Nicholas,
I broke your post up as it makes it easier for me to read and also respond.
No problem, questions are always good, comments are fine, and as long as you allow me to play Devil Devil Advocate then I have no problem.
I do not care. But that is history and politics. As pointed out by some here this is based upon the work of many people of long periods of time. It would be like asking as stated earlier why someone did not develop Differential Equations and non-euclidean geometry before addition. One depends upon the other.
Not a real valid question if the there was first, how does one get a zero.
Yes I playing the Devil here. I see your point, but it was not presented well.
You point is it had to start somewhere. Some say it started with Cain and Able. Others might say it started when the first parasite attacked and the host had to learn how to defend itself.
One again if you have a first and then an instructor to the first and then an instructor to the first this is like say N-1 regression back to zero. But when N is 1 you get zero so there is nothing to count. One could also say it is progression of the limit to infinity for future generations. They could be better than the best ever thought of being of today.
It is your story. I will accept it as I have no data or counter story that has any more validity.
Now comes the real point of your post so far. If the first was able to teach himself then why not others. Of course they can. But most inventors who do not understand science and math end up inventing things that do not work. So ti does become a trial and error situation.
I personally can watch people do an application of a technique or an entry to a technique I may not have seen before and then go do it. But that is me. And from my HUMBLE experience, most people are not me in the least. No insult to others, but may if not most have to see it and or hear it and or feel it before they can get it. So, having a partner that will let you work with him to see if it works is good. But if time is money the amount of time spent to try to learn something basic instead of going and learning it from an instructor makes me wonder why they even bothered. Add to the fact the most beginners do not like the basics and want to jump to the cool stuff. (* Note I will discuss more on basics later in the post *)
Well, not that no one, but it does not mean everyone. From my experience, there are too many who think they know it and walk in to a club to test themselves or try to test it on the street only to find out the real hard way that it does not work.
So now time for more Devil to the Devil. Let us assume that you go out and practice on your own. Then you get into a real knife fight and either die or so serious injured you might wish you were dead. And your defense was that this guy on the internet told me it was ok to do this on my own. So, now your family comes along reads your notes and then checks the internet and takes me to court because they are upset you were injured or killed. So, I loose everything because I did not tell you to get proper instruction or refused to reply to the topic at all.
Yes, I think on lots of layers for self defense at all times.
Whta is more ridiculous is that more people think they can learn to fight without ever being in a fight.
Everyone drives a car, so they think they can run a care company.
Everyone has a check book and credit card, yet for some reason less people think they can handle investment banking. But there are lots of people who think they can.
I find it more ridiculous that people think they should teach themselves. I have taught lots of stuff to me. I have done things instinctively from basics that ended up being applied elsewhere. But in the end I had an instructor or instructors who helped me along.
Note: Knowing a Techinique and knowing when or the timing of the technique are totally different.
I think Videos are fine for people who already have instruction in that art. I think they are fine for reference material to refresh your mind, or to give you a jump start after you understnad some basics, but the instructor will guide and dine tune and adjust as required.
You second point above is valid. Just by having an instructor it does nto mean you have it all and know how to apply it. But it does give you the idea of your own workings and home work as well as the instructions of your instructor. Life expereince is the only real test. But most people train to not test in the real life experience.
Well, this will seem confusing. I don't do advanced techniques. I only do basics. But, the basics I do, are considered advanced by even those with a black belt in the systems I teach. So, the answer is either all are advanced or there are no advanced.
I teach some basic knife defenses. When asked like I almost get, what I would do in "X" situation, it is not what I just taught. this upsets many confuses most, and frustrates a lot. But I go on to explain, that what I do and what they do would be different as my basics are way above their basics. What I consider normal and obvious most people cannot even see or comprehend. I do break down the timing aspect and the technique changes, and explain that what I taught them will get them more experience to move forward in their training and then from there they can move forward again. I then even let them try the application I did. They get cut. They wonder how I did. I show them again. It is an issue of knowing when and how, not just how.
This is a true statement. And those that do not revert to basics, will do nothing. But here is the caveat, your basics and mine will not be the same.
This is very true. But most who train my themselves will not spend the time on weight transfer in stances, but instead will strat wavign their arms around and never have their arms tied to their body and a solid frame work and then wonder why it does not work.
For, me it was just once. I guess you are stronger than I am.
I agree, if you keep getting hit you need to learn a counter. But if you have no clue because you are always out of position then this is where your training stops. Either from your own point or from stagnation or from death when it ultimately fails.
Ah but did you learn that maybe if you started your roundhouse kick and then changed it to a full body block he would kick your shin and he might no try that again, which would open up your round house kick to be an option. Instead you learned not to do something. Instead you should have learned how to move and counter or position and attack, or to bait and set up.
