What arts are incompatible with each other?

[zzj]

“Total abandonement” of muscular force is a way of saying extremely efficient use of force, isn’t it? In the extreme of perfection, you’ll need almost none. But with actually none, one should dye soon.

Is Systema mainstream? Their concept of relaxation perhaps is not far from this one.

I wouldn't classify Systema as mainstream, but that's my own understanding.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Ok, there's another solution. If it's not being demonstrated, don't include it.

If you're going to include it, make it so that the layman can understand it enough to believe it.

I think this varies somewhat depending who the audience is. If I'm demonstrating to potential students, versus current students, versus a group of martial artists interested in learning a little about the art (seminar, etc.), those are very different needs. In some of those, including an "incidental" finish might be helpful, even though it's not what's really being demonstrated. It gives some context to the entry point or initial reaction being shown.

And, of course, if I'm demonstrating for entertainment value, there's an entirely different set of considerations.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The problem with a pin in self defense is 2-fold.

1. You've only "won" until you let go. Then they may start again.
2. What if there are two of them?

That's the "situational" component. If there are two, you don't pin. If you use a pin that allows mobility, you can release quickly if a second shows up. There are a lot of situations where a pin can be useful in self-defense. Running is less often a good option than is commonly asserted in self-defense training. I saw an instructor recently say he didn't need to pin, because he'd be running. The guy is my height and probably 100 lbs heavier - and not with muscle - and doesn't practice running. For him, a pin makes far more sense than running in most cases.

 

[oftheherd1]

Agreed. And, unfortunately, it often hides (for those who can understand at least some of what's going on) the actual technique and efficacy thereof.

Even in class, I have to sometimes remind students about this. I'll start something, and the student falls. I'll ask, "Why did you fall?" The answer, usually: "I thought I was supposed to."

Sigh.

Or feel great pain of have a joint dislocated?

 

[skribs]

Or feel great pain of have a joint dislocated?

There's a middle ground here, between "looks fake" and "got hurt."

 

[oftheherd1]

There's a middle ground here, between "looks fake" and "got hurt."

I think I understand you to mean that many times look fake but are not. Is that what you meant?

 

[skribs]

I think I understand you to mean that many times look fake but are not. Is that what you meant?

I mean, there's:

1. Instructor barely touches your arm. You do a backflip.
2. Instructor grabs your hand and applies a technique that results in you falling to the ground, and shows how you can apply pressure to break the wrist.
3. Instructor wrenches your hand so hard it nearly breaks as you fall to the ground, and then actually breaks your wrist.

Obviously #3 is bad. But #1 is also just as bad for a demonstration. #2 shows, safely, how the technique can be effective. So if you can show effective technique, why overblow it with obvious fakeness?

 

[oftheherd1]

I mean, there's:

1. Instructor barely touches your arm. You do a backflip.
2. Instructor grabs your hand and applies a technique that results in you falling to the ground, and shows how you can apply pressure to break the wrist.
3. Instructor wrenches your hand so hard it nearly breaks as you fall to the ground, and then actually breaks your wrist.

Obviously #3 is bad. But #1 is also just as bad for a demonstration. #2 shows, safely, how the technique can be effective. So if you can show effective technique, why overblow it with obvious fakeness?

I never saw a demonstration by masters or GM in the kwan I studied in that "looked fake" at least to me. I have seen a lot of internet videos by GM that I had to play over and over again with a lot of stopping at certain places to see what was really done. I think demonstrations put on by members of the kwan I studied in were related to things I already knew, so it was easier to see what was being done.

But just because I saw people moving with a technique didn't make me think it was fake, but just that they didn't want to be injured. Even so there is often enough twisting or throwing done to cause pain.

 

[skribs]

I never saw a demonstration by masters or GM in the kwan I studied in that "looked fake" at least to me. I have seen a lot of internet videos by GM that I had to play over and over again with a lot of stopping at certain places to see what was really done. I think demonstrations put on by members of the kwan I studied in were related to things I already knew, so it was easier to see what was being done.

But just because I saw people moving with a technique didn't make me think it was fake, but just that they didn't want to be injured. Even so there is often enough twisting or throwing done to cause pain.

I'm specifically looking at the video linked early in this thread which features someone jumping away or falling over what appears to be nothing.

 

[now disabled]

I'm specifically looking at the video linked early in this thread which features someone jumping away or falling over what appears to be nothing.

