens on everything thread you go on, it's why you are here.


----------



## Tez3

One of the tasks the military takes on, sadly this is bad news but  just to show that the military aren't what some think.
British soldier killed by elephant during anti-poaching operation in Malawi


----------



## DocWard

jobo said:


> what you want proof they have a selection tion process, to weed out people who arnt aggressive enough or that they fail people in training who dont display a disregard  for human life. just say I'm sorry I'm not shooting this man shaped target  asI have no intention of ever killing anybody and your out,  or you get a job in the stores



I've decided not to wait for your response. I have things to do, and I don't want to leave this unsaid. Your comment about the military is ignorant and wholly offensive.

I served, all told, twenty three years in the military. The fast majority of that time was, as I have mentioned elsewhere, as a medic. On my last deployment, while my MOS, or my official job, was as a medic, I served as an assistant squad leader in an Area Reaction Force. I believe I mentioned that as well. I accepted the fact from day one that I might need to take human life, and that I was signing a blank check for my own. I also accepted the fact that the purpose of the military is the forceful projection of power via the ability to engage in combat operations when diplomacy fails. Whether defensively or offensively, the military fights and attempts to ruin the enemy's will to fight. Yes, that involves killing them. It does not mean wholesale slaughter and indiscriminate killing, though.

To this day I have friends that are closer to me than family by blood because of our shared experiences and our trust in one another. I have also lost friends in combat, whom I think of often with sadness. If we break down the definition of empathy to its most basic form, "the ability to understand and share the feelings of another," I don't believe it is possible to serve in the military without such ability. If one can't empathize with those one is serving with, one will not be able to trust, nor gain the trust of those most important to survival. This is also true of the populace the military deals with and often attempts to protect.

As an NCO, I will say It is certainly almost impossible to be a good leader without empathy. As a leader, if I had not been able to empathize, I couldn't have looked out for the best interest of those soldiers serving under me, and worked to keep them as safe as circumstances dictated, and fought for their interests when command became disinterested, among other things.

Since it is painfully, offensively obvious that you have no clue what you are talking about, allow me to elaborate. One of my friends who died in Afghanistan was an NCO in the military, yet an attorney in civilian life, as I am. He wasn't just any attorney, though. He served with the Public Defender's office, providing services to the indigent, when he had the ability to earn far more money, far more easily elsewhere. Many of my friends from the military are now in the medical field, paramedics, nurses and physician's assistants, trying to make the lives of others better, and indeed, keep them alive. They deal with the PTSD and other issues that people who are highly empathetic deal with.

As for myself, I served for over a decade at our prosecutor's office seeking to protect abused and neglected children. Dealing with sleepless nights before trials, my worry that I might miss something and lose, and a child be put into danger because of it keeping me awake. I have had tears in my eyes as I have asked a judge to issue a Do Not Rescucitate Order for a child who had been so violently shaken by a family member that his brain was swelling and his brain stem was being forced down into his spinal column, and the medical personnel all believed it was the right thing to do. HOW DARE YOU suggest I, or any one of the countless soldiers I have been proud to serve with and call brothers and sisters are not caring, empathetic individuals. To do so shows your ignorance, and so much more.

Of course, I can't help but think of the fact that you are one of the more glibly violence advocates on this forum. I could only shake my head in disbelief when I read your comment that "[and] if you made a kid of mine stand with their nose against the wall, I'd punch your lights out' on another thread.

If this causes this thread to be locked, my apologies to the original posters and all those who were benefitting from it, as well as moderators and admins. I believe this needed to be said. This person is simply loathsome.


----------



## DocWard

jobo said:


> when I was a lad, there was a bit of high unemployment, and the army used it as an opportunity to exploit poor iut of work lads, by advertising,  join the army learn a trade, see the world etc with out mentioning killing or getting killed, to be fair there was t much going on in terms of war, I of course had a trade, so no reason to inconvenience myself just to escape poverty.