So your learnings for round house kicks stopped there, and possible got worse as you might not practice them as much any more.
(* I have broken up the next into fragments to address each idea or comment *)
While I have known a few street fighters who knew a couple of traps and strikes and could hit hard, they were efective yes. But once they were out classed they were very ineffective. So, effective for what?
Of course as stated above having an instructor and never actually testing your skill set is only marginally better. I do not advocate fights, but controller sparring, with someone to call it when it gets to rough so people can see and feel and learn.
It gets really old for me to listen to people who have never been in a fight and trained with an instructor to those who have just trained themselves, pontificate about the values and effectivness of a training method without any real expereince in it.
I know you might say how do I have experience with those who taught themselves? It is easy. They come talk to me and test themselves on me and find it does not work. Most go away and do not come back. Some come back once or twice, but most make the comment that he is too big or too strong or too tall but I KNOW IT WILL WORK. To this I say I have smaller guys in my class that have and do make it work, as they have trained and tested themselves in a controlled manner.
Your opinion.
My opinion.
We both have one.
Doing your homework is a very important part of learning. Practicing on your own is great. Practicing with a friend is even better. But this assumes a small amount of time a week or two from class to class with you working with others or even less time. This is good training.
I agree.
This is very true. Thinking for yourself is not mutually exclusive to haivng an instructor. I would hope that over time you think for yourself, but not right up front. Example of this is basics math. 1 + 1 = 2. We learn this and then move on. We are taught this and then learn move stuff. We even more on to multiplication and subtraction and even division, and then years later, we learn about story problems and then years after that we learn about proofs.
So, if we asked the kindergarten student why is 1 + 1 =2? they will not know. And even if you explain on of the proofs to them, only teh very exceptional could repeat it back and those that repeat it back mot likely would not be able to apply the idea another subject. Sometimes you just learn something so you have blocks to work with, and then later you can learn why those blocks fit together.
Understanding the attributes of the weapon you are using also means understanding the attribute of the technique you have and also the attributes of the opponent you have. Adjusting is good. Learning to adjust is good. Learning to adjust on the fly is better. But only working with yourself or your untrained partner, one will not get this.
I am not sure you came across humble and I know I sure did not.
But that is what we get when we play Devil's Advocate and Devil Devil's Advocate.
Peace
I broke your post up as it makes it easier for me to read and also respond.
No problem, questions are always good, comments are fine, and as long as you allow me to play Devil Devil Advocate then I have no problem.
I do not care. But that is history and politics. As pointed out by some here this is based upon the work of many people of long periods of time. It would be like asking as stated earlier why someone did not develop Differential Equations and non-euclidean geometry before addition. One depends upon the other.
Not a real valid question if the there was first, how does one get a zero.
Yes I playing the Devil here. I see your point, but it was not presented well.
You point is it had to start somewhere. Some say it started with Cain and Able. Others might say it started when the first parasite attacked and the host had to learn how to defend itself.
One again if you have a first and then an instructor to the first and then an instructor to the first this is like say N-1 regression back to zero. But when N is 1 you get zero so there is nothing to count. One could also say it is progression of the limit to infinity for future generations. They could be better than the best ever thought of being of today.
It is your story. I will accept it as I have no data or counter story that has any more validity.
Now comes the real point of your post so far. If the first was able to teach himself then why not others. Of course they can. But most inventors who do not understand science and math end up inventing things that do not work. So ti does become a trial and error situation.
I personally can watch people do an application of a technique or an entry to a technique I may not have seen before and then go do it. But that is me. And from my HUMBLE experience, most people are not me in the least. No insult to others, but may if not most have to see it and or hear it and or feel it before they can get it. So, having a partner that will let you work with him to see if it works is good. But if time is money the amount of time spent to try to learn something basic instead of going and learning it from an instructor makes me wonder why they even bothered. Add to the fact the most beginners do not like the basics and want to jump to the cool stuff. (* Note I will discuss more on basics later in the post *)
Well, not that no one, but it does not mean everyone. From my experience, there are too many who think they know it and walk in to a club to test themselves or try to test it on the street only to find out the real hard way that it does not work.
So now time for more Devil to the Devil. Let us assume that you go out and practice on your own. Then you get into a real knife fight and either die or so serious injured you might wish you were dead. And your defense was that this guy on the internet told me it was ok to do this on my own. So, now your family comes along reads your notes and then checks the internet and takes me to court because they are upset you were injured or killed. So, I loose everything because I did not tell you to get proper instruction or refused to reply to the topic at all.
Yes, I think on lots of layers for self defense at all times.
Whta is more ridiculous is that more people think they can learn to fight without ever being in a fight.
Everyone drives a car, so they think they can run a care company.
