Learning to take strikes

[drop bear]

Completely different:

1. They're not wailing on each other. Those kicks look like they're at 20% power, the punches at 30%.
2. They're training proper technique to absorb the blows, instead of just wailing on each other
3. They're both adults, and neither feels coerced into that situation.
4. It's not 2-on-1.
5. Neither of them is backed against the wall in what would be a TKO in any legit competition.

There's also a risk of concussion in the video in the OP that's not present in this drill.

You're playing devil's advocate, and I mean that literally. You're trying to help justify child abuse. Just stop.

If you think what's in the OP is justified, stop training entirely and get yourself some therapy. If you don't think it was justified, then stop trying to justify child abuse.

I never justified OPs video. I just tried to put it in terms that were not your standard wailing and caterwalling.

 

[drop bear]

You didn't read Gweilo's post did you?

I just assumed he wasn't telling the truth.

 

[Tez3]

I just assumed he wasn't telling the truth.

Obviously if you look at the video it's in your neck of the woods not ours, plus there's no way of knowing how old that is.

Saying someone is a liar is an interesting way to argue your point.

I never justified OPs video. I just tried to put it in terms that were not your standard wailing and caterwalling.

It's called trolling, not 'putting it a different way'.

 

[pdg]

The point you made about rugby, the training sessions for juniors is very different, when rugby is taught at the beginning phase, it is modified to touch rugby, where a tackle, and impact are reduced to a touch or tap, this has been so across the world since the early 70's. Tackling and impact are taught gradually, and participants are introduced to tackling from the age of 14. The full contact is not in training until the participent is 16. Your logic is flawed.

I started secondary school in 1988, when I was 11.

When we played rugby, either in PE lessons or in interschool competition, a touch didn't count as a tackle. It was a miss.

Touch rugby was something that the girls were told to do - which they routinely ignored and generally played rougher than the boys. It was also used as said, in the beginning, but that beginning was usually a couple of lessons just before the start of the season to brush up on the rules.

If you didn't want to tackle, that was fine - you either went on the track to run or jogged about pretending you couldn't catch very well. And you never applied for the school team.

 

[Gweilo]

I just assumed he wasn't telling the truth.

Whilst there was sttempt to tackle, most of your video was pushes and shoulder barges, not full on smash em, your video showed 1 boy a lot larger than the other, obviously stronger, and these boys where in kits, so part of a regulated system.
Tell me, how much rugby training do you have ?, whilst my experience is limited to my school days, school/junior matches are allowed limited amount of contact, as I stated in my earlier post, juniors are introduced to tackling over a period of time, it is a contact sport, so there is going to be some form of contact as students progress albeit limited, and not straight into head contact. It suprises me how often some people are ready to ridicule anyone who quotes or uses a youtube video as reckless, but is willing to use youtube videos to argue there point

 

[Gweilo]

I started secondary school in 1988, when I was 11.

When we played rugby, either in PE lessons or in interschool competition, a touch didn't count as a tackle. It was a miss.

Touch rugby was something that the girls were told to do - which they routinely ignored and generally played rougher than the boys. It was also used as said, in the beginning, but that beginning was usually a couple of lessons just before the start of the season to brush up on the rules.

If you didn't want to tackle, that was fine - you either went on the track to run or jogged about pretending you couldn't catch very well. And you never applied for the school team.

So your point is ??
That touch rugby was for girls, but you played touch rugby for a couple of lessons at the beginning of each season to brush up on the rules, so your female.
Are you saying you didnt play touch rugby, but you did for a few lessons every year?

 

[pdg]

So your point is ??
That touch rugby was for girls, but you played touch rugby for a couple of lessons at the beginning of each season to brush up on the rules, so your female.
Are you saying you didnt play touch rugby, but you did for a few lessons every year?

I'm saying that tackling and full contact was introduced and played from the age of 11, not 14+ or 16+.

Touch wasn't a generally used thing, except for the times where things like rules and positions were being taught. It wasn't something you were restricted to until you reached a certain age, it was a tool used in certain circumstances.

You said:

about rugby, the training sessions for juniors is very different, when rugby is taught at the beginning phase, it is modified to touch rugby, where a tackle, and impact are reduced to a touch or tap, this has been so across the world since the early 70's. Tackling and impact are taught gradually, and participants are introduced to tackling from the age of 14. The full contact is not in training until the participent is 16. Your logic is flawed.

Which is not at all what I experienced.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I think that 1988 is more recent than the early 70s.

 

[pdg]

Back on track though - what is the location of the training in the OP?

 

[Tez3]

Whilst there was sttempt to tackle, most of your video was pushes and shoulder barges, not full on smash em, your video showed 1 boy a lot larger than the other, obviously stronger, and these boys where in kits, so part of a regulated system.
Tell me, how much rugby training do you have ?, whilst my experience is limited to my school days, school/junior matches are allowed limited amount of contact, as I stated in my earlier post, juniors are introduced to tackling over a period of time, it is a contact sport, so there is going to be some form of contact as students progress albeit limited, and not straight into head contact. It suprises me how often some people are ready to ridicule anyone who quotes or uses a youtube video as reckless, but is willing to use youtube videos to argue there point

DB has also missed or ignored the point that we were talking about head strikes not tackles but as usual he's brought in something else to prove a non existent point.