Of course. I am not impressed.


----------



## jobo

Tez3 said:


> Your grasp of history is as good as your spelling I see.


its simplistic, but a pretty fair summary, they were racing the Russians to Berlin,  and in their haist gave away many thousands of lives , that could easily have been preserved


----------



## jobo

DocWard said:


> I've decided not to wait for your response. I have things to do, and I don't want to leave this unsaid. Your comment about the military is ignorant and wholly offensive.
> 
> I served, all told, twenty three years in the military. The fast majority of that time was, as I have mentioned elsewhere, as a medic. On my last deployment, while my MOS, or my official job, was as a medic, I served as an assistant squad leader in an Area Reaction Force. I believe I mentioned that as well. I accepted the fact from day one that I might need to take human life, and that I was signing a blank check for my own. I also accepted the fact that the purpose of the military is the forceful projection of power via the ability to engage in combat operations when diplomacy fails. Whether defensively or offensively, the military fights and attempts to ruin the enemy's will to fight. Yes, that involves killing them. It does not mean wholesale slaughter and indiscriminate killing, though.
> 
> To this day I have friends that are closer to me than family by blood because of our shared experiences and our trust in one another. I have also lost friends in combat, whom I think of often with sadness. If we break down the definition of empathy to its most basic form, "the ability to understand and share the feelings of another," I don't believe it is possible to serve in the military without such ability. If one can't empathize with those one is serving with, one will not be able to trust, nor gain the trust of those most important to survival. This is also true of the populace the military deals with and often attempts to protect.
> 
> As an NCO, I will say It is certainly almost impossible to be a good leader without empathy. As a leader, if I had not been able to empathize, I couldn't have looked out for the best interest of those soldiers serving under me, and worked to keep them as safe as circumstances dictated, and fought for their interests when command became disinterested, among other things.
> 
> Since it is painfully, offensively obvious that you have no clue what you are talking about, allow me to elaborate. One of my friends who died in Afghanistan was an NCO in the military, yet an attorney in civilian life, as I am. He wasn't just any attorney, though. He served with the Public Defender's office, providing services to the indigent, when he had the ability to earn far more money, far more easily elsewhere. Many of my friends from the military are now in the medical field, paramedics, nurses and physician's assistants, trying to make the lives of others better, and indeed, keep them alive. They deal with the PTSD and other issues that people who are highly empathetic deal with.
> 
> As for myself, I served for over a decade at our prosecutor's office seeking to protect abused and neglected children. Dealing with sleepless nights before trials, my worry that I might miss something and lose, and a child be put into danger because of it keeping me awake. I have had tears in my eyes as I have asked a judge to issue a Do Not Rescucitate Order for a child who had been so violently shaken by a family member that his brain was swelling and his brain stem was being forced down into his spinal column, and the medical personnel all believed it was the right thing to do. HOW DARE YOU suggest I, or any one of the countless soldiers I have been proud to serve with and call brothers and sisters are not caring, empathetic individuals. To do so shows your ignorance, and so much more.
> 
> Of course, I can't help but think of the fact that you are one of the more glibly violence advocates on this forum. I could only shake my head in disbelief when I read your comment that "[and] if you made a kid of mine stand with their nose against the wall, I'd punch your lights out' on another thread.
> 
> If this causes this thread to be locked, my apologies to the original posters and all those who were benefitting from it, as well as moderators and admins. I believe this needed to be said. This person is simply loathsome.


you volunteered to take part in the subjugation of various sovereign  sates that lead to millions of deaths, but   you think I'm loathsome, thats a really bizarre level of delusion


----------



## DocWard

jobo said:


> you volunteered to take part in the subjugation of various sovereign  sates that lead to millions of deaths, but   you think I'm loathsome, thats a really bizarre level of delusion



If you wish to believe so, I will make no attempt to dissuade you, because you clearly aren't worth the effort. Suffice it to say, that when I leave this realm of existence, I will do so with the knowledge that my efforts, in the military, in professional and in private life, have served to help others, my country, my community, and individuals both familiar and unknown to me. I don't know anything about you other than the facade you present here, but if it is representative, I sincerely doubt you will be able to say the same.


