Can you learn from video?
- Thread starter KPM
- Start date
Flying Crane
Sr. Grandmaster
I have been training since 1984 and have a background in several methods. I no longer train in any but the one:Tibetan white crane. I have done some teaching informally, but do not run a formal school.
I have also made attempts to learn by reading books and thru video. Both methods lead to nothing, although I did manage to learn to mimick a couple forms thru instructional video. It was shallow mimicry, and nothing more. It is not a good way to go about it.
.
I use video reinforcement all the time, and we use video referencing quite a bit.
Reinforcement, as I've used it here, is literally picking up my smartphone, flipping on the video mode when Student A is working on something, usually with Student B. It's not working for them, and I can see why, but they can't "feel' the why I'm explaining because they don't even know what it is they are feeling for yet.
So... I play back the video and point it out to them. Then mimic their flaw, show the negative outcome, then show the correction and (hopefully) am then able to demonstrate the preferred outcome of whatever it is. Sometimes to get people to feel what it is you very much have to use what my teacher called "Training Hands" and grasp the person and corral their movement into a certain path or position.
Video works, but it's an aid to teaching in this regard.
Next, working on - insert random kata technique name - we often will, since the instructor who originally taught me/them the kata is in another state, and sometimes memory fails everyone... we'll pull up the video of said kata technique and the discussion surrounding it, watch it together (obviously with different levels of understanding) and then go practice.
Video works, but it's an aid to teaching in this regard.
IMO... trying to learn a technique with which you've had absolutely no physical experience with first... is a very uphill task. If all you have is a book, I wish you luck. If you've video of good quality, at least you get more of the data, though it's not live and interactive. Better, but not great.
Sometimes, I wish we could just download it, matrix-style... Ha!
Rather than just arguing "yes you can" "no you can't", it might be fruitful to look at the different avenues of learning and consider the relative advantages/disadvantages of video vs. in-person instruction.
Learning through visual emulation: Instructor demonstrates movements and the student imitates those movements. This is one of the primary learning methods in just about every art. For this, video has a potential advantage over traditional classroom instruction. A well shot video will allow you to see the techniques clearly from multiple angles and the student can replay the video over and over as often as he/she likes.
Learning via verbal explanation: The instructor explains the concepts, context, principles, and/or fine details behind the techniques being taught. No major advantage that I can see here for video or in-person instruction. I've seen instructors in both formats who are really good at explaining stuff and others who are terrible at it.
Learning via personal correction: This is the biggest potential advantage of in-person instruction. No video can point out the flaws in your technique that you aren't aware of. It should be noted however that many instructors are terrible at this. I've personally witnessed teachers who just aren't good at providing effective feedback to students and I've heard stories of various famous teachers who (by my criteria at least) didn't seem to be very good at it. Reasons could include temperament, poor communications skills, favoritism (only offering real feedback to preferred students), overly large class sizes, or other factors. Nevertheless, I've seen students advance and improve even under instructors who provide little in the way of effective correction and feedback.
Learning through tactile emulation: This is the other potential big advantage of in-person instruction. Actually feeling the technique of a skilled practitioner as he/she applies it to you can clarify things in a way beyond the capacity of visual or verbal instruction. No video can provide that. Unfortunately, there are plenty of schools out there where the instructor doesn't spar with students and only demonstrates techniques on select ukes. I've seen students improve in those schools as well, so as desirable as this form of learning is, it's apparently not completely indispensable.
Learning through solo repetition and personal exploration: This is the process of performing thousands of kicks or punches or forms or other movements on your own without constant correction from an instructor. This is a vital part of learning an art whether you are training under a live instructor or from video. Robotic repetition is not the goal. The student needs to constantly self-monitor to observe the quality of his/her balance, body control, movement, and how well the performance matches his/her understanding of the proper form. The better the practitioners body awareness and understanding of the desired ideal technique, the more he/she will get out of this process. The danger of doing this sort of practice based exclusively or primarily on video instruction is that without periodic correction, the movement being developed may deviate further and further from the desired end-goal. A secondary issue is that not everybody has the self-discipline to put in this kind of regular practice without the structure of a regular class and instructor to demand the work be put in.
