The impact of sense impairment in martial arts?

[Ivan]

What is it like to study martial arts as someone who is blind or deaf? Does it affect you badly, and how do you adapt to such a situation?

 

[isshinryuronin]

This is one of the best of your many questions, Ivan, that you have posed.

I taught karate at the Braille Institute to blind and some deaf students in the late 1970's. It was a program I designed based on spatial awareness of the opponent's body.

Simply, it was based on the idea that if there is a hand on your shoulder, there will be an arm and body attached to the other end. Then, it is a matter of working up the arm with checks, grabs and traps till you get to something good to hit. And lower down, there will be knees between the torso and ground. Basic joint locks and takedowns are easily possible, once there is contact which provides the initial orientation. Verbal and tactile communication was sufficient to teach such techniques.

Sadly, I was never trained at the old Shaolin Temple, nor bitten by a radioactive spider, so was unable to teach how to detect and block an incoming punch one could not see when apart from the attacker. So there were limits, but what was able to be taught had good self-defense value.

Deaf students were even easier to teach, since they could visually observe the technique and be able to detect incoming attacks. In my opinion, teaching a deaf student is no different than one who can hear. Lengthy verbal explanations are not necessary - watching, doing and feeling are the most important elements.

It is not possible to effectively teach both blind and deaf students at the same time, however, since the communication techniques are different for each. Of course, the big win of all this, is the fact that the limitation of a handicap is limited. It is not all-encompassing and allows for many other things, even martial arts. Accomplishing something a student may have thought impossible for them was a great confidence builder and a very rewarding experience for me.

 

[Ivan]

This is one of the best of your many questions, Ivan, that you have posed.

I taught karate at the Braille Institute to blind and some deaf students in the late 1970's. It was a program I designed based on spatial awareness of the opponent's body.

Simply, it was based on the idea that if there is a hand on your shoulder, there will be an arm and body attached to the other end. Then, it is a matter of working up the arm with checks, grabs and traps till you get to something good to hit. And lower down, there will be knees between the torso and ground. Basic joint locks and takedowns are easily possible, once there is contact which provides the initial orientation. Verbal and tactile communication was sufficient to teach such techniques.

Sadly, I was never trained at the old Shaolin Temple, nor bitten by a radioactive spider, so was unable to teach how to detect and block an incoming punch one could not see when apart from the attacker. So there were limits, but what was able to be taught had good self-defense value.

Deaf students were even easier to teach, since they could visually observe the technique and be able to detect incoming attacks. In my opinion, teaching a deaf student is no different than one who can hear. Lengthy verbal explanations are not necessary - watching, doing and feeling are the most important elements.

It is not possible to effectively teach both blind and deaf students at the same time, however, since the communication techniques are different for each. Of course, the big win of all this, is the fact that the limitation of a handicap is limited. It is not all-encompassing and allows for many other things, even martial arts. Accomplishing something a student may have thought impossible for them was a great confidence builder and a very rewarding experience for me.

That is very interesting to hear. Did every student adapt in similar ways, or did they all have different methods to help them?

 

[skribs]

Deaf students were even easier to teach, since they could visually observe the technique and be able to detect incoming attacks. In my opinion, teaching a deaf student is no different than one who can hear. Lengthy verbal explanations are not necessary - watching, doing and feeling are the most important elements.

I'm going to disagree to some extent. I've worked with one or two students that were hard of hearing, more that couldn't speak English at all (kids that had just moved to the states from another country), and even more kids that barely understand English yet because they're only 4 or 5 years old.

It's a lot more difficult to explain something if you can't verbally explain it, especially if they're not a visual learner. Some people see and copy. Others need explanations for things to click.

Simply, it was based on the idea that if there is a hand on your shoulder, there will be an arm and body attached to the other end. Then, it is a matter of working up the arm with checks, grabs and traps till you get to something good to hit. And lower down, there will be knees between the torso and ground. Basic joint locks and takedowns are easily possible, once there is contact which provides the initial orientation. Verbal and tactile communication was sufficient to teach such techniques.

For my 1st, 2nd, and 3rd degree black belt tests, I had to spar 1-on-3, 1-on-4, and then 1-on-5. Well...it actually ended up being 1-on-3, 1-on-5, and then 1-on-3. Because for 2nd Dan there was someone I wanted to avoid (and thus picked 5 so people would be too busy praising me for picking an extra person instead of chastising me for ignoring the tougher fighter...and yes, 1-on-5 without him was easier than 1-on-4 would have been with him). And then for 3rd Dan, I was recovering from an injury, and it was a small test group anyway. But I digress...