----------



## jobo

DocWard said:


> If you wish to believe so, I will make no attempt to dissuade you, because you clearly aren't worth the effort. Suffice it to say, that when I leave this realm of existence, I will do so with the knowledge that my efforts, in the military, in professional and in private life, have served to help others, my country, my community, and individuals both familiar and unknown to me. I don't know anything about you other than the facade you present here, but if it is representative, I sincerely doubt you will be able to say the same.


I bet you think youl go to heaven as well
that's a serious lot if self justification right there, I bet you think your military  career made the world a safer more just place.


----------



## Sarah Mc

MetalBoar said:


> Something I haven't seen anyone talking about on the thread (though I could have missed it) is basic physical conditioning. Especially if you were fairly sedentary before you started training, 8 months isn't very long to both develop things like strength and flexibility from a martial arts program. If you were to focus some attention on areas like this where you might have some weaknesses you could see fairly dramatic improvement in your performance. Training in your art(s) will improve these things but frequently not as quickly nor anywhere near as efficiently as a specialized routine.
> 
> Taking flexibility as an example - Back in my 20's I studied Hapkido for about 5 years. I am not naturally flexible, in fact I'm naturally inflexible, especially my legs and hips. When I started I progressed more quickly than the average student when it came to punching and grappling techniques but any kick higher than my opponents' knee was absolute garbage and I felt like I just couldn't learn them. It wasn't a problem with my brain or innate ability but it sure felt like it. It wasn't until I made a dedicated effort outside of class to really do some research and follow a dedicated flexibility program that I started to make any progress in that area. I'm sure if I'd just kept with the class I'd have eventually developed the flexibility to do the kicks properly but it would have taken far longer because I was _so_ much less flexible than the average student that what we did for class wasn't enough for me. Strength can also be a limiting factor in the same way. If your legs are weaker than they need to be it makes it harder to be coordinated when you kick, etc. and a good strength training program will make you stronger _*much*_ faster than a martial arts class.



Absolutely.  This makes so much sense.


----------



## DocWard

jobo said:


> I bet you think youl go to heaven as well



As is usual for you, you are in error. No surprise there.



> that's a serious lot if self justification right there,



Self justification? Perhaps, but I know it to be true, and I have mentioned only a brief bit of facts concerning what I have done that lead me to the conclusion. Feel free to attempt to prove otherwise.



> I bet you think your military  career made the world a safer more just place.



You're zero-for-two on the betting. It seems gambling isn't your forte any more than spelling and rational discussion are. I did my best to serve my country, my community, and those soldiers I served with, and to be the best soldier, medic and leader I could be. Whether my efforts, or the efforts of those I served alongside made my country a better place, or the world for that matter, will be up to posterity to decide.


----------



## jobo

DocWard said:


> As is usual for you, you are in error. No surprise there.
> 
> 
> 
> Self justification? Perhaps, but I know it to be true, and I have mentioned only a brief bit of facts concerning what I have done that lead me to the conclusion. Feel free to attempt to prove otherwise.
> 
> 
> 
> You're zero-for-two on the betting. It seems gambling isn't your forte any more than spelling and rational discussion are. I did my best to serve my country, my community, and those soldiers I served with, and to be the best soldier, medic and leader I could be. Whether my efforts, or the efforts of those I served alongside made my country a better place, or the world for that matter, will be up to posterity to decide.


