Punching skill testing

[JR 137]

I think of it like cooking. When a person wants to bake a cake, they don't say "test the eggs", "Test the sugar" What a cake really tells a person, is how well they can put a variety of ingredients together to create something better than the individual parts.

This is how I think skill set should be tested. How well can you put the individual skills together and make them bigger than what they are alone.

It’s isolating different aspects of sparring/fighting. There’s nothing wrong with isolating different aspects.

Would it be wrong for a sprinter to repeatedly practice his start?

Would it be wrong for a quarterback to repeatedly practice his drop back steps and plant to throw?

Would it be wrong for a tennis player to practice his serve?

Wrestler to practice takedowns?

Soccer player to practice direct kicks from a set spot?

Nothing is wrong with any of that. And I’ve seen high level athletes of each sport do just that. If a MA teacher feels his students need work on an aspect, he should isolate that aspect a bit to get it up to the level of everything else. We do rounds of hands only, kicks only, one offense and one defense only, one person isn’t allowed to take a single step backwards; stuff like that.

Sometimes, I think the less you restrict sparring, the more people start doing the same thing over and over. People get too comfortable. Setting restrictions can force people out of their comfort zone.

 

[JowGaWolf]

It’s isolating different aspects of sparring/fighting. There’s nothing wrong with isolating different aspects.

Would it be wrong for a sprinter to repeatedly practice his start?

Would it be wrong for a quarterback to repeatedly practice his drop back steps and plant to throw?

Would it be wrong for a tennis player to practice his serve?

Wrestler to practice takedowns?

Soccer player to practice direct kicks from a set spot?

Nothing is wrong with any of that. And I’ve seen high level athletes of each sport do just that. If a MA teacher feels his students need work on an aspect, he should isolate that aspect a bit to get it up to the level of everything else. We do rounds of hands only, kicks only, one offense and one defense only, one person isn’t allowed to take a single step backwards; stuff like that.

Sometimes, I think the less you restrict sparring, the more people start doing the same thing over and over. People get too comfortable. Setting restrictions can force people out of their comfort zone.

By the way I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just writing how I saw the question based on my understanding of Skill testing vs Skill Training

Those are all Drills, which are not done in the context of competition. for example
Punch drills, kick drills, knee drills etc. In that context there is no Winner.
What you just posted is not the same as what Kung Fu Wang is speaking about. In what you just posted, there is no Winner. In what you posted their is no "Skill Test" but only "Skill Training"

Isolating different aspects of sparring / fighting = Skill training
Deciding a winner in a competition = Skill Testing.

It's just my opinion that if a person is going to test their skills of "sparring/ fighting" then more than one element should be included. In other words. If it's a punching skills test then don't just punch the head. Allow punching the same things that one would punch in a fight (within safety standards).

For me punching isn't just hitting. For me punching is:

• The ability to see what is open
• The ability to open defenses
• The ability to counter
• The ability to hit with controlled force (for training if you can land solid punch at a slower speed then you'll have no problem landing a powerful shot to that same location at a faster speed. If your opponent cannot block your slow punch then there is no reason to think he/she can block the faster more powerful version."
• The ability to create strategy
• The ability to acknowledge and to know your own weak points of your defense as you try to punch someone else.

All of this together is punching skill to me (in the context of martial arts application).

The only reason I see it this way is because I've seen people really good at punching but suck at putting it all together. Now which is the skill set you want to test? Are you trying to see if they punch with good for or are you trying to see how well they put punching together? According to Wang, He was collecting data which means, that he's really not testing but data collecting. Which would have been helpful to know right from the beginning.

 

[JR 137]

By the way I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just writing how I saw the question based on my understanding of Skill testing vs Skill Training

Those are all Drills, which are not done in the context of competition. for example
Punch drills, kick drills, knee drills etc. In that context there is no Winner.
What you just posted is not the same as what Kung Fu Wang is speaking about. In what you just posted, there is no Winner. In what you posted their is no "Skill Test" but only "Skill Training"

Isolating different aspects of sparring / fighting = Skill training
Deciding a winner in a competition = Skill Testing.

It's just my opinion that if a person is going to test their skills of "sparring/ fighting" then more than one element should be included. In other words. If it's a punching skills test then don't just punch the head. Allow punching the same things that one would punch in a fight (within safety standards).

For me punching isn't just hitting. For me punching is:

• The ability to see what is open
• The ability to open defenses
• The ability to counter
• The ability to hit with controlled force (for training if you can land solid punch at a slower speed then you'll have no problem landing a powerful shot to that same location at a faster speed. If your opponent cannot block your slow punch then there is no reason to think he/she can block the faster more powerful version."
• The ability to create strategy
• The ability to acknowledge and to know your own weak points of your defense as you try to punch someone else.

All of this together is punching skill to me (in the context of martial arts application).

The only reason I see it this way is because I've seen people really good at punching but suck at putting it all together. Now which is the skill set you want to test? Are you trying to see if they punch with good for or are you trying to see how well they put punching together? According to Wang, He was collecting data which means, that he's really not testing but data collecting. Which would have been helpful to know right from the beginning.