Learning through repetition with a partner: This is the process of performing thousands of throws, locks, chokes, pins, blocks, parries, or other techniques or drills with a cooperative partner. This is another essential part of learning, whether from video or in-person. This can be hugely beneficial with the right training partners. A good partner - one who can feed realistic attacks, respond realistically to your technique, and give good verbal feedback ("it feels much tighter when you shift 2 inches this way") can be as helpful as many teachers are - more so sometimes. Not all training partners are this helpful, unfortunately. The best place to find this kind of quality training partner is in a good school with good in-person instruction. However it is sometimes possible to find a good training partner who is willing to work through video instruction with you outside an official dojo environment and make significant progress. In fact I would say that finding such partners is a necessary pre-requisite to getting any sort of real value out of exclusive video training.
Learning via application experience: This is the process of taking whatever you have learned from an instructor (in-person or video) and trying to apply it in sparring or real fighting or other real-world situations (such as a LEO or bouncer or corrections officer applying a restraint to a resisting subject), then learning from the experience. Having a coach who can offer you feedback during or after the event can be helpful, but is not by any means necessary. The most important feedback comes from the person who is opposing your technique.
Conclusions from the above: In person instruction has major advantages over video instruction - most importantly the potential for personal correction and feeling the technique of an experienced practitioner. However - a highly disciplined person with talent and good body awareness (and preferably prior training) who has consistent access to good training partners (who preferably have prior training) can use video instruction as a springboard, explore the material being shown through trial and error experimentation with training partners, then further test and refine what is learned through sparring, fighting, and/or other real world application experience, and eventually end up with usable skills. In essence, the practitioner is teaching himself through experience as much as he is learning from video. There are numerous martial arts which have been created or recreated this way - not so much via video (since that is a more recent invention), but by practitioners starting with a seed of information and doing the work to grow that seed into something more substantial. Consider most of HEMA - the modern pioneers didn't even have video to work from: they had to start with just books! Have modern masters of long sword technique recreated the techniques of Liechtenauer with perfect accuracy? We'll never know. However I do know they can kick your *** with a sword.
Caveats: The kind of exploration described above can lead to usable skills, but those skills may not be exactly the same as what a teacher of the art in question might be teaching. A particular art may utilize a certain set of body mechanics and an autodictat learning from video may develop a different set of body mechanics that (while effective) don't match the principles of that system. Also, most people who are considering learning primarily through video don't have the dedication, talent, or stable of quality training partners necessary to have much success with that approach. Another consideration is that the feedback mechanisms I've described for developing application of technique aren't so helpful for systems which are largely built around solo forms - especially if those forms have only an indirect relationship to actual application.
Learning through visual emulation: Instructor demonstrates movements and the student imitates those movements. This is one of the primary learning methods in just about every art. For this, video has a potential advantage over traditional classroom instruction. A well shot video will allow you to see the techniques clearly from multiple angles and the student can replay the video over and over as often as he/she likes.
Learning via verbal explanation: The instructor explains the concepts, context, principles, and/or fine details behind the techniques being taught. No major advantage that I can see here for video or in-person instruction. I've seen instructors in both formats who are really good at explaining stuff and others who are terrible at it.
Learning via personal correction: This is the biggest potential advantage of in-person instruction. No video can point out the flaws in your technique that you aren't aware of. It should be noted however that many instructors are terrible at this. I've personally witnessed teachers who just aren't good at providing effective feedback to students and I've heard stories of various famous teachers who (by my criteria at least) didn't seem to be very good at it. Reasons could include temperament, poor communications skills, favoritism (only offering real feedback to preferred students), overly large class sizes, or other factors. Nevertheless, I've seen students advance and improve even under instructors who provide little in the way of effective correction and feedback.