I think posterity, well in any other place than the good old US of A has already reach a verdict , and 8m not sure that, that many Americans are totally enamoured  with the mess it left behind.

but hell who cares as long as your proud of your contrabution


----------



## Yokozuna514

DocWard said:


> As is usual for you, you are in error. No surprise there.
> 
> 
> 
> Self justification? Perhaps, but I know it to be true, and I have mentioned only a brief bit of facts concerning what I have done that lead me to the conclusion. Feel free to attempt to prove otherwise.
> 
> 
> 
> You're zero-for-two on the betting. It seems gambling isn't your forte any more than spelling and rational discussion are. I did my best to serve my country, my community, and those soldiers I served with, and to be the best soldier, medic and leader I could be. Whether my efforts, or the efforts of those I served alongside made my country a better place, or the world for that matter, will be up to posterity to decide.


*“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.”*

― George Carlin


----------



## DocWard

jobo said:


> I think posterity, well in any other place than the good old US of A has already reach a verdict , and 8m not sure that, that many Americans are totally enamoured  with the mess it left behind.
> 
> but hell who cares as long as your proud of your contrabution



I find it most curious that you only seek to attack what I would call "the low hanging fruit," that is, those statements you can best attack, or see as weakest. In reality, it show's your inability to engage those more challenging points, and your ability to only engage the weaker ones at a superficial level.

Having said that, "posterity" would mean generations to follow. Once the final dust has settled, then the historians can truly start sorting through the wheat and chaff, and see the end results on the geo-political spectrum, outside the myopic world view of the present. If future generations judge our efforts poorly, then so be it. It may very well be after my passing before we see the full positive and negative repercussions of the actions of the U.S., England, Canada and numerous other nations in the post 9/11/2001conflicts in the Middle East. I certainly will take your opinion for all that I consider it worth on the subject.

As for me, yes, I remain proud of my service and my efforts, and it will take far more than the nearly incoherent attacks and ramblings of a troll who seemingly only exists to denigrate the efforts of others. I said loathsome earlier. Sad and pathetic are also apt.


----------



## DocWard

Yokozuna514 said:


> *“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.”*
> 
> ― George Carlin



How right he was and how right you are. It is, sadly a character flaw I have. I deplore misinformation, bullies, and those who attack the efforts of others, whether through ignorance, insolence, or both.


----------



## jobo

DocWard said:


> I find it most curious that you only seek to attack what I would call "the low hanging fruit," that is, those statements you can best attack, or see as weakest. In reality, it show's your inability to engage those more challenging points, and your ability to only engage the weaker ones at a superficial level.
> 
> Having said that, "posterity" would mean generations to follow. Once the final dust has settled, then the historians can truly start sorting through the wheat and chaff, and see the end results on the geo-political spectrum, outside the myopic world view of the present. If future generations judge our efforts poorly, then so be it. It may very well be after my passing before we see the full positive and negative repercussions of the actions of the U.S., England, Canada and numerous other nations in the post 9/11/2001conflicts in the Middle East. I certainly will take your opinion for all that I consider it worth on the subject.
> 
> As for me, yes, I remain proud of my service and my efforts, and it will take far more than the nearly incoherent attacks and ramblings of a troll who seemingly only exists to denigrate the efforts of others. I said loathsome earlier. Sad and pathetic are also apt.


you clearly dont take well to criticism,   just heaping personal abuse doesn't make your position look any better. we are clearly a generation on from your efforts at world peace,  and eeer well, the proof it seems is in the pudding of far flung lands still in chaos and racked by conflict. so you haven't really got an " end justifies the means" defence either.

how long do you think it should be left, before posterity judges you and what do you think could possibly happen in the intervening period so that your contribution is viewed as a positive?


----------



## DocWard

jobo said:


> you clearly dont take well to criticism,   just heaping personal abuse doesn't make your position look any better. we are clearly a generation on from your efforts at world peace,  and eeer well, the proof it seems is in the pudding of far flung lands still in chaos and racked by conflict. so you haven't really got an " end justifies the means" defence either.
> 
> how long do you think it should be left, before posterity judges you and what do you think could possibly happen in the intervening period so that your contribution is viewed as a positive?