I'm trying to convince my Master that for 4th Dan, instead of doing 1-on-6, I should do 1-on-1, but blindfolded. Simply include the rule "no headshots" (which is common in 1-on-3 type sparring anyway) and have enough people creating a fence to keep me on the mat.

What you describe is exactly what I plan to do if he lets me do my sparring blindfolded. Keep my hands on my opponents so I can feel where they are. I've practiced this idea with both BOB and with kicking shields, and I'm sure I could do it.

 

[isshinryuronin]

It's a lot more difficult to explain something if you can't verbally explain it, especially if they're not a visual learner. Some people see and copy. Others explanations for things to click.

Yes, it is more difficult, but not so much more IMO. In the past, few native Okinawan/Japanese instructors spoke any English, yet managed to teach American military. They would demo a move and simply say, "Do this," then smack 'em if they left an opening. I have experienced this myself, and I quickly fixed any bad habits. Quoting Ed Parker, "...to feel is to know."

It's a process - showing the technique, having them copy it, doing it on the student, and then guiding them as they do it on you, providing visual and physical correction, and repeat. "A picture is worth 1000 words," holds true - experiencing what the picture shows is worth 10,000 words.

Thru repetition, as both uke and uchi (being on the sending and receiving end) things will eventually click. One of the things I've noticed is that some instructors only verbally correct the student, instead of taking hold of them and moving them to the correct position, and if then done incorrectly, show them the results of their mistake. My first sensei used the edge of his size 14 foot, I used a shinai (split bamboo kendo sword.) But a foam training equipment will work, too, in these kinder, gentler times.

I see MA as a physical movement art and strongly feel that direct physical experience is the most effective way to learn. Words are good, but doing and feeling is better.

 

[skribs]

Yes, it is more difficult, but not so much more IMO. In the past, few native Okinawan/Japanese instructors spoke any English, yet managed to teach American military. They would demo a move and simply say, "Do this," then smack 'em if they left an opening. I have experienced this myself, and I quickly fixed any bad habits. Quoting Ed Parker, "...to feel is to know."

On the one hand, you have this criticism of the Taekwondo forms: the Japanese mainly taught the physical aspects of the forms to the Koreans, but due to either language barriers or cultural issues, did not teach the deeper meanings of the forms. Thus, the Taekwondo forms only superficially resemble the Karate forms.

On the other hand, you're adding in an element of feedback. An element of feedback that I wish I could incorporate into my school, but isn't as commonly allowed in western schools.

 

[Cynik75]

Does it affect you badly, and how do you adapt to such a situation?

I am not sure if I can poty the link to other forum but this is quite good answer for your question:
https://www.reddit.com/r/bjj/comments/3ay9d8/im_a_deafblind_grappler_ama/

 

[isshinryuronin]

On the one hand, you have this criticism of the Taekwondo forms: the Japanese mainly taught the physical aspects of the forms to the Koreans, but due to either language barriers or cultural issues, did not teach the deeper meanings of the forms. Thus, the Taekwondo forms only superficially resemble the Karate forms.
On the other hand, you're adding in an element of feedback. An element of feedback that I wish I could incorporate into my school, but isn't as commonly allowed in western schools.

I don't think it was due mainly to language barriers that the Japanese did not teach the deeper (oyo) meanings to the Koreans. The Okinawans did not teach them to the Japanese (or American military) either. Don't forget, karate entered Japan thru the public schools.

There was something called the "Okinawan Karate Kenkyukai," back in the 1920's. (don't have the exact date handy now) that was basically the first governing body of karate. Rumor has it there was agreement amongst the top masters to hold back the "good stuff" and keep it only for their serious Okinawan students.

So I think it was mostly cultural chauvinism that caused them to hold some things back. When that first generation Marines brought karate back from Okinawa, it was the "basic" version, similar to what was exported to Japan, with much of the grabbing technique and vital point striking missing as well as many applications. Korean, Japanese and Western schools shouldn't be faulted. It's just the way it was. But with the spread of info nowadays, it doesn't have to stay that way.

Re: your comment on feedback - it need not be painful, if this is what you're alluding to. Just a touch to alert the student is enough, so no one should have any objection. If they do, they should find another hobby. Luckily, I don't need to overly cater to parents of 6 year olds. But I understand some schools must for $$.