Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Traditional vs. Modern
What I've seen in the last several (10, 12+?) years, has been the debate over Modern vs.Traditional. What is (generally) being considered as being modern, is obviously designed for young, physically fit, Male student's. If one doesn't fall (specifically) into that category, the training becomes less (and less) useful (or even useable).
When one examines all of their methodology, and what's being taught, one find's that it's (all) being based upon (physical) strength. Western combative methodology's have (classically) all been built upon this same (but misguided, IMO) belief. Basically, Might makes Right (right?..).
This belief is generally reinforced/validated through various non-related “sporting” events and their common (if not predictable) outcomes. What would appear to be generally ignored, is that these sporting events, have rules and limitations as to what the participant's are allowed to do.
The fact that it is limited in it's user applicability, is sufficient for myself not to be interested in it. RyuTe®, is designed to be applicable to whatever the user's ability's will allow for. There is no “majical/spiritual” nonsense that's taught in regards to it (“Ki, Chi”, etc.), nor is there any necessity to learn any manor of “meridian/pathways” or similarly irrelevant material.
Modern (generally meaning “Western”) system's, tend to not put much emphasis on any of the limb manipulation art's. Except in a very few instances, the Western system's only focus upon “restraining” the aggressor until unconscious, and/or “choking” them out.
Though initially appearing to be more “practical”, they more often fall far short of whats considered to be legally allowed for a response (which are obviously subject to the situation for each occurrence).
More often than not, traditional tends to approach training in a more reserved manner (ie. It takes longer). Maybe not for everything, but for the majority of what's shown, traditional instruction will take more time for the student to be shown the system's (total) instructional methodology.
Commonly this isn't because of any improved training methods, but because the more modern systems have less to train the student (in performing). They rarely include any kata instruction, and the main focus of their instruction is geared around “sparring” (of one form or another).
In many cases, systems tend to train students in prearranged methods of defending the student from generalized methods and manners of aggression. There's nothing wrong with that method (necessarily).
The problem comes from (the fact) that nothing ever occurs as it does during practice (ie.”Murphy's Law”). Hence, the practice of specific defenses become (nearly) pointless.
RyuTe® teaches defensive principles (as well as individual defensive motions). Though the (industry) tendency is to train students to defend against the most difficult types of aggression, the more common attack is (more) often an amateur who's throwing a “hay-maker” punch (of which there appears to be countless versions of, LOL).
When student's begin to regularly make their practiced techniques (in class) work, then that practice needs to be changed/modified. The ability to make a technique work, usually means that the student is likely done with what practicing that technique can teach to them.
It's for this very reason that our study/instruction will focus on concepts and principles (rather than specific techniques). Those concepts and principles are (initially) shown/demonstrated through the use of specific techniques, but once they are understood (by the student), we show the student how they will apply to most every technique and/or defensive situation.