I actually handle criticism quite well, particularly if it is positively stated, has a logical basis and is intended to be helpful. I do not react well to personal attacks, demeaning commentary and the insulting statements you make without knowing of which you speak. I believe "bristle" would be the correct term for my reaction.

I make no pretense toward prescience, pardon the alliteration. I also believe we are careening wildly toward a deeply political conversation.


----------



## Sarah Mc

DocWard said:


> How right he was and how right you are. It is, sadly a character flaw I have. I deplore misinformation, bullies, and those who attack the efforts of others, whether through ignorance, insolence, or both.



I have a lot of thoughts on all of this (since I've, of course, followed this thread) but since understanding can only be established with people who want to learn, I'm in agreement with the quote.  Still, your posts are thoughtful & thorough and I thank you for trying, and I particularly would like to thank you for your service.


----------



## DocWard

Sarah Mc said:


> I have a lot of thoughts on all of this (since I've, of course, followed this thread) but since understanding can only be established with people who want to learn, I'm in agreement with the quote.  Still, your posts are thoughtful & thorough and I thank you for trying, and I particularly would like to thank you for your service.



Thank you, I'm humbled, and I considered it an honor to be able to.


----------



## DocWard

Sarah Mc said:


> I have a lot of thoughts on all of this (since I've, of course, followed this thread) but since understanding can only be established with people who want to learn, I'm in agreement with the quote.  Still, your posts are thoughtful & thorough and I thank you for trying, and I particularly would like to thank you for your service.



Also, since this is your thread, my apologies for my contribution to the direction it has taken. I hope that the answers related to your original question have been helpful.


----------



## Sarah Mc

DocWard said:


> Also, since this is your thread, my apologies for my contribution to the direction it has taken. I hope that the answers related to your original question have been helpful.



Not a problem. This is important, too. And I have gotten so much out of the original thread - I'm so glad I posted.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Sarah Mc said:


> Not a problem. This is important, too. And I have gotten so much out of the original thread - I'm so glad I posted.


If you hang around -and we hope you will - you’ll find thread swerve (to say nothing of drift) is rather common here on MT.


----------



## Sarah Mc

gpseymour said:


> If you hang around -and we hope you will - you’ll find thread swerve (to say nothing of drift) is rather common here on MT.



I figured as much!  And yes, I really like this forum, for sure.


----------



## Buka

Sarah, I have some ideas you might consider. But our cable and internet keeps going third world on us, so I'll get back to it when it straightens out.


----------



## Buka

Sarah Mc said:


> Primarily kickboxing sparring.  Karate comes much more easily to me than kickboxing somehow.



Okay, in order to better help you, are you using - 

A floor marked off with tape to represent a ring?

An open floor with no tape boundaries?

A ring with ropes?


----------



## Orion Nebula

@Sarah Mc Congratulations on having your thread go into new and exciting directions, including multiple arguments. At least your thread didn't get locked like mine 

I totally understand the feeling that you suck at martial arts, lack talent, etc. I have often thought to myself, "man, I'm really awful at this really simple thing. Why won't my body obey?" It also doesn't help that I'm usually training with people far beyond my skill level and I am woefully uncoordinated and slow in comparison to them. It was quite nice to hear last week that I'm doing quite well for someone testing for 8th kyu, since I don't have any other beginners to compare myself to.

As almost everyone has pointed out, hard work and repetition will get you where you're going. I think that there are some rare cases where someone can be so unsuited for something that they will never be particularly good at it, and that's ok. However, the vast majority of the population can work hard at something until they succeed. Sometimes it just takes a while. 

Regarding genetics, in a lot of cases genetics only works as a guidepost and not an immutable truth, particularly because we have a fairly shallow understanding of the genome. Some things like genes for eye color are simple and well understood, but many traits are influenced by several genes and can involve epigenetics, which is a process in which parts of your DNA become methylated (a small compound attaches), which makes it unreadable. Environmental conditions can modify the epigenome and it can be inherited as well. Which is why genetic studies will generally say that having a specific gene variant will increase your likelihood of having some trait, but does not guarantee it. Heck, according to my genes I should be lactose intolerant, but I'm not, and that's a pretty well understood mutation.