Learning through tactile emulation: This is the other potential big advantage of in-person instruction. Actually feeling the technique of a skilled practitioner as he/she applies it to you can clarify things in a way beyond the capacity of visual or verbal instruction. No video can provide that. Unfortunately, there are plenty of schools out there where the instructor doesn't spar with students and only demonstrates techniques on select ukes. I've seen students improve in those schools as well, so as desirable as this form of learning is, it's apparently not completely indispensable.
Learning through solo repetition and personal exploration: This is the process of performing thousands of kicks or punches or forms or other movements on your own without constant correction from an instructor. This is a vital part of learning an art whether you are training under a live instructor or from video. Robotic repetition is not the goal. The student needs to constantly self-monitor to observe the quality of his/her balance, body control, movement, and how well the performance matches his/her understanding of the proper form. The better the practitioners body awareness and understanding of the desired ideal technique, the more he/she will get out of this process. The danger of doing this sort of practice based exclusively or primarily on video instruction is that without periodic correction, the movement being developed may deviate further and further from the desired end-goal. A secondary issue is that not everybody has the self-discipline to put in this kind of regular practice without the structure of a regular class and instructor to demand the work be put in.
Learning through repetition with a partner: This is the process of performing thousands of throws, locks, chokes, pins, blocks, parries, or other techniques or drills with a cooperative partner. This is another essential part of learning, whether from video or in-person. This can be hugely beneficial with the right training partners. A good partner - one who can feed realistic attacks, respond realistically to your technique, and give good verbal feedback ("it feels much tighter when you shift 2 inches this way") can be as helpful as many teachers are - more so sometimes. Not all training partners are this helpful, unfortunately. The best place to find this kind of quality training partner is in a good school with good in-person instruction. However it is sometimes possible to find a good training partner who is willing to work through video instruction with you outside an official dojo environment and make significant progress. In fact I would say that finding such partners is a necessary pre-requisite to getting any sort of real value out of exclusive video training.
Learning via application experience: This is the process of taking whatever you have learned from an instructor (in-person or video) and trying to apply it in sparring or real fighting or other real-world situations (such as a LEO or bouncer or corrections officer applying a restraint to a resisting subject), then learning from the experience. Having a coach who can offer you feedback during or after the event can be helpful, but is not by any means necessary. The most important feedback comes from the person who is opposing your technique.
Conclusions from the above: In person instruction has major advantages over video instruction - most importantly the potential for personal correction and feeling the technique of an experienced practitioner. However - a highly disciplined person with talent and good body awareness (and preferably prior training) who has consistent access to good training partners (who preferably have prior training) can use video instruction as a springboard, explore the material being shown through trial and error experimentation with training partners, then further test and refine what is learned through sparring, fighting, and/or other real world application experience, and eventually end up with usable skills. In essence, the practitioner is teaching himself through experience as much as he is learning from video. There are numerous martial arts which have been created or recreated this way - not so much via video (since that is a more recent invention), but by practitioners starting with a seed of information and doing the work to grow that seed into something more substantial. Consider most of HEMA - the modern pioneers didn't even have video to work from: they had to start with just books! Have modern masters of long sword technique recreated the techniques of Liechtenauer with perfect accuracy? We'll never know. However I do know they can kick your *** with a sword.
Caveats: The kind of exploration described above can lead to usable skills, but those skills may not be exactly the same as what a teacher of the art in question might be teaching. A particular art may utilize a certain set of body mechanics and an autodictat learning from video may develop a different set of body mechanics that (while effective) don't match the principles of that system. Also, most people who are considering learning primarily through video don't have the dedication, talent, or stable of quality training partners necessary to have much success with that approach. Another consideration is that the feedback mechanisms I've described for developing application of technique aren't so helpful for systems which are largely built around solo forms - especially if those forms have only an indirect relationship to actual application.
mograph
Master of Arts
Hope springs eternal!What a great way to conclude this thread!
What a great way to conclude this thread!
And yet I'm sure we will continue to beat the dead horse and squeeze another three or four pages out of it.