 

[drop bear]

Whilst there was sttempt to tackle, most of your video was pushes and shoulder barges, not full on smash em, your video showed 1 boy a lot larger than the other, obviously stronger, and these boys where in kits, so part of a regulated system.
Tell me, how much rugby training do you have ?, whilst my experience is limited to my school days, school/junior matches are allowed limited amount of contact, as I stated in my earlier post, juniors are introduced to tackling over a period of time, it is a contact sport, so there is going to be some form of contact as students progress albeit limited, and not straight into head contact. It suprises me how often some people are ready to ridicule anyone who quotes or uses a youtube video as reckless, but is willing to use youtube videos to argue there point

About 5 years playing rugby union.

Played touch rugby as well. But it was in addition to normal rugby. This idea that kids did some no contact rugby instead. Never happened.

Plenty of head contact for children.

 

[Gweilo]

About 5 years playing rugby union.

Played touch rugby as well. But it was in addition to normal rugby. This idea that kids did some no contact rugby instead. Never happened.

Plenty of head contact for children.

Yeah I can tell by your posts

 

[drop bear]

Yeah I can tell by your posts

So is this touch rugby for children a real thing?

 

[Gweilo]

When I started secondry school in 1981, yes it was a real thing, one of my pe teachers was a head coach for a local rugby team, and touch rugby was the introduction to the game, tackling was introduced quite quickly, as was pushing, shoulder barges, and scrums, but it was a gradual introduction.

 

[Gweilo]

I dont know his first name, we had to call him mr Henstritch, he left our school, and went as a full time coach, to a team called London Irish.

 

[Gweilo]

Now let me ask you a question, what are your ma acheivements, are you an insructor, and what do you train or instruct now.

 

[drop bear]

And so head contact for children is generally bad. But does kind of happen.

Contact sports like rugby and football accept it as part of the nature of the game. Sparring generally includes head contact. Even grappling can lead to concussions.

There is a line between exposing a child to risk as development and abusing that child.

Combat sports raise the bar a bit because there is a lot of head contact and it is intentional.

And unfortunately to manage head contact in a combat sport you need to experience head contact.

The question is managing development with risk. Is a drill going to make you better vs is a drill going to hurt you.

So I raised body conditioning and built up gradually you can wail on a body with minimal risk. Where not built up all you create is risk.

Head striking really should be avoided as much as you can as to achieve a result. Because the long term effects. So less contact, less time and fighting styles that concentrate on evasion rather than meat grinding are better.

I don't like the drill of throwing people up against a wall and banging on their cover. But that also would be less head trauma than say a hard round of sparring. Where they can get caught flat footed.

I also don't like drill spazzes like Hatsumi who take compliant strikes and then use that as an excuse to wail on people.

It is in reality a very tricky subject if you are trying to develop a person who can fight. And definitely a less is more approach is the best approach to head contact.

 

[drop bear]

Now let me ask you a question, what are your ma acheivements, are you an insructor, and what do you train or instruct now.

No I just train. The people who instruct have significantly better depth to their martial arts being recognized fighters.

Which is why I train with them.

 

[Gweilo]

As per earlier posts, you are ignoring the facts of the op, 2 trained adults pounding an untrained minor, when the minor has little or no skill, you can twist the facts any way you wish, the video I shared is abuse, and if you agree with that, imho, your training and trainer are fundamentally flawed, there is no excuse for so called adults to pound a child to the head,neven if you or your trainer are a world champion.
I know sometimes you like to argue, thats fine, but have a valid point, that does not involve exploitation, you do have valid points, sometimes, but sonetimes you sound like a complete bell end, so I am not suprised you are not an instructor, as I have said before, knowledge is king, a little knowledge is dangerous.
Now I could be childish and put you on ignore, but I beleive eveyone has a point of veiw, wether it fits with my beleifs or not, you are entitled to them, but jeez you need to change your diet.

 

[Tez3]

As per earlier posts, you are ignoring the facts of the op, 2 trained adults pounding an untrained minor, when the minor has little or no skill, you can twist the facts any way you wish, the video I shared is abuse, and if you agree with that, imho, your training and trainer are fundamentally flawed, there is no excuse for so called adults to pound a child to the head,neven if you or your trainer are a world champion.
I know sometimes you like to argue, thats fine, but have a valid point, that does not involve exploitation, you do have valid points, sometimes, but sonetimes you sound like a complete bell end, so I am not suprised you are not an instructor, as I have said before, knowledge is king, a little knowledge is dangerous.
Now I could be childish and put you on ignore, but I beleive eveyone has a point of veiw, wether it fits with my beleifs or not, you are entitled to them, but jeez you need to change your diet.

To be honest, most times he's only there to stop his skeleton falling over.

 

[Headhunter]

I started secondary school in 1988, when I was 11.

When we played rugby, either in PE lessons or in interschool competition, a touch didn't count as a tackle. It was a miss.

Touch rugby was something that the girls were told to do - which they routinely ignored and generally played rougher than the boys. It was also used as said, in the beginning, but that beginning was usually a couple of lessons just before the start of the season to brush up on the rules.

If you didn't want to tackle, that was fine - you either went on the track to run or jogged about pretending you couldn't catch very well. And you never applied for the school team.

P.e teachers aren't necessarily rugby coaches....when I was at school the p.e teachers were 3 male football players, a female hockey player and a female netball player. Not a single one of the p.e staff had ever played or coached rugby.

What I'm saying is just because they're a p.e teacher it doesn't mean they know how to teach every sport. Our rugby sessions were basically you are on this team here's a ball off you all go. Of course that's completely wrong and damm lucky no one got seriously hurt