----------



## Sarah Mc

Buka said:


> Okay, in order to better help you, are you using -
> 
> A floor marked off with tape to represent a ring?
> 
> An open floor with no tape boundaries?
> 
> A ring with ropes?



Just with regards to sparring? We have a space on the mat marked off with cones to designate sparring stations.


----------



## Sarah Mc

Orion Nebula said:


> @Sarah Mc Congratulations on having your thread go into new and exciting directions, including multiple arguments. At least your thread didn't get locked like mine
> 
> I totally understand the feeling that you suck at martial arts, lack talent, etc. I have often thought to myself, "man, I'm really awful at this really simple thing. Why won't my body obey?" It also doesn't help that I'm usually training with people far beyond my skill level and I am woefully uncoordinated and slow in comparison to them. It was quite nice to hear last week that I'm doing quite well for someone testing for 8th kyu, since I don't have any other beginners to compare myself to.



It really is helpful just to hear that other people have had similar experiences, & there's no prophesy that where I'm at = I suck forever.



Orion Nebula said:


> @Sarah Mc Regarding genetics, in a lot of cases genetics only works as a guidepost and not an immutable truth, particularly because we have a fairly shallow understanding of the genome. Some things like genes for eye color are simple and well understood, but many traits are influenced by several genes and can involve epigenetics, which is a process in which parts of your DNA become methylated (a small compound attaches), which makes it unreadable. Environmental conditions can modify the epigenome and it can be inherited as well. Which is why genetic studies will generally say that having a specific gene variant will increase your likelihood of having some trait, but does not guarantee it. Heck, according to my genes I should be lactose intolerant, but I'm not, and that's a pretty well understood mutation.



I realize you've specified what we've been talking about in the abstract. When asking about natural aptitude, we're talking about genetics. 

I don't have the first clue about what my genes say.  Aside from observing parents & half-siblings who are reasonably athletic, anyway. as someone else pointed out, I don't actually know what my capabilities are yet. What I've been doing is interpreting my perception of what I feel (or don't feel) compared to what I *see* in others. Apples and oranges.


----------



## oftheherd1

Sarah Mc said:


> Yes, that's exactly what he does.
> 
> I think what others have said about muscle memory makes sense - I may be making very slow progress because there's so much that's new, I'm only learning / practicing so much at one time.
> 
> Over the weekend I started setting additional time aside to practice some of the basics that I feel comfortable with on the bag, & so haven't been practicing at home.  I can do them *but that doesn't mean my body remembers them without having to think about it each time.*



Stay with it.  It will come.  One day you will look back and wonder when it changed, and marvel at how easy it is.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Sarah Mc said:


> there's no prophesy that where I'm at = I suck forever.


When people said, "I suck". The may mean that he is

1. humble.
2. joking.
3. losing confidence.

1 and 2 are OK. 3 is not.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Kung Fu Wang said:


> When people said, "I suck". The may mean that he is
> 
> 1. humble.
> 2. joking.
> 3. losing confidence.
> 
> 1 and 2 are OK. 3 is not.


Also 4. Driven. 

The phrase "i suck" is going to get me to try a lot harder than the phrase "Im amazing"


----------



## Tez3

Kung Fu Wang said:


> When people said, "I suck". The may mean that he is
> 
> 1. humble.
> 2. joking.
> 3. losing confidence.
> 
> 1 and 2 are OK. 3 is not.



4. in the UK you will get a lot of funny looks and even perhaps a couple of propositions you don't want especially as a female if you say 'I suck'. 


On a more serious note, I really dislike when it's 1. because that's not being humble, that's someone who wants others to disagree and tell them how good they are.


