Learning Versus Understanding

[Kung Fu Wang]

I have to admit I'm curious and please don't take this as an attack, it's just something that I find odd. You always post lists of techniques to do in whatever thread you post on, in answer to just about everything, is there a particular reason for this? This thread is about 'learning v understanding' but you have posted techniques to use again. I realise it's probably to make a point but it seems your point is about strategy not 'learning v understanding'? It's probably me but I don't understand why the techniques all the time.

I try to stay away from "abstract" discussion. I like to use concrete example to map abstract discussion into concrete discussion.

My example was used to point out that even a set of kick, punch combo may exist in your form/Kata, depending on your opponent's respond, your punch may be different from the punch that you have learned from your form/Kata. That's an example of "strategy" can cover more ground than "technique" can.

When I learn

- English text, not only I want to learn the words used in that text. I also want to learn the grammar used in that text. By using subject, verb, object grammar, I can construct many sentences.

- MA form/Kata, not only I want to learn the techniques used in that form/Kata. I also want to learn the strategies used in that form/Kata. By using "kick low punch high" strategy, I can construct many combo techniques.

 

[Danny T]

Agree! It's more than just a block. The "upward block" is like raising the curtain with one hand, you then walk under it. It can be used as offense, raise your opponent's "head guard", you then punch his chest when you step in. Your "upward block" can be considered as "plow the way" when you enter.

Or, it may just be slammed against his mandible.

 

[Lameman]

I like what I hear, but one thing stands out. Instict is king. That never changes, but relying on instinct is like relying upon your muscle to hit hard. To be good at fighting you have to be able to think. To see and anylyze. To not only see the current opening but the next opening. Fighting is like chess, the best fighters see several moves ahead. I remember learning chess. I spent many hours learning end game. You understand the end game you understand what you need to do to set it up. Instict, merely focuses on the here and now. Strategy wins fights, instict merely blunders into it. While training instict is good (and nessecary), too much and it leads to ghost fighting. Where the body reacts, but there is nothing there. Learning is how, understanding is when.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I like what I hear, but one thing stands out. Instict is king. That never changes, but relying on instinct is like relying upon your muscle to hit hard. To be good at fighting you have to be able to think. To see and anylyze. To not only see the current opening but the next opening. Fighting is like chess, the best fighters see several moves ahead. I remember learning chess. I spent many hours learning end game. You understand the end game you understand what you need to do to set it up. Instict, merely focuses on the here and now. Strategy wins fights, instict merely blunders into it. While training instict is good (and nessecary), too much and it leads to ghost fighting. Where the body reacts, but there is nothing there. Learning is how, understanding is when.

Fighting is movement. Chaotic, impossible to predict, brutal, and dangerous. The goal in any self-defense situation should be to end the engagement as quickly as possible with as little risk to oneself as can be achieved. The time for planning and strategic thinking is over. Now it is time for trust in one's training, and decisive movement.

It is not instinct, but training. Instinct is what compels us to fight or flee. Training gives the body tools to act and react when the time for running away is gone. If one is playing chess in a fistfight, one is going to have trouble.

 

[Lameman]

Not if one plays very well. And by instict, I mean muscle memory. Moves firing from the nerves. Which is very important. Don't get me wrong. Too much thinking and you start doing mr. roboto. Slow and ineffective, you quickly lose. It takes a lot of training to get to the point where you can think effectivly in a fight. But if you can, you have an edge over those who can't. You have to find that sweet spot. Where you become reaction, with purpose.

 

[Lameman]

For the record, thinking, period, slows you down. Can't get away from that. Its the number one reason I have such a strong focus on movement discipline. (Not wasting movement) Because I have to make up for that lose in speed, with increased efficiency.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Fight should not last that long. Seriously.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I would like to think in the reverse order.

