Lights out

[rmcrobertson]

Sigh.

1) Invulnerability. Beyond the fact that these claims about varying training tell any half-decent brown/black belt what they know already, there's the way that these ideas get piled higher and higher, with more and more obscure training methodologies added to more. What's the logical outcome? If enough is added, then all eventualities become completely--not even manageable, but masterable. Look, too, at the stle in which such claims are couched: it never seems to be just, hey, we do this cool thing...but always, we train in a way nobody else ever thought of, we are prepared and you ain't. There are rare exceptions--Ender and Tess, for example, who write that such training, "breaks up the monotony," or, "is fun."

2) Practicality. My point was that IF we're going to be realistic about threats, let's get realistic; not only are there no ninjas in the parking lot (thanx for a great line, Mr. Chapel), but a) threats that aren't ordinarily considered to be part of martial arts training are a lot more common--if I were gonna fool around, I'd have students take defensive driving classes, courses in diet and anger management, etc...and b) any rational martial artist learns to assess threat...in kenpo, it's part of, "acceptance," and "environmental awareness...," considerations that I guess just aren't very sexy.

3) And as for the kata not helping with fighting in the dark...why would they be LESS helpful than stooging around with the studio lights out? For one thing, I seriously doubt that anybody trains in a studio in which they CAN get things really dark...no windows?

4) It's funny. Why are topics like these more interesting than learning how to kick properly, how to block, decent manners, etc.? Why's it sexier to discuss knives, fighting, etc.?

5) And sorry. Differences of opinion and approach notwithstanding, it is NOT all good.

Anyway, thanks for reading today's rant.

 

[MJS]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Sigh.

1) Invulnerability. Beyond the fact that these claims about varying training tell any half-decent brown/black belt what they know already, there's the way that these ideas get piled higher and higher, with more and more obscure training methodologies added to more. What's the logical outcome? If enough is added, then all eventualities become completely--not even manageable, but masterable. Look, too, at the stle in which such claims are couched: it never seems to be just, hey, we do this cool thing...but always, we train in a way nobody else ever thought of, we are prepared and you ain't. There are rare exceptions--Ender and Tess, for example, who write that such training, "breaks up the monotony," or, "is fun."

notice in my first post, I mention that it breaks up the regular routine of doing things.

2) Practicality. My point was that IF we're going to be realistic about threats, let's get realistic; not only are there no ninjas in the parking lot (thanx for a great line, Mr. Chapel), but a) threats that aren't ordinarily considered to be part of martial arts training are a lot more common--if I were gonna fool around, I'd have students take defensive driving classes, courses in diet and anger management, etc...and b) any rational martial artist learns to assess threat...in kenpo, it's part of, "acceptance," and "environmental awareness...," considerations that I guess just aren't very sexy.

This has nothing to do with Ninjas. It has to do with a very real situation...if you are walking outside at night. Do you never go out at night Rob? I dont think it has anything to do with fooling around. Oh yes, God forbid we do something that isnt traditional, right.

3) And as for the kata not helping with fighting in the dark...why would they be LESS helpful than stooging around with the studio lights out? For one thing, I seriously doubt that anybody trains in a studio in which they CAN get things really dark...no windows?

Well, obviously you have to wait until its dark outside right?? Why would they be less helpful?? Well, a fight or SD situation is not going to be preset like a kata.

4) It's funny. Why are topics like these more interesting than learning how to kick properly, how to block, decent manners, etc.? Why's it sexier to discuss knives, fighting, etc.?

Yup, you're right. There is certainly alot to learn in the arts. Nobody ever said that you had to focus solely on this type of training. Doing it every now and then is a great way to take a break from constantly going over kicks, punches, kata.

5) And sorry. Differences of opinion and approach notwithstanding, it is NOT all good.

Yup, another difference of opinion. I dont see anybody forcing you to do this Rob. If you choose not to then fine, but please try to refrain from looking down on every suggestion that someone makes. Just because you are a negative person, does not mean we all have to be. Nothing wrong with an open mind!

Mike

 

[theletch1]

Wow, little did I know that sharing an enjoyable training experience would turn into such a debate. I could train for the next 50 years in every conceivable scenario and not become invincible. That's not even a concept that I espouse in my training. The possibility that I will be attacked in a low light situation is high. I work nights and must be in darkened parking lots and warehouses to perform my job. Do I think training in the dark makes me unbeatable in this situation? Certainly not. We've trained from a chair and done a great deal of suwari waza (techs from a kneeling position.) I have no dillusions about being invincible after these drills either. It's like others here have said. It breaks up the monotony and gives you the opportunity to try out techs in different situations so that on the off chance that you need those techs in those situations you have at least been exposed to it and not be completely out of your depth.

MA to me is not about invincibility. It's simply about improvement and trying my best to even the odds as much as possible.

 

[rmcrobertson]

While I basically agree with theLetch's viewpoint, Mike, I see that that "it's all good," viewpoint has gone right out the window where disagreements with the way you see training are concerned.

Just to be clear, I think you raise valid points. I also think you don't pay attention to other folks' points when they vary much from yours...and you've a habit of personal attacks in the place of arguing about ideas.

I think I've probably made myself clear enough to anyone who wants to read what I wrote, but here're the fundamental issues as I see them:

a) all this stuff about environmental awareness, etc., is quite true and really very traditional;
b) basics--and those "worthless," forms--are there in part to establish a ground on which all sorts of things can be built;
c) boredom in martial arts training is one of the "defense mechanisms of the ego," we all struggle with;
d) the dream of technology without responsibility or knowledge is endemic to our culture.