----------



## ShortBridge

I will go a step further and suggest that the notion of talent is ALMOST a myth. Occasionally there will be a 5 year old concert pianist, but as I meet and get to know people who I have thought of as talented for years, I've heard their stories and realized that they just put their work in and stuck with it. Sports, music, art, martial arts, it doesn't matter.


----------



## AndreaLola

Yes, hard work can take you a long way!  I'm not really naturally athletic, I began training when I was 24.  I could hardly tell my left from my right back then.  Some folks are just athletic, some come from various sports or dance, and some of us need a little extra time to get it together.  Believe in yourself, ask questions, and try.  Best of luck!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

ShortBridge said:


> I will go a step further and suggest that the notion of talent is ALMOST a myth. Occasionally there will be a 5 year old concert pianist, but as I meet and get to know people who I have thought of as talented for years, I've heard their stories and realized that they just put their work in and stuck with it. Sports, music, art, martial arts, it doesn't matter.


My brother started telling people something when they told him he was talented in piano, guitar, songwriting, music whatever. "I'm not talented. I'm musically inclined with a lot of dedication."


----------



## dvcochran

Sarah Mc said:


> It really is helpful just to hear that other people have had similar experiences, & there's no prophesy that where I'm at = I suck forever.
> 
> 
> 
> I realize you've specified what we've been talking about in the abstract. When asking about natural aptitude, we're talking about genetics.
> 
> I don't have the first clue about what my genes say.  Aside from observing parents & half-siblings who are reasonably athletic, anyway. as someone else pointed out, I don't actually know what my capabilities are yet. What I've been doing is interpreting my perception of what I feel (or don't feel) compared to what I *see* in others. Apples and oranges.


That is a very cogent observation. In one of you previous posts you referenced  hard work and repetition. REPETITION can override most of what we believe science tells us we are not supposed to be able to do. Keep at it.


----------



## Sarah Mc

AndreaLola said:


> Yes, hard work can take you a long way!  I'm not really naturally athletic, I began training when I was 24.  I could hardly tell my left from my right back then.  Some folks are just athletic, some come from various sports or dance, and some of us need a little extra time to get it together.  Believe in yourself, ask questions, and try.  Best of luck!
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk



Much appreciated!! I will!


----------



## Sarah Mc

dvcochran said:


> That is a very cogent observation. In one of you previous posts you referenced  hard work and repetition. REPETITION can override most of what we believe science tells us we are not supposed to be able to do. Keep at it.



Yes, I will.  Since making this post I've noticed I was better able to focus in class & it absolutely made a difference.  While I knew the looming question of "is it possible I just can't do this?" was affecting me (though I tried not to let it - tried to shove it aside, etc), I didn't realize how much until I had a reasonable counter-argument.


----------



## ShortBridge

kempodisciple said:


> My brother started telling people something when they told him he was talented in piano, guitar, songwriting, music whatever. "I'm not talented. I'm musically inclined with a lot of dedication."



I am a jazz musician. A local one and kind of a hack at that, but I've played with some excellent musicians and have gotten to know some of the greats. To the very last one of them, they HATE to be told they are talented. Hang out and talk with them, get their stories and you'll understand why. Calling them talented dismisses their work and struggle.

I also know some ball players, journalists, photographers...same. I don't personally know of an exception, though mostly likely there are a few somewhere.


----------



## Buka

Sarah Mc said:


> Just with regards to sparring? We have a space on the mat marked off with cones to designate sparring stations.



One of the things you can do is work on your distance. The distance between you and your sparring partners. Try moving around the ring with various partners. Maintain the same distance, whatever distance is good for you. A distance that you can work your fighting techniques from. It will be a little different with each person you partner with, depending on their steps, ability to close distance, size etc.