I see what you’re say and completely agree. However, with Wang, I think there’s a slight language barrier sometimes and I’ve come to put that under consideration.

I didn’t interpret it as strictly competition in the literal sense. I just looked at it as sparring with a restriction and using that information to tell the students what they need to work on. For example, my teacher will say “senior side, kicks only; other side hands and feet.” Or he may say “any time your partner drops his hands, tap him on the head.” He’s said those things and similar plenty of times. Sure, it’s competition in a way - we’re both try to land our stuff and not allow our partner’s stuff, there’s rules, etc. But it’s not exactly pure competition with stats being complied. He’s asked quite a few times “how many times did he tap your headgear? Remember to protect your head.”

I think you’re taking Wang too literally, but perhaps I’m not taking him literally enough. I’m just picturing a night in our dojo where our teacher wants us to work on something specific. It’s competition in a sense, but far more like a drill as you put it. Only way we’d know for sure is if we were in his class.

 

[JowGaWolf]

However, with Wang, I think there’s a slight language barrier sometimes and I’ve come to put that under consideration.

Only one word threw me off in his statement "Winner." When I hear read or hear the word Winner. I immediately think competition. To be honest it's probably more me than him because I always spar to learn. The concept of winning isn't factored in my training or when I train students. For me the goal is to land techniques successfully. Winning is a by product of being successful of with landing techniques. This means there is no need to think of "winning" unless it's a competition.. When winning gets factored in students tend to only use the skill sets that they are good in and not work the skill sets that they should train to be better in.

This perspective of winning will cause me to make the same assumptions regardless of any language barriers. I'm just weird like that and need more info and explaining in order to determine what is meant when the word "Winner" is used.

I always thought Wang was just sharing his thoughts but forgot to include us in on the first half of the conversation that goes on in his mind. Sort of like how people begin the conversation in the middle of their thoughts and forgetting that the person they are talking to wasn't in on the first half of that conversation that was in your mind.

 

[JR 137]

Only one word threw me off in his statement "Winner." When I hear read or hear the word Winner. I immediately think competition. To be honest it's probably more me than him because I always spar to learn. The concept of winning isn't factored in my training or when I train students. For me the goal is to land techniques successfully. Winning is a by product of being successful of with landing techniques. This means there is no need to think of "winning" unless it's a competition.. When winning gets factored in students tend to only use the skill sets that they are good in and not work the skill sets that they should train to be better in.

This perspective of winning will cause me to make the same assumptions regardless of any language barriers. I'm just weird like that and need more info and explaining in order to determine what is meant when the word "Winner" is used.

I always thought Wang was just sharing his thoughts but forgot to include us in on the first half of the conversation that goes on in his mind. Sort of like how people begin the conversation in the middle of their thoughts and forgetting that the person they are talking to wasn't in on the first half of that conversation that was in your mind.

Sure, but that “winner” could be a part of the language barrier too. Instead of winner, it could be the one most successful within the rule set.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I always thought Wang was just sharing his thoughts but forgot to include us in on the first half of the conversation that goes on in his mind.

I did that on purpose. I don't want to upset people with terms such as:

- anti-striking,
- rhino guard.
- arm wrap.
- ...

If I just talk about "punch test", most people will like to share their opinions. If people stay away from this thread and think that I try to sell my rhino guard, there won't be much interested discussion.

In another 5 minutes, I'll collect my data again in my Sunday class. I already have my video camera ready.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I did that on purpose. I don't want to upset people with terms such as:

- anti-striking,
- rhino guard.
- arm wrap.
- ...

If I just talk about "punch test", most people will like to share their opinions. If people stay away from this thread and think that I try to sell my rhino guard, there won't be much interested discussion.

In another 5 minutes, I'll collect my data again in my Sunday class. I already have my video camera ready.

always the business man. I can't blame you for that. How is the promotion of your rhino guard going? You should find some younger guys to fight with it.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

How is the promotion of your rhino guard going? You should find some younger guys to fight with it.

In today's 2 hours class (Sunday 12:30 pm - 2 :30 pm). we did 3 sets of testing of 10 rounds each (20 punches as 1 round).

1. A punches, B blocks with rhino guard.
2. A punches, B blocks and also punches back with rhino guard.
3. A tries to destroy B's rhino guard and also punches on B's head. B tries to obtain a clinch on A.

Believe it or not, among those 20 x 10 x 3 = 600 punches, there was not even 1 punch that could land on the head. It proves that rhino guard is effective to protect the head from punched.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

In today's 2 hours class (Sunday 12:30 pm - 2 :30 pm). we did 3 sets of testing of 10 rounds each (20 punches as 1 round).

1. A punches, B blocks with rhino guard.
2. A punches, B blocks and also punches back with rhino guard.
3. A tries to destroy B's rhino guard and also punches on B's head. B tries to obtain a clinch on A.

Believe it or not, among those 20 x 10 x 3 = 600 punches, there was not even 1 punch that could land on the head. It proves that rhino guard is effective to protect the head from punched.

