And yes, I know the other" song and dance "....you know, all the other benefits that come from training. Just sucks that those that are there to actually learn something, have to get some toned down, watered down version, because those that belong in the knitting class, are catered to. Thank God there are still some "old school" schools left.
Combinations, punch techniques etc. are just training exercises to teach specific response skills, thats all.
Not designed as real complete responses, just to teach specific response skills.
Complete training consists of all aspects of fighting; learning techniques, developing muscle memory, learning to take and give attacks whether they be strikes, kicks, submissions or grappling, developing the internal and external skills and then putting it all together.
Alot of work, thats why it takes alot of time and "training" to develop.
Part of "old school" training is to learn what your taught and then seek more, either from your instructors or your own self development. To push yourself and then test your skills, whether that be in organized competition or the street.
When your taught something take what you want and then either accept it as is or expand on it.
The purpose of this experience is to develop yourself, styles and systems are only a means to and end not the end.
Agreed. I've said this to students many times...that the techs. are designed to give a base to work from, but once you understand the strikes, kicks, blocks, movement, etc., then you should be thinking on your own, and not so bound by the set techs. I had, in an earlier post in this thread, posted a link to another thread, which was discussing the other attacks that the combos/DMs, can be used against. It generated some good discussion.
I was simply curious as to why, if the original attack was an overhead punch, and the tech. worked better for that attack, why change it to a straight right? As I said, when I was training at a Villari school, all of the combos were taught off of a straight right. We never worked #1 off of anything else, yet if you look at that other thread, you'll see a variety of things that #1 could be used against. With some slight modifications I'm sure we can think of a number of things the combos can be used against.
If your unhappy with your teachers don't blame the style or the teachers only yourself. There is no absolute answer from anyone but you.
Never said I was unhappy. While I no longer train SKK, I give credit where its due, and credit that school for getting me started in the arts. I've had the chance to move on to the Parker system, and currently Tracy. I've also had the chance to meet, train and become friends with many wonderful people. So being unhappy is far from true...I'm very happy with my current teacher and training.
As an instructor I know its difficult to run a group class that works for all students. Group classes have to be structured to everyone in the class so some students unfortunately get less of a training experience then others due to their skill level, unfortunate but reality, you can't teach too far on either side of the spectrum but try and run a complete class to benefit the group.
True. Of course, IMO, if you're billing your school as a place that teaches effective SD, then I feel that is what should be taught. Not some watered down, McDojo material. If that is what someone wants, I'm sure the inst. could easily point them to another school.
Best learning experience is from private lessons but not all dojo's offer them.
Couldn't agree more!!! I take 1 a week, in addition to group classes. I have the chance to take my training to another level, by working on things that are not normally covered as part of the material.
The original attacks and response techniques in SKK were developed by men that used them in the street, we can either accept their teachings which came from experience or prove they were wrong. Not in the dojo or the ring but in the street where these systems were developed.
I know my training, as simplistic as the early training was, works for me.
Not sure who you are, or who you've trained with, but it seems to me, just going on your last few posts in this thread, that you've been around for quite some time.
So, that being said, let me ask you this...If the original teachings, as you said, proved effective for those men, we could assume that they'd still be effective in todays world. If that is the case, and there were set techs for set attacks, why change it so drastically? I mean, its one thing if something is being changed for the better...that I can see. But if something is changed, just for the sake of changing...no, that I can't see.