That was an Uke over acting plain and simple he was trying (and he ultimately failed) to make his teacher look good and really there was no need for that ...that said it could have been he actually didn't feel and was really trying again to make it look like he did

What the first vid showed is possible totally it was presented wrong and was over acted in bits (again that could be for multiple reasons) ...I am not going to slam anyone at all all I am going to say is ..........it does work and with the right adept doing so and it is not hocus pocus ....but how it is presented makes it look so lol

 

[now disabled]

I mean, there's:

1. Instructor barely touches your arm. You do a backflip.
2. Instructor grabs your hand and applies a technique that results in you falling to the ground, and shows how you can apply pressure to break the wrist.
3. Instructor wrenches your hand so hard it nearly breaks as you fall to the ground, and then actually breaks your wrist.

Obviously #3 is bad. But #1 is also just as bad for a demonstration. #2 shows, safely, how the technique can be effective. So if you can show effective technique, why overblow it with obvious fakeness?

Yes you are correct in what you say

however


#1 hmmmmm it may look like it no touch and filmed that way (yup that can and does happen) but is it ? there can be other things at play ie the set up all the things that led to the look of no touch ..... as has been said (not being nasty ) but if you have been in that situation then it easier to know what your looking for and that cannot really be adequately or fully explained in words but it is not hocus pocus lol (well it could be depending on who is doing it lol)

 

[skribs]

Yes you are correct in what you say

however


#1 hmmmmm it may look like it no touch and filmed that way (yup that can and does happen) but is it ? there can be other things at play ie the set up all the things that led to the look of no touch ..... as has been said (not being nasty ) but if you have been in that situation then it easier to know what your looking for and that cannot really be adequately or fully explained in words but it is not hocus pocus lol (well it could be depending on who is doing it lol)

Having done some hapkido I know a lot of what to look for. I may not know all the moves but I can at least see how the body is reacting.

 

[now disabled]

Having done some hapkido I know a lot of what to look for. I may not know all the moves but I can at least see how the body is reacting.

I am not doubting you sir

I have no doubts nor any qualms over your ability or knowledge in any way

If you ever get the chance to actually go and experience from a teacher who has developed that side of things then take it ....even better if you can do that in the east ....I say that as I have seen many teachers come over and well they do kinda modify what they do or how they teach (not all btw) and I say that because (and I can only speak to Japanese teachers) they are not stupid and they know all to well how the west views certain things and that well they have to make a living so to speak ....get them on their home turf so to speak and get them to trust you that you are open to learn and study then it a different ball game ...

You may shoot me down and others too but when masters/GM/Shihan do come over they well teach what they know will be accepted widely

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I mean, there's:

1. Instructor barely touches your arm. You do a backflip.
2. Instructor grabs your hand and applies a technique that results in you falling to the ground, and shows how you can apply pressure to break the wrist.
3. Instructor wrenches your hand so hard it nearly breaks as you fall to the ground, and then actually breaks your wrist.

Obviously #3 is bad. But #1 is also just as bad for a demonstration. #2 shows, safely, how the technique can be effective. So if you can show effective technique, why overblow it with obvious fakeness?

You may miss this one.

4. Student grabs on teacher's wrist. Teacher flips that student. That student is stupid enough not to release his own grip.

When you choke my throat, if my hands are

- fighting against your grips, that's normal.
- dropping next to my legs and my body shake like a fish, that's fake.

In other words, fake demo = no common sense (you hand is burned but you don't know how to pull it back).

 

[marques]

I wouldn't classify Systema as mainstream, but that's my own understanding.

It is not in most places. But we all know it (or what it looks like).

 

[oftheherd1]

I'm specifically looking at the video linked early in this thread which features someone jumping away or falling over what appears to be nothing.

I know you were.

I mean, there's:

1. Instructor barely touches your arm. You do a backflip.
2. Instructor grabs your hand and applies a technique that results in you falling to the ground, and shows how you can apply pressure to break the wrist.
3. Instructor wrenches your hand so hard it nearly breaks as you fall to the ground, and then actually breaks your wrist.

Obviously #3 is bad. But #1 is also just as bad for a demonstration. #2 shows, safely, how the technique can be effective. So if you can show effective technique, why overblow it with obvious fakeness?