Was that regardless of who used the rhino guard, or was it with you using it for each round?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Was that regardless of who used the rhino guard, or was it with you using it for each round?

My students took turns to test rhino guard. I was not in the test. May be in 3 days, I can share some video here.

 

[JowGaWolf]

In today's 2 hours class (Sunday 12:30 pm - 2 :30 pm). we did 3 sets of testing of 10 rounds each (20 punches as 1 round).

1. A punches, B blocks with rhino guard.
2. A punches, B blocks and also punches back with rhino guard.
3. A tries to destroy B's rhino guard and also punches on B's head. B tries to obtain a clinch on A.

Believe it or not, among those 20 x 10 x 3 = 600 punches, there was not even 1 punch that could land on the head. It proves that rhino guard is effective to protect the head from punched.

Sounds good, throw some sparring in and really test it out. I'm assuming that you have only tested this against punches where the rule was punch only.

 

[JR 137]

In today's 2 hours class (Sunday 12:30 pm - 2 :30 pm). we did 3 sets of testing of 10 rounds each (20 punches as 1 round).

1. A punches, B blocks with rhino guard.
2. A punches, B blocks and also punches back with rhino guard.
3. A tries to destroy B's rhino guard and also punches on B's head. B tries to obtain a clinch on A.

Believe it or not, among those 20 x 10 x 3 = 600 punches, there was not even 1 punch that could land on the head. It proves that rhino guard is effective to protect the head from punched.

It could also prove you have very ineffective head punchers.

I’m not saying you do or don’t. I’m just saying stats can be pretty misleading.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

It could also prove you have very ineffective head punchers.

I’m not saying you do or don’t. I’m just saying stats can be pretty misleading.

I was not in that test. My guys did the best they could. I don't believe they can do any better.

With these many years of MA training, I think I am an OK striker. If you use rhino guard and I punch your head, I don't think I can land any punch on your head within my 20 punches. It's not my punching skill is bad. Your extend arms can just hide your head nicely. It has nothing to do with the punching skill. It has to do with the design of the "rhino guard".

When my opponent uses

- boxing guard, I can punch between his arms.
- WC (or CMA) guard, I can punch beside his arms.
- rhino guard, I don't know how to reach to his head. If I punch straight, his fists are in my way. If I punch around, his arms are in my way.

IMO, the "rhino guard" should work for everybody. Try to play defense and use it to deal with your opponent's 20 head punches, you can then draw conclusion for yourself.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

I was not in that test. My guys did the best they could. I don't believe they can do any better.

With these many years of MA training, I think I am an OK striker. If you use rhino guard and I punch your head, I don't think I can land any punch on your head within my 20 punches. It's not my punching skill is bad. Your extend arms can just hide your head nicely. It has nothing to do with the punching skill. It has to do with the design of the "rhino guard".

When my opponent uses

- boxing guard, I can punch between his arms.
- WC (or CMA) guard, I can punch beside his arms.
- rhino guard, I don't know how to reach to his head. If I punch straight, his fists are in my way. If I punch around, his arms are in my way.

IMO, the "rhino guard" should work for everybody. Try to play defense and use it to deal with your opponent's 20 head punches, you can then draw conclusion for yourself.

I think the point is while your testing proves its worthwhile to explore, we cant definitively state its effective from just that.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I think the point is while your testing proves its worthwhile to explore, we cant definitively state its effective from just that.

That's why I try to test it as much as I can.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Let's have 1 minute per round.

- If A can punch on B's head (with any punch), A wins that round.
- If B can punch on A's head (with any punch), B wins that round.
- Test this for 5 rounds and decide the winner.

What's your opinion on this testing method?

That seems more a test of head defense than punching technique. It's also a decent test of the ability to set up a head punch.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Ability to punch and ability to block.

I don't think it tests the ability to punch - a sloppy punch that gets through would score.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I think of it like cooking. When a person wants to bake a cake, they don't say "test the eggs", "Test the sugar" What a cake really tells a person, is how well they can put a variety of ingredients together to create something better than the individual parts.

This is how I think skill set should be tested. How well can you put the individual skills together and make them bigger than what they are alone.

Agreed. All the same, putting stress on a particular skill at a time is useful. If I have a student who is head-hunting to their own detriment (no offense, @Headhunter ), I might put them on a restricted ruleset in sparring for a while, where only body punches "count". Once they work that for a while, it should actually improve their head-hunting.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

But you have to develop one tool at a time. If you add body punch or kick into it, students may not concentrate on head punch (and deal with head punch) enough.

I try to achieve the following 3 stages:

Defense - protect your head from punching.
Offense - punch your opponent's head.
Defense and offense - obtain clinch.

I assume at some point you also work on defending/attacking the body.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

My main goal of this testing is to collect data - the percentage success/fail rate of A can obtain a successful clinch on B before B can land fist on A's head.

This can be useful. How do you control for the difference in other areas? If someone is particularly good at slipping in to clinch distance, their head attack/defense might be less critical than someone who has to hang out at striking distance longer.