Watch out for breaking out of a viable stance. You have to keep a good stance to fight from. And be aware that the easiest thing Martial Artists tend to do is go forward and back. Do not get stuck in that game. Having the cones to mark off the area allows you to skeedaddle backwards if you get in distance trouble. Work on your angles, all your angles. Sometimes you're the bull and sometimes you're the matador.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Buka said:


> Martial Artists tend to do is go forward and back. Do not get stuck in that game.


Agree! Most people don't know how to react if you drag him in circle.


----------



## DocWard

Orion Nebula said:


> @Sarah Mc Congratulations on having your thread go into new and exciting directions, including multiple arguments. At least your thread didn't get locked like mine



For the record, I still feel bad about that!


----------



## dvcochran

Buka said:


> One of the things you can do is work on your distance. The distance between you and your sparring partners. Try moving around the ring with various partners. Maintain the same distance, whatever distance is good for you. A distance that you can work your fighting techniques from. It will be a little different with each person you partner with, depending on their steps, ability to close distance, size etc.
> 
> Watch out for breaking out of a viable stance. You have to keep a good stance to fight from. And be aware that the easiest thing Martial Artists tend to do is go forward and back. Do not get stuck in that game. Having the cones to mark off the area allows you to skeedaddle backwards if you get in distance trouble. Work on your angles, all your angles. Sometimes you're the bull and sometimes you're the matador.


Agree. We call the forward and backwards motion the sparring dance.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Buka said:


> One of the things you can do is work on your distance. The distance between you and your sparring partners. Try moving around the ring with various partners. Maintain the same distance, whatever distance is good for you. A distance that you can work your fighting techniques from. It will be a little different with each person you partner with, depending on their steps, ability to close distance, size etc.
> 
> Watch out for breaking out of a viable stance. You have to keep a good stance to fight from. And be aware that the easiest thing Martial Artists tend to do is go forward and back. Do not get stuck in that game. Having the cones to mark off the area allows you to skeedaddle backwards if you get in distance trouble. Work on your angles, all your angles. Sometimes you're the bull and sometimes you're the matador.


Agreed. My students learn angles and distance control before they learn to use attacks in sparring.


----------



## dvcochran

gpseymour said:


> Agreed. My students learn angles and distance control before they learn to use attacks in sparring.


That is something I still struggle teaching some people in TKD. They have a hard time not flinching up and learning that a small move to one side or the other avoids contact and/or sets you we for a strike. As people progress they should learn to anticipate when a pre-emptive side step is a wise move. Any flinch and you are too late most of the time.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

dvcochran said:


> That is something I still struggle teaching some people in TKD. They have a hard time not flinching up and learning that a small move to one side or the other avoids contact and/or sets you we for a strike. As people progress they should learn to anticipate when a pre-emptive side step is a wise move. Any flinch and you are too late most of the time.


We run into the same problem teaching people to enter. They want to side-step first, which leaves them in the power zone too long. Also happens when they're learning to step back, sometimes.

So, apparently, you need to teach your people to step in, so they will mistakenly side-step, instead. 

Actually, this is why I teach the defensive strategy and distance control before I teach them to attack in sparring. They have only two jobs: protect themselves and control the distance (really, the latter is part of the former, so just one job). They also get to learn to keep their heads when they can't give a return strike. By the time they have to deliver a punch in sparring, I expect this stuff to start to get a little easy, so they can devote conscious thought to targeting.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

dvcochran said:


> That is something I still struggle teaching some people in TKD. They have a hard time not flinching up and learning that a small move to one side or the other avoids contact and/or sets you we for a strike. As people progress they should learn to anticipate when a pre-emptive side step is a wise move. Any flinch and you are too late most of the time.


Something that worked in fencing, is having new students practice just keeping distance. I would teach them the distance they want to keep, and when they want to invade the other person's distance. Then 'distance sparring' was a regular drill where people would not use the weapon at all, but just use their footwork to trip up the other person. I never tried it with an unarmed art, but I could see it teaching people how to set up strikes and learn footwork against others.


----------