First you decide what finish move that you want to use (for example, a neck choke). you then try to find a path that can help you to reach there (such as a front kick, foot sweep, leading arm jam). It doesn't matter whether this combo sequence is in any form/Kata or not. The advantage of this approach is your MA skill doesn't have to be restricted by the form/Katas that you have trained. You will have much more freedom this way. There are many entering strategies that can help you to apply your "finish strategy" depending on your opponent's different responds.

entering strategy -> finish strategy

For me, I don't think what I want to finish with. I take what my opponent gives me. I don't try to force a path. This is probably what Bruce Lee was thinking when he says be like water. If I put you in a neck choke, it's because your motions created that path for me, and not because I created that path by planning it. the other instructor in my school thinks like you do. He tries to plan a path to a end result.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Are katas and forms synonymous?

For the most part yes. There are some slight differences but not enough to separate the benefits that they both give which are similar. Forms are associated with Kung Fu and are usually more strenuous than kata. Kata also usually has more pauses than in forms. With forms it's more of flow, almost a continuous movement. Beyond that I don't know how they differ.

Both serve as a "dictionary" or "reference book" of techniques that otherwise would be extremely difficult to remember outside of the kata / form.
Both help the student to remember techniques while practicing the techniques
Both help build some form of strength and cardio endurance.
Both help train the mind and focus.
Both help teach correct breathing and power generating
Both help teach muscle memory.
Both help teach speed and accuracy
Both help the student to better understand their body
Both help the teacher make corrections in a students technique, which would other wise be difficult to do in a free sparring or competitive fight situation.

All of this can be trained all at once by doing Kata /Forms. There's no need to create a separate exercise to address these areas. Application training helps to build understanding and conditioning helps forge the body into flexible steel so that it doesn't break when we do the techniques in the forms.

When I look at kata, I see kung fu. When I look at kung fu I see kata, which is why learning about the other fighting system sometimes shed light on my own fighting system.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I like what I hear, but one thing stands out. Instict is king. That never changes, but relying on instinct is like relying upon your muscle to hit hard. To be good at fighting you have to be able to think. To see and anylyze. To not only see the current opening but the next opening. Fighting is like chess, the best fighters see several moves ahead. I remember learning chess. I spent many hours learning end game. You understand the end game you understand what you need to do to set it up. Instict, merely focuses on the here and now. Strategy wins fights, instict merely blunders into it. While training instict is good (and nessecary), too much and it leads to ghost fighting. Where the body reacts, but there is nothing there. Learning is how, understanding is when.

Instinct will get you killed. In my school we train to take advantage of a person's instinct. We will target certain areas because we know the reaction will be an instinctive one. I'm not saying that it's all bad, because sometimes it's instinct is what keeps you alive in non-fighting situations. For us we don't analyze as much as we sense and feel. "The ability to see" would be considered a sensing characteristic. For me and the other instructor, it's like time slows down and a fraction of a second seems like 5 seconds worth of understanding. The benefit of this skill set is that we don't have to think or analyze. We "see." I put it this way. When we can get it to work, we can literally see that you are going to punch and we can counter before your arm even moves. It's not an easy thing to master. We get flickers of it like a light trying to come on.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

the other instructor in my school thinks like you do. He tries to plan a path to a end result.

If you let your girl to take you to Macy's, you may have to spend a lot of money. If you take your girl to Dollar Tree, it won't cost you too much money. If you are a grappler, you should try to force your boxing opponent to play your grappling game ASAP.

 

[Tez3]

If you let your girl to take you to Macy's, you may have to spend a lot of money. If you take your girl to Dollar Tree, it won't cost you too much money.

Sorry, that's a bad analogy. 'Your girl' no, she's her own person, she may well be paying or she might be going Dutch. Likewise the boxing/grappling comment, you don't want to be grappling on the ground when you are attacked for many reasons, use your grappling skills to get you bas PDQ if taken down and use what stand up grappling skills you have but try always never to be on the ground.

 

[Lameman]

And I've learned the hard way, that just because they box, doesn't mean they can't grapple. And, in a fight that only last 6 or less seconds you don't think you just act. But a fight starts, when you know that you are going to be in a fight. If I take the time to anylyze and stratagize then, then I can use that during the 3 second fight. To JowGaWolf, that does sound like what is happening. Though, I probably do anylyze more then you do. Anaylizing helps the most when you find yourself in a situation where you absolutly do not know what you are doing. And you have to improvize or create new techniques on the fly. Professionally trained martial artists, probably, don't run into those situtions as much as generic fighters. That is one of the major drawbacks of untested systems. The very reason I recomend proffesional training in something that has been tested and proven.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

you don't want to be grappling on the ground when you are attacked for many reasons, use your grappling skills to get you bas PDQ if taken down and use what stand up grappling skills you have but try always never to be on the ground.

