T
twinkletoes
Guest
Someone recently raised the topic of efficiency. Is there such a thing as being too efficient?
We are efficient in our methodology because to be inefficient can mean being too slow to keep up with an opponent. That much seems clear. I think we all agree that our methods of combat should be efficient.
The comment was made that training need not be uber-efficient, and that some people try too hard to improve their efficiency. This is the point where I take issue.
In teaching, you find that your students are with you for a certain amount of time. Few of them will be your students for life. Most of them, after 2 or 4 or 6 or however many years, will decide that they have learned all they care to, and they will stop training. Our question as instructors is "What will they have when they stop?"
If you train them extraordinarily well, they will have a set of solid self-defense skills, even after a short period of time.
If you train them extraordinarily poorly, they will have NO self-defense skills of any kind. (I include awareness and conflict navigation here)
I would think that most of us fall between these two extremes somewhere: probably closer to the middle than we would like to admit.
Our experimental question is "what tangible, functional self-defense skills would my student have if he left after 1 year of training?"
If you teach Tai Chi, Tae Bo, Aikido, or some other styles, you might say "little to none" (I don't mean to bash Aikido in here, I am using it as an example of a style that takes a long time to develop).
If you teach boxing, wrestling, judo, PDR, MMA, or other high-stress reality-based systems, you might say "a decent amount."
So that leaves the rest of us in the middle again, which is about what is expected.
So let's get back to efficiency. Why strive to be so ultra-efficient?
Here's my answer: so that the students I lose after 1, 2, 5, or 10 years are as safe as I possible could have made them. They will have the most skills I can impart in that period of time. I work hard to help them develop as much skill as possible in whatever time frame they will give me. When they leave, I know that I could not have helped them more that I did.
Now, if you are teaching a class in which the primary goal is not self-defense, like a Tai Chi class, then I understand that this is not your focus. However, for anyone who every advertises their art is being good for self-defense, I'm talking to you!
I watched a beginner goju-ryu class every week when I was in college because it was right before my JJ class. Every class the students came in and they worked on a kata. The kata was stiff and awkward. The instructor went around fixing details, correcting posture, and so on. They did the form over and over, every class. That was about it. Towards the end of the semester, they started doing parts of the form against choreographed attackers, positioned so the form would look right. This was about the most I ever saw in terms of partner work.
So how much skill do you think these kids developed in their semester? I'm not knocking the style, as I know plenty of goju guys who don't do this. But this class seemed, in my opinion, to produce little to no effect on the students' abilities to defend themselves. Had they taken a course in boxing, wrestling, or even sprinting, they might be a little safer at the end of the semester.
Well, my goal is to be efficient. I want to see skill development in my students, and I want to see it now. I want proof that they can use what I teach them in live environments, against resistance, under stressful conditions. I want to know that I am helping them. If I begin their training in a roundabout way, like by teaching them an elaborate kata to "teach them form" or "weed out the quitters" or whatever else, then I cheat them. Worse still, the ones that do leave take nothing useful with them! I care about all of my students, and THAT is why I strive for efficiency.
~TT
We are efficient in our methodology because to be inefficient can mean being too slow to keep up with an opponent. That much seems clear. I think we all agree that our methods of combat should be efficient.
The comment was made that training need not be uber-efficient, and that some people try too hard to improve their efficiency. This is the point where I take issue.
In teaching, you find that your students are with you for a certain amount of time. Few of them will be your students for life. Most of them, after 2 or 4 or 6 or however many years, will decide that they have learned all they care to, and they will stop training. Our question as instructors is "What will they have when they stop?"
If you train them extraordinarily well, they will have a set of solid self-defense skills, even after a short period of time.
If you train them extraordinarily poorly, they will have NO self-defense skills of any kind. (I include awareness and conflict navigation here)
I would think that most of us fall between these two extremes somewhere: probably closer to the middle than we would like to admit.
Our experimental question is "what tangible, functional self-defense skills would my student have if he left after 1 year of training?"
If you teach Tai Chi, Tae Bo, Aikido, or some other styles, you might say "little to none" (I don't mean to bash Aikido in here, I am using it as an example of a style that takes a long time to develop).
If you teach boxing, wrestling, judo, PDR, MMA, or other high-stress reality-based systems, you might say "a decent amount."
So that leaves the rest of us in the middle again, which is about what is expected.
So let's get back to efficiency. Why strive to be so ultra-efficient?
Here's my answer: so that the students I lose after 1, 2, 5, or 10 years are as safe as I possible could have made them. They will have the most skills I can impart in that period of time. I work hard to help them develop as much skill as possible in whatever time frame they will give me. When they leave, I know that I could not have helped them more that I did.
Now, if you are teaching a class in which the primary goal is not self-defense, like a Tai Chi class, then I understand that this is not your focus. However, for anyone who every advertises their art is being good for self-defense, I'm talking to you!
I watched a beginner goju-ryu class every week when I was in college because it was right before my JJ class. Every class the students came in and they worked on a kata. The kata was stiff and awkward. The instructor went around fixing details, correcting posture, and so on. They did the form over and over, every class. That was about it. Towards the end of the semester, they started doing parts of the form against choreographed attackers, positioned so the form would look right. This was about the most I ever saw in terms of partner work.
So how much skill do you think these kids developed in their semester? I'm not knocking the style, as I know plenty of goju guys who don't do this. But this class seemed, in my opinion, to produce little to no effect on the students' abilities to defend themselves. Had they taken a course in boxing, wrestling, or even sprinting, they might be a little safer at the end of the semester.
Well, my goal is to be efficient. I want to see skill development in my students, and I want to see it now. I want proof that they can use what I teach them in live environments, against resistance, under stressful conditions. I want to know that I am helping them. If I begin their training in a roundabout way, like by teaching them an elaborate kata to "teach them form" or "weed out the quitters" or whatever else, then I cheat them. Worse still, the ones that do leave take nothing useful with them! I care about all of my students, and THAT is why I strive for efficiency.
~TT
Like it has been said before, we all do the MA for many different reasons. However, for those people that want to really learn to defend themselves, it is very important to keep in mind the things that were posted above. Granted, not every single one of us wants or is going to be the next UFC champ. Some of us want to do an art just for the sake of learning something new or for something to do after a long day at work. Those of us that want to learn true SD and be able to walk around with the confidence that we will be able to defned ourselves, need to closely look at the things that we are doing in our classes.