That's it for me on this thread.

 

[MJS]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson

While I basically agree with theLetch's viewpoint, Mike, I see that that "it's all good," viewpoint has gone right out the window where disagreements with the way you see training are concerned.

IMO, you are the only one that seems to be disagreeing with what is being said here. This forum is to discuss ideas and give feedback. I never said that the way I train is "The Ultimate Way" of doing anything.

Just to be clear, I think you raise valid points. I also think you don't pay attention to other folks' points when they vary much from yours...and you've a habit of personal attacks in the place of arguing about ideas.

Thats funny....it seems that everybody else that made a post on this so far, seems to think that training in the dark is a good idea. I do pay attn. to what others say. I'm just trying to keep my training moving ahead, not going backwards. This is 2003, not 1700. While there has always been crime, you cant tell me that things are the same as they were 300 yrs ago.

I think I've probably made myself clear enough to anyone who wants to read what I wrote, but here're the fundamental issues as I see them:

a) all this stuff about environmental awareness, etc., is quite true and really very traditional;
b) basics--and those "worthless," forms--are there in part to establish a ground on which all sorts of things can be built;
c) boredom in martial arts training is one of the "defense mechanisms of the ego," we all struggle with;
d) the dream of technology without responsibility or knowledge is endemic to our culture.

That's it for me on this thread.

Again, I dont think that anybody has said that this is something that we all have to do. Let me ask you 2 questions.

1- With all of the tech. that are in the Parker system, why are there so many? Are we, at some point in our training, going to be attacked in every way that the defenses present? Of course not, but we still train all those tech. We are preparing ourselves in the event that we find ourselves in that situation. So training in the dark is no different.

2- Seeing that you think that all of these ideas are useless, what do you think that training should be like?

Mike

 

[rmcrobertson]

Sorry, but I see no point in responding. Anything further would just turn into another of those, "gee this stuff's already in kenpo," vs. "no it's not," arguments that we've had before.

I guess I'll just have to accept being painted as a hidebound traditionalist whose only interests are the dead mechanical repetition of the unconsidered past.

 

[MJS]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Sorry, but I see no point in responding. Anything further would just turn into another of those, "gee this stuff's already in kenpo," vs. "no it's not," arguments that we've had before.

I guess I'll just have to accept being painted as a hidebound traditionalist whose only interests are the dead mechanical repetition of the unconsidered past.

Ok!

Mike

 

[MJS]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Sorry, but I see no point in responding. Anything further would just turn into another of those, "gee this stuff's already in kenpo," vs. "no it's not," arguments that we've had before.

I guess I'll just have to accept being painted as a hidebound traditionalist whose only interests are the dead mechanical repetition of the unconsidered past.

I dont think that any of us here are trying to compare 1 art vs another art. We are simply talking about the question that was originally posted--Do any of us train in the dark? Anytime something different is added, IMO, it is done so there will be a little more varity in the classes. Granted, I really dont think that there is a way to 100% prepare ourselves for every single situation we will encounter, but its still fun to play around with different senarios.

I'm still interested in hearing how you think that training should be?? I probably won't get an answer, but I still had to ask 1 more time.

Mike

 

[rmcrobertson]

Sorry, but if you want to discuss it, you might want to consider why I'd want to discuss with someone who writes, "I'm just trying to keep my training moving ahead, not going backwards. This is 2003, not 1700. While there has always been crime, you cant tell me that things are the same as they were 300 yrs ago."

I guess I'm just stuck in 1700...or maybe 1989...

The problem, Mike, is that I don't agree with your fundamental premises and description of reality, I want different things out of martial arts, and my remarks upon this keep getting described as out-of-date, frozen in time, and unaware...

By the way, folks in 1700 knew a thing or two about hand-to-hand...

 

[MJS]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson

Sorry, but if you want to discuss it, you might want to consider why I'd want to discuss with someone who writes, "I'm just trying to keep my training moving ahead, not going backwards. This is 2003, not 1700. While there has always been crime, you cant tell me that things are the same as they were 300 yrs ago."

Rob- In regards to the above comment that I made. Every single day of the year, things change. People all over the world are working on ways to improve things. From how to make a car safer in a crash to finding a cure to a disease. The same thing goes for the MA's. If someone has an idea on how to make something better or comes up with a new drill to improve your skills, I feel that it is worth looking at. I have said before that we all train for different reasons. Obviously, yours are much different than mine are. I study the arts to learn to defend myself, and because it is something that I have been doing for a while now. I dont think that this has anything to do with becoming the next NHB champ, but instead, to improve my skills. I may never have to fight someone in the dark, but there might come a day when I will. There are also people who work at night, and this is something that would greatly benefit them.

I guess I'm just stuck in 1700...or maybe 1989...

Again, it all goes back to what we want from the arts.

The problem, Mike, is that I don't agree with your fundamental premises and description of reality, I want different things out of martial arts, and my remarks upon this keep getting described as out-of-date, frozen in time, and unaware...

Thats fine that you want something different. But, dont look down upon someone elses ideas just because you dont approve. Again, I ask the question for the 3rd time, and am still waiting for an answer. What do you want out of your training, and what do you think training should be like?

By the way, folks in 1700 knew a thing or two about hand-to-hand...

I'm sure that they did. I'm also sure though, that things have changed.

Mike

 

[rmcrobertson]

Generally speaking, I agree with your comments about what training should be. That's easy to do. They're truisms.

Details? Sorry, no point.

 

[MJS]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Generally speaking, I agree with your comments about what training should be. That's easy to do. They're truisms.

Details? Sorry, no point.

Ok!!

Mike