Agree with you on this. I'll never go to the ground unless I was dragged down. I have always believed "mobility - hit and run" is more important than "ground skill".

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

just because they box, doesn't mean they can't grapple.

If you are a grappler and you lose to a

- grapple, that means your grappling skill is not good enough and you need to train harder.
- striker, that means your general MA skill is not good enough to switch a striking game into a grappling game.

In both situations, more training in different areas will be needed. How fast that you can switch a striking game into a grappling game depends on how fast you can obtain your "clinch" and control your opponent's punching arms.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

If you are a grappler and you lose to a

- grapple, that means your grappling skill is not good enough and you need to train harder.
- striker, that means your general MA skill is not good enough to switch a striking game into a grappling game.

In both situations, more training in different areas will be needed. How fast that you can switch a striking game into a grappling game depends on how fast you can obtain your "clinch" and control your opponent's punching arms.

Or you just got unlucky. I am primarily a striker. If I do not see someone coming, get distracted by another person, or just get unlucky and they get a really good punch in, that doesn't mean my striking skill is not good enough.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Or you just got unlucky. I am primarily a striker. If I do not see someone coming, get distracted by another person, or just get unlucky and they get a really good punch in, that doesn't mean my striking skill is not good enough.

In the field of striking, the word "lucky" may make sense. But in the field of grappling, the word "luck" does not make sense.

There is no way that a white belt

- Judo guy will be able to throw a black belt Judo guy no matter how lucky that white belt Judo guy is.
- BJJ guy will be able to tap out a black belt BJJ guy no matter how lucky that white belt BJJ guy is.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

In the field of striking, the word "lucky" may make sense. But in the field of grappling, the word "luck" does not make sense. There is no way that a white belt Judo guy will be able to throw a black belt Judo guy no matter how lucky that white belt Judo guy is.

For the most part yes, especially if you are looking at that much of a difference (white judo to black judo). If you're looking at two decent grapplers, this isn't the case as much. Especially if it is a chaotic environment, distractions, and the other guy using one at just the right time, can get him that hold he needs to sweep you/choke you/etc.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

For the most part yes, especially if you are looking at that much of a difference (white judo to black judo). If you're looking at two decent grapplers, this isn't the case as much. Especially if it is a chaotic environment, distractions, and the other guy using one at just the right time, can get him that hold he needs to sweep you/choke you/etc.

Agree that 2 persons on the same level, luck may play some important rule even in the grappling art. This is why the "strategy" is important. If you can lead your opponent into an area that you are more familiar with than he does, you will have advantage.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

One of the things that often trips up beginners in the martial arts is the difference between learning something and understanding it.

For illustration, let's take a simple upper body block. It's a fairly easy move to learn, and it's relatively common to many different martial arts styles, although the nuances may vary quite a bit. Imagining that a blow is coming toward's one's head, one raises their arm to get it in-between the incoming punch and their own head, and stops the punch. This is the basic block.

Now, one can see this in a book, or on a video, or be shown it by someone else, and they think they know how to perform the block. It's an easy misunderstanding to have.

How to Understand Basic Karate

Unfortunately, there is a world of difference between 'learning' to perform the block, and 'understanding' how to perform the block.

Some nuances that expand learning can be taught online as well. Tips such as crossing the center line with the rising block so that if one guesses wrong about which side the opponent is throwing the punch with, it will still be blocked. Or how to 'set' the block so that one does not get punched in the face with one's own fist as the block collapses under the opponent's power.

An in-person instructor will make additional adjustments that one typically doesn't see in a book or online, because they require adjustments that are based on the student's physical attributes. Things like the angle of the blocking arm, the height of the elbow relative to the student's body, how the feet connect the flow of incoming power to the floor, the bend in the knees, when to begin the block and what to do with the block once it is applied (such as follow up actions, like grasping and pulling, etc).