Here and elsewhere, you seem OK with making a technique look good, rather than letting the technique speak for itself. And I don't agree with any kind of faking. Slowing the technique at the point of most pain to allow going into the flow may be necessary to prevent injury. But techniques imho should only be done on people who know the technique and therefore can recognize it and react to it.

I mean, in a demonstration there is a little of that. But you have to make it look real. (Hence my linking of the clip from Get Smart). If you're doing a demonstration, then most or all of it will be scripted and practiced. But it should be scripted and practiced to look as real as it can, while being as safe as it can.

We have a problem at our school of some of the kids underacting a lot, which makes the techniques not look as effective. This guy is overacting, which makes the techniques look fake.

...

As to the bolded parts, that has not been true in my experience. Properly applied, the technique will look real, and underacting is only going to increase their pain if they don't go with the flow of the technique. That doesn't mean a properly applied technique won't hurt. But we don't want to dislocate a joint just to prove the demonstration of a technique that will do so. I don't call that being fake. Maybe that is what you were trying to say, but it just didn't come over to me that way.

Having done some hapkido I know a lot of what to look for. I may not know all the moves but I can at least see how the body is reacting.

You are fortunate. I have done more than "some" Hapkido, and although I know a fair amount of techniques (nowhere all of course) I still see techniques that I have to play over and over to be sure I can see what is being done.

 

[now disabled]

I know you were.




Here and elsewhere, you seem OK with making a technique look good, rather than letting the technique speak for itself. And I don't agree with any kind of faking. Slowing the technique at the point of most pain to allow going into the flow may be necessary to prevent injury. But techniques imho should only be done on people who know the technique and therefore can recognize it and react to it.



As to the bolded parts, that has not been true in my experience. Properly applied, the technique will look real, and underacting is only going to increase their pain if they don't go with the flow of the technique. That doesn't mean a properly applied technique won't hurt. But we don't want to dislocate a joint just to prove the demonstration of a technique that will do so. I don't call that being fake. Maybe that is what you were trying to say, but it just didn't come over to me that way.



You are fortunate. I have done more than "some" Hapkido, and although I know a fair amount of techniques (nowhere all of course) I still see techniques that I have to play over and over to be sure I can see what is being done.

Much in any demo depends not just on the person who is applying/performing the tech but on the uke/person receiving to and I agree that applying a tech just to prove it works isn't the way to go imo doing that really could be viewed as arrogant.

In any demo you have to chose not just the person applying the tech carefully (ie they really know what they doing) but the choice of uke is equally as important as they have not only got to know the tech applied but how to take ukemi and if needed the breakfall and not get hurt.....If folks look at demo's it is not hard to tell if the uke actually is good or not ....for example a demo I watched recently (yes I have the time these days ) was a Hachidan and what were his uke .........Godan and rokudan .....so it depends greatly on the uke to provide the resistance necessary not to under act or overact but to make the high grade perform ..............................

 

[skribs]

I know you were.

Then why were you getting defensive about my comments?

Here and elsewhere, you seem OK with making a technique look good, rather than letting the technique speak for itself. And I don't agree with any kind of faking. Slowing the technique at the point of most pain to allow going into the flow may be necessary to prevent injury. But techniques imho should only be done on people who know the technique and therefore can recognize it and react to it.

If you leap back before the technique is even applied, it doesn't let the technique speak for itself. It just shows how staged it is, and makes everything look fake. If it looks fake, how can you trust you'll learn anything real?

As to the bolded parts, that has not been true in my experience. Properly applied, the technique will look real, and underacting is only going to increase their pain if they don't go with the flow of the technique. That doesn't mean a properly applied technique won't hurt. But we don't want to dislocate a joint just to prove the demonstration of a technique that will do so. I don't call that being fake. Maybe that is what you were trying to say, but it just didn't come over to me that way.

You are fortunate. I have done more than "some" Hapkido, and although I know a fair amount of techniques (nowhere all of course) I still see techniques that I have to play over and over to be sure I can see what is being done.

So in the video we're talking about, does it look like the technique is properly applied that sends the guy flying a few feet? With your greater experience than mine in Hapkido, do you see what is causing the guy to leap back?

 

[now disabled]

do you see what is causing the guy to leap back?

Yes I do ...it not well presented for sure but yes it is recognizable

 

[skribs]

Yes I do ...it not well presented for sure but yes it is recognizable

Then what is it? Because to me, it still looks like the very start of a technique and the other guy is just leaping away or falling on his own.