For you perhaps. Others with different aptitudes may very well be much more successful, as Tony points out in his great post above!
Last edited:
Hyoho
2nd Black Belt
Well it all seems rather moot when the OP themselves is posting what could be construed as instructional videos on YouTube. The original question seems to based more on justification than a question. For sure dummies dont hit you back.
WTF?
Flying Crane
Sr. Grandmaster
Only if you really stretch the concept of "instructional videos." KPM has posted videos to share some of his thoughts and perspectives on Wing Chun, but there's certainly no implication that you can learn WC from his videos. It's more like the way we share ideas in our discussion on the forum, except that he's added some visuals to make his points clearer.
Kenposcholar
Orange Belt
I wouldn't rely on video instruction for learning a physical activity that demands a partner. I do believe that you can use video instructions to help reinforce or to develop a physical activity that you practice physically with a partner later. Learning martial arts is like learning to be a good singer or become an athlete.
To become a good singer you need a second person to listen to you while you sing to provide a level of insight you would otherwise be incapable of knowing. Is it possible to sing without a second person or instructor there to give you tips? Absolutely. Can you compete or be proficient enough to be successful compared to others? Probably not.
The same rule applies to martial arts and/or self-defense that you want to use in real life. Is it possible to learn and do martial arts without a teacher? Sure. Can you become proficient enough to execute a self-defense technique in real life without a teacher to guide you? Possibly. It's all a matter of how much you care about being good at a martial art.
To become a good singer you need a second person to listen to you while you sing to provide a level of insight you would otherwise be incapable of knowing. Is it possible to sing without a second person or instructor there to give you tips? Absolutely. Can you compete or be proficient enough to be successful compared to others? Probably not.
The same rule applies to martial arts and/or self-defense that you want to use in real life. Is it possible to learn and do martial arts without a teacher? Sure. Can you become proficient enough to execute a self-defense technique in real life without a teacher to guide you? Possibly. It's all a matter of how much you care about being good at a martial art.
Flying Crane
Sr. Grandmaster
Ok, so sure, mimicry is not difficult. Jabbing out with a stick is pretty intuitive, and it's pretty easy to be hazardous to another human being when you've got a stick in your hand (or not), whether you've had training or not. Let us not forget that it really is not so difficult to hurt somebody. You do not need a superior method, nor highly developed skills to do so, if injury to another is your goal.
However, I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that, like the Chinese methods, there are some very specific biomechanics that are supposed to be happening in the context of Filipino martial arts. It is my observation that those kinds of details have a very high chance of failure to transmit thru a video medium.
Can I mimic what you are doing with that stick, well enough to be a danger to another person? Of course. Does that mean I am learning, or practicing Filipino martial arts? No. That is the shallow mimicry I referenced earlier.
Why wouldn't you be doing "Filipino Martial Arts?" You aren't a master, you are a bare bones beginner with a ludicrously small knowledge base, but sure you are practicing a "Filipino Martial Art." I don't think that video is complete instruction on the topic, nor was it meant to be, but it was an introduction to a technique and some examples of how to use it. The student needs to then go out and get some practical application using it through sparring. Could I expand that into an hour long bit on all the different setups a jab uses? What its different power generations methods can be? Sure, but not the intention here.
I don't think you could learn a fairly esoteric art like aikido through video, but you could most striking arts, particularly ones that can be sparring against another person for some real time feedback and learning about distance control, power generation, and timing.
Flying Crane
Sr. Grandmaster
Alright fair enough, I don't see it that way. A technique picked up this way is just a guy swinging a stick.
Maybe I see things differently, but it's not the techniques that make the method. It's the principles that give those techniques a turbo boost and take them from "ouch" to "dead" that are what the method is really all about. Maybe other methods don't have that, I dunno. But without the deeper bits, it's just a collection of tricks. Meh.
If you have a whole collection of tricks that you can beat someone's *** with, wouldn't that make a martial art or at least a fighting art?