All of these things contribute to understanding, but they do not by themselves, constitute understanding.

The only way to gain understanding is to do the technique with a qualified instructor and a partner (who can be the instructor themselves) who force the student to either make the technique work, or get hit.

This has to be done over and over again, day by day, week by week. Adjustments will continue to be made, and there will slowly be a series of eye-opening 'ah hah!' moments involved. They might be small revelations, but they'll be there.

Little things like watching the opponent's midsection and not their eyes, to detect the beginning of the incoming punch. where the 'lock point' is for your individual block, where you can trust your block to handle the incoming blow and not even worry about it. The pacing that takes the place of 'only speed' so that the block is there at the right time, but not in a panic move. The sinking into the floor feeling that redirects the power of the incoming blow so that the arm doesn't have to be super-strong to absorb it. The 'spring tension' in the body that spreads out force.

All of these things, and more, contribute to the beginning of understanding a technique, rather than just learning it. They all take time, lots of time, and repetition, lots of repetition. Often one practices with a willing and trained partner who will at your request bring up the power and speed of the attack until it overmatches your ability, but forces you to improve. Incremental improvement is the goal.

So what is 'understanding' versus 'learning' then? Just lots of reps and tips until the technique gets locked in and works every time?

Actually, no. It's more than that. Being able to do a technique is one thing. Doing it well is something else. But true understanding means more than even that. It means you have begun to master things that go far beyond the technique itself.

In the case of our example, the upper body block, it means we begin to not just see, but begin to be able to demonstrate, how the block can be modified and used in other ways. Perhaps it is not simply a block, but can be a trap, a redirection, a strike. A combination of all of those things. Perhaps it can be applied even through the attack does not come in the form one expected. For example, a student is expecting a roundhouse punch, but instead a high kick is thrown, or a straight punch, or some other form of attack; the student who has some understanding of the technique is not trapped; they can use their technique anyway and it will work.

Eventually, an experienced and dedicated student will hopefully begin to think and move in terms of the abstractions that the technique represents, the parts it is made of, instead of just in terms of the bare mechanics of what the various body parts do.

There is no instruction book for this, and even though instructors who are well-qualified can talk about it and explain and demonstrate, this is something that either becomes a part of a student or it does not.

Nor does it really become part of the student's conscious thinking, like "Here comes the attack. I am going to do X and then Y and then Z, unless the opponent does A instead of B, etc etc." It becomes instinctive and part of the student's natural body movement. "Attack comes, I defend, attack failed," is about as far as it gets into one's conscious thinking.

Understanding begins when the technique is so natural and normal to the student that they can apply any part of the movement at any time for any situation and depend upon it to function as the student wanted it to. When techniques taken as a whole begin to blend together such that a 'block' technique immediately becomes a 'trap' technique to respond to the actual attack as needed, and without thinking about it. The arms move, the body repositions itself, the modified technique is applied and works.

It's the difference between learning to play a song by reading the sheet music and learning to play music by understanding how chord structure and notes work together to flow in a free form, on the fly, and still sound like music to the ears.

Understanding is not a destination; to the best of my knowledge, one never arrives at mastery. One simply continues to improve their understanding for as long as they live and continue to train diligently towards that goal. Personally, I am the furthest thing from a master - perhaps it is honest to say that I have begin to perceive some of what I may yet achieve in time, if I keep training hard. I can say that I have 'learned' to apply an upper body block. I am beginning to understand the technique in that I am starting to be able to use it when I need it for whatever comes my way as an attack. I am beginning to understand that attack, defense, it's all the same thing. Some people say a block is a strike and a strike is a block, but it's even more than that. Everything is everything. That's what it is. The question is whether or not a student can apply that, turn that concept into reality.

Keep training, and strive for understanding to complement learning!

There's even a world of difference even between "doing" and "understanding".

There are parts of my art I didn't understand for years, though I learned to do them fairly early. I could do the technique, and had no idea it wasn't quite the right way, until one day I finally understood the principle, and suddenly it was much more effective.

To my mind, "mastery" is simply short-hand for understanding the principles. It is a starting point for a deeper level of understanding.