The Hobbyist vs. The Serious Student

[Ken Morgan]

Just adding something quickly that I've noticed (as a student of course), the main thing that comes up is repitition, we do a lot of that but it's "hidden" IMO. For instance when we do modern self defence, we train the exact same things over and over and over and over each time. If the attacker does something different, we still train the exact same thing and that's because we train principles rather than set "You must respond with Option A to Attack A, Option B to Attack B" etc.. Given that there are so many possible scenarios etc and classes are so fast paced, it can seem like you're learning something brand new.

That being said, something I commented on in class a while ago while doing knife defence was that the material was very familiar, almost unchanged but I got so much more out of it after some extra time spent training and then being exposed to it again. Each time we revisit the basics I find I get something new out of it, whether that something is an understanding of a concept or as small as figuring out a tech works easier for me if I shift my weight this way instead of the other. That in itself keeps it "interesting and fun" without needing to go through something new every time, for me anyway.

Generally the practitioners in the JSA initially try to collect kata, you want to learn/know as many as possible as well as all the variations that go along with them. You train other schools, you question your sensei about things, and you build up in your head a list of all the kata you know.

After a while you start to realize that the way you move in this school, is the same way you move in that school, and this kata is really the same as that kata, with a bit of flashy bits thrown in. Then one day you realize….its all the same! At this point you start to strip it all down to the basics, and you just try to become proficient at what is the core of your school.

There are such so many ways to swing or avoid a sword.

 

[Balrog]

In another thread, Chris Parker and I were having an interesting discussion (as always ) on various aspects of training. While the topic wasn't specifically on this, the subject of the differences between self defense and martial arts came up. We agreed that they were 2 distinct topics, I had suggested that it may be possible to interject the two into the same class.
...snip...
So, for the sake of this thread, we can look at 2 areas:

1) Do you teach any differently in your classes, depending on who's there? Do you feel that the hobbyist will gain anything from the Sd side?

2) How do you seperate the SD side from the MA side?

I have to disagree with the concept that they are two distinct topics. Self defense is the underlying foundation for martial arts training. I teach all of my classes that way. Whether we are sparring, doing basics, working on forms, whatever....I always try to relate what we are doing to a practical self defense application.

I personally feel that if that basis in self-defense is not emphasized, then we might as well be doing XMA dance routines.

 

[Supra Vijai]

See the way we approach it is that what we learn during the Martial Arts section is the traditional stuff. It's the core of the art, the philosophies etc. Our self defence concept is "Get home safe" and often that means not stay and fight. If forced to fight though (no flee option available), then we train gross motor skills and principles that will let us escape and get home safe. The arts side of it is great and is something I'm personally partial to but we just won't come up against the same attacks on the street. No one in their right mind will assume Seigan no Kamae and step forward with a textbook punch to the head, it's going to be havoc. So while we take our street/modern principles from the traditional and adapt them, the 2 are very different. At least that's our way of looking at it.

 

[Chris Parker]

I have to disagree with the concept that they are two distinct topics. Self defense is the underlying foundation for martial arts training. I teach all of my classes that way. Whether we are sparring, doing basics, working on forms, whatever....I always try to relate what we are doing to a practical self defense application.

I personally feel that if that basis in self-defense is not emphasized, then we might as well be doing XMA dance routines.

Hi Balrog,

The discussion (as well as why I feel that they are completely seperate areas of knowledge) can be found here: http://martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=92226&page=3, starting from about post 37.

In short, a martial art school can (and, in many cases, does and should) have a focus on self defence, but that doesn't mean that the martial art itself is actually designed for self defence, or even suited to it in it's purest form. The self defence knowledge is never a part of the teachings of the martial art itself, and is added on, or extrapolated.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Not sure that hobbyist is the best choice of words, but I know what is meant by it.

Serious students make us as instructors perk up and smile. We love serious students because it make teaching more rewarding on a regular basis; we get to see people taking what we tell them seriously and put serious effort into learning the skills we seek to impart.

The less serious student (the dabbler?) can be an irritant because they seem to be unhappy or to actively dislike the 'serious' training. Always bugs me in kumdo when a student groans at the command to put on hogu; isn't this what you signed up for??

But the dabblers make us grow as instructors. We seek different ways to motivate or communicate to them the important matters of the lesson. When the dabbler 'gets it' and takes things a little more seriously or puts forth a little more effort, it is a great thing.

I teach different material based on what my lesson plan for the day is, as there is enough material to teach different things on different days. But everyone gets the same material. I don't change my lesson plan because few or none of my 'serious' students made it, leaving me with all of the dabblers. The dabblers paid the same fee per lesson as the serious students and should not be short changed. If my classes are not entertaining enough for them, then that is something that they need to work out within themselves. My website is pretty clear:

Our traditional program builds discipline, a strong spirit and quick reflexes and is an excellent choice for both kids and adults. We firmly believe that rigid and correct training makes for proficient and well developed students. As such, we do not offer rapid advancement, excessive belts or special clubs.

I think that that pretty much says it all. If someone does not want rigid and correct training, there are other social/fitness oriented programs available in my area.

As far as separating SD and martial art, within a class, I don't. SD is part of the martial art. So are training drills. So are other aspects of the art that may not have an SD focus (sword work for example), but my content is based on what material I am choosing to go over, not on who shows up for class.

Daniel