Saturday, February 26, 2011

Training outside of your system

  The topic that seemed to permeate the post's that I was reading, was that a student should participate in a variety of systems (to gain exposure to them). I have no problem with, and would agree (to a degree) with that suggestion. The only caveat to that (IMO), would be that they first attain a ranking of Shodan in the system that they are presently studying. If a student is only familiar with some of the kyu rank teachings, they will rarely have any (real) understanding of the system's applications. For a person to garner any knowledge of a system (through participation in the classes being taught for that system), one needs a reference to compare it against. Without that reference, any system's methodology will sound good.
  As an instructor, having to listen to the ramblings (of these multi-system, kyu ranked student's), can be a (time consuming) chore. The majority of system's/instructor's require that student's “put on a white belt” (to participate in their class). I disagree with that mandate (and don't do so in my own classes). If someone has attained what-ever rank, in what-ever system, they should wear that rank. Whether that ranking holds a similar equivalency in my own classes (or not), will become obvious after a short time. I feel no need to (attempt to) deny that previous instruction. They may very well be equivalent to a higher rank (in my own class), and that will be acknowledged.
  The majority of system's/style's have something to offer a student. It's dependent upon whether what's being offered, is what the student is seeking. What I'm teaching (Oyata's methodology), doesn't offer “sparring” information. Student's that are seeking that (type of) information, would not be interested in participation in any of my classes ( Homey don't play that tune). Other instructor's Do offer that sort of instruction (and some even require it in their classes). My own (classes), don't pursue that type of instruction (my choice). 
  Acquiring knowledge about various system's methods (IMO) can be useful, but frankly (in hind-site) not much. That usefulness, is usually only in regards to instruction (when dealing with change-over student's from those systems). Though the basic's (being taught in the majority of system's) are similar, the differences will become apparent when attempting to apply the new techniques being taught (in the student's newly studied system), with what was learned/practiced in their previous system.
  If/when one of my own student's is planning on teaching, then I would encourage that student to participate in the study of alternate systems. Not to attempt to incorporate those methods into their instruction methods, but as a reference for student's that they may acquire from those systems.
  I believe the majority of instructor's who do participate in alternative systems, do so in order to prevent being surprised by any technique's that are taught by that system. I (personally) can't really relate (to that concern). Not that Oyata teaches every possible variation of a technique, only that there are only so many ways that a technique can be attempted and I feel competent in my own responses to those variations.
  There are only so many ways that one can throw a punch, or perform a kick. Regardless of the intricate details (of how which-ever method does so), prevention of that motion's completion is done in an almost identical manner. I can understand seeking the understanding of a particular motion's application (if you have never seen anything close to it within your own system), but wouldn't that say more about your own system? (more so than the other one). I have had (numerous) student's come to me to learn Tuite, and in every case, they tell me that their system teaches something similar (then, Why do they come to me to learn Oyata's method?). Those differences can often times be minor, but when combined with their system's methodology they (more often than not) prove awkward to integrate (into that system). When a student from another system comes to my class, and they're a kyu ranked student, I (generally) inform them that what I teach, will more often than not, prove difficult for them to apply (until they understand Oyata's methodology). Some are able to adapt, some aren't. Yudansha student's (that wish to study from me), I inform that the way that we do things, is going to mess with (if not conflict with) what they were previously taught, or at least are used to doing/using. That shouldn't imply better or worse, only different.
  I believe any new trend (in teaching) is spurred by similar beliefs. This is how/why ground work/techniques have become so popular. Nobody (well, hardly anybody, LOL) else was doing it before. Now it seems like everybody is concerned with “ground” technique's. The thing to consider is, they first have to get you there. If that doesn't happen, then it's not a concern (and they have most likely fucked-up, BAD). I work (practice) with student's who are familiar with those “take-down” methods being utilized (by the MMA/Gracie “methods”), and I don't understand the motivation behind them. Is the “goal” to eliminate the kick/punch repertoire of the martial artist? The only purpose, seems to be to get them on the ground (and sit on them, LOL). When I have those student's (who work with this shit) begin their “take-down” attempt, it seems to be (quite) easy to thwart that attempt. Using even basic point applications, their attempts are (easily) countered. The other “weakness” to their technique's (which I consider the greatest), is that they (their technique's) won't work against a larger/stronger opponent (even a less talented one). Mass, and Strength are Major factor's to their technique's (and I use that term loosely) success.
  I keep reading Blog's, that “tip-toe” around the whole MMA issue, and frankly I'm sick of it. These individual's are skilled “sports” figures. They are by no means skilled combatants. If you watch one of these matches, note that every one of them, is in prime physical condition. They're young, strong and full of piss and vinegar. ALL, notable attributes for a “sporting” contestant. I would defy you to take any of them, at age 45 or older, and see if anything (that they presently do in this MMA shit) even works for them at that time. When you can present to me, multiple 70+ year old practitioner’s of any of this MMA (or related) trash, that's even able to do it (much less force any of it to work) then maybe I'll consider bestowing any respect towards it. The difference being (between that tripe, and what I practice) is that I have an example to aspire towards. Granted, he isn't 70 year's old (he's freakin' 83 year's old!), but I would definitely feel more confident knowing what he knows, compared to anything that these MMA/ground-fighting/what-ever mook’s are selling.


Man of the West said...

That was too good. Had to link to it.

Anonymous said...

No doubt about it, your using tons of energy in MMA, can't do that on the street where you might be fighting more than one person, your technique must be compact and use very little in the way of energy.