Everyone has a check book and credit card, yet for some reason less people think they can handle investment banking. But there are lots of people who think they can.
I find it more ridiculous that people think they should teach themselves. I have taught lots of stuff to me. I have done things instinctively from basics that ended up being applied elsewhere. But in the end I had an instructor or instructors who helped me along.
Note: Knowing a Techinique and knowing when or the timing of the technique are totally different.
I think Videos are fine for people who already have instruction in that art. I think they are fine for reference material to refresh your mind, or to give you a jump start after you understnad some basics, but the instructor will guide and dine tune and adjust as required.
You second point above is valid. Just by having an instructor it does nto mean you have it all and know how to apply it. But it does give you the idea of your own workings and home work as well as the instructions of your instructor. Life expereince is the only real test. But most people train to not test in the real life experience.
Well, this will seem confusing. I don't do advanced techniques. I only do basics. But, the basics I do, are considered advanced by even those with a black belt in the systems I teach. So, the answer is either all are advanced or there are no advanced.
I teach some basic knife defenses. When asked like I almost get, what I would do in "X" situation, it is not what I just taught. this upsets many confuses most, and frustrates a lot. But I go on to explain, that what I do and what they do would be different as my basics are way above their basics. What I consider normal and obvious most people cannot even see or comprehend. I do break down the timing aspect and the technique changes, and explain that what I taught them will get them more experience to move forward in their training and then from there they can move forward again. I then even let them try the application I did. They get cut. They wonder how I did. I show them again. It is an issue of knowing when and how, not just how.
This is a true statement. And those that do not revert to basics, will do nothing. But here is the caveat, your basics and mine will not be the same.
This is very true. But most who train my themselves will not spend the time on weight transfer in stances, but instead will strat wavign their arms around and never have their arms tied to their body and a solid frame work and then wonder why it does not work.
For, me it was just once. I guess you are stronger than I am.
I agree, if you keep getting hit you need to learn a counter. But if you have no clue because you are always out of position then this is where your training stops. Either from your own point or from stagnation or from death when it ultimately fails.
Ah but did you learn that maybe if you started your roundhouse kick and then changed it to a full body block he would kick your shin and he might no try that again, which would open up your round house kick to be an option. Instead you learned not to do something. Instead you should have learned how to move and counter or position and attack, or to bait and set up.
So your learnings for round house kicks stopped there, and possible got worse as you might not practice them as much any more.
(* I have broken up the next into fragments to address each idea or comment *)
You can also learn basics faster and easier.
Probably is true. This means it is not 100%. So what is the percentage for the average person? 30% of 50% or 70%? Is that value added for their time and or training?
While I have known a few street fighters who knew a couple of traps and strikes and could hit hard, they were efective yes. But once they were out classed they were very ineffective. So, effective for what?
Of course as stated above having an instructor and never actually testing your skill set is only marginally better. I do not advocate fights, but controller sparring, with someone to call it when it gets to rough so people can see and feel and learn.
It gets really old for me to listen to people who have never been in a fight and trained with an instructor to those who have just trained themselves, pontificate about the values and effectivness of a training method without any real expereince in it.
I know you might say how do I have experience with those who taught themselves? It is easy. They come talk to me and test themselves on me and find it does not work. Most go away and do not come back. Some come back once or twice, but most make the comment that he is too big or too strong or too tall but I KNOW IT WILL WORK. To this I say I have smaller guys in my class that have and do make it work, as they have trained and tested themselves in a controlled manner.
Your opinion.
My opinion.
We both have one.
Doing your homework is a very important part of learning. Practicing on your own is great. Practicing with a friend is even better. But this assumes a small amount of time a week or two from class to class with you working with others or even less time. This is good training.
I agree.
This is very true. Thinking for yourself is not mutually exclusive to haivng an instructor. I would hope that over time you think for yourself, but not right up front. Example of this is basics math. 1 + 1 = 2. We learn this and then move on. We are taught this and then learn move stuff. We even more on to multiplication and subtraction and even division, and then years later, we learn about story problems and then years after that we learn about proofs.
So, if we asked the kindergarten student why is 1 + 1 =2? they will not know. And even if you explain on of the proofs to them, only teh very exceptional could repeat it back and those that repeat it back mot likely would not be able to apply the idea another subject. Sometimes you just learn something so you have blocks to work with, and then later you can learn why those blocks fit together.
Understanding the attributes of the weapon you are using also means understanding the attribute of the technique you have and also the attributes of the opponent you have. Adjusting is good. Learning to adjust is good. Learning to adjust on the fly is better. But only working with yourself or your untrained partner, one will not get this.
I am not sure you came across humble and I know I sure did not.
But that is what we get when we play Devil's Advocate and Devil Devil's Advocate.
Peace
