Here's something for conversation: how important is fluidity in self defense?

[Vankuen]

Keeping in mind the reality of violence, as that is what this particular forum is on, how important would you all say is fluidity in your motion? Do you need it to fight effectively? Ive seen many many people who have no idea what it is to flow with energy, nor do they have any control of their own...they may win some fights, but is it luck? Lets here everyone's thoughts on this....

"From one thing know ten thousand" - Miyomato Musashi, Book of five rings

"Loy lau hoi sung, lut sau jik chung"

[JerryLove]

"need"? No. But it is important and very useful.

[fmann]

I would agree that it makes you more effective, but it's not necessary. Often, in a self-defense situation, it's not how you flow (since my first priority is to make enuf space to run), but how you deal with having your flow broken.

[soy]

I second what fmann said.

[honorisc]

A circle is a curved line that meets-up with itself. Not everyone would look at a circle and say line. They might hane no concious idea about flow, yet it might be likely that they did flow when they won. Flow happens with each motion. The more motions the greater the likeliness of inhibited flow in the overall action(s).

A line is made-up of points.

Very some such, perhaps might have been, likely say some, some not.

[brassmonkey]

I think fluidity is a great thing to practice as it helps keep a constantance of the mind.

[unclaimed effort]

Do you mean as fluidity with your own movements, or fluidity by following, and yielding to his movements?

-------------------------
What is a tree without it's roots? What is a martial art without its basics?

[Spectre]

I do not feel that fluidity is necessary to fight or even win a fight. I do think that having fluidity in your fighting style is an advantage. If you are a stiff fighter than your body will usually telegraph your movements making it easier for your opponent to read and counter/counter-strike.


Continued blessings in your life and your training.

The key to understanding is to open your mind and your heart and then the eyes will follow.

[Vankuen]

I was actually just speaking of flow in general... so either would apply, flow of your own movements as well as flowing with the movements of your opponent. Either or, depends on how you perceive the question ya know?

I personally believe that one needs to train for fluidity. It develops an understanding of energy. That doesnt mean that a broken rythm shouldnt be developed, as I also think that is a must. After all...real music is the space between the notes right?

"From one thing know ten thousand" - Miyomato Musashi, Book of five rings

"Loy lau hoi sung, lut sau jik chung"

[dedalus]

I think training fluidity is related to gaining speed and economy of motion. If you can fight so that every strike loads the next, then your attack is a flurry of movements that run one to the next with no wasted time or energy. I reckon that also takes the thinking out of things and tailors your response to your attacker's position... you just go with what you're loaded to execute.

[ElPietro]

It is important to be able to flow from one movement to the next. I don't think you can really "flow" in one movement so it is more like a transition to another movement. The importance is in economy of movement and speed. If you are not flowing then you are probably spending a lot of energy stopping the current direction you are moving and then starting in a new direction. This causes you to use more energy, and take more time versus one move leading to the next and then the next, etc...

Those are my thoughts on this anyway.

[Tigerdragon]

Important? VERY! Nessisary? NO!

Think of it this way. How many schoolyard/street/bar fights have you seen where neither person has had any training? What do they look like? To me they have always looked off balance and like they were fighting their own bodies to pull off the shots they were going for.

Fluidity will help your balance. It will help control your energy as well as read/control your opponents energy. Fluidity also helps generate more speed and power.

Think of the psychological factor of speed alone. A guy picks a fight with you while a couple of his friends are standing next to and/or behind him. He is about to throw (or does throw) a punch. And in less then 3 seconds you have him on the ground (whether by knockout or takedown it doesn't matter). How willing is he going to be to try to get back up, and how willing are his friends going to be to step up to you? I can say from one experience of my own, not very willing at all.

Just my thoughts

Assumption is the mother of tragedy. Just keep and open mind and be ready

[apoweyn]

The streetfights I've seen had plenty of flow. Not much technique. But lots of flow. Presumably that's because they're untrained. There isn't such a thing as technique to them at that moment. Just aggression and the resulting movement.

I think martial artists are much more prone to suffer a lack of flow because we're the ones who break fighting down into it's component parts, analyze those parts, and then put the whole thing back together in the hopes that it will become organic again.

We get tied up in wondering "Am I doing a good roundhouse? Or a good block?" Instead of viewing the whole experience as a whole experience.

To the untrained, a fight is a fight. One experience. To many of us, it's a series of blocks, kicks, punches, takedowns, etc. Each to be performed as technically proficiently as possible. I think that can very often result in a lack of flow. Each technique becomes an end to itself and we loose track of the bigger picture.

What do you think?


Stuart B.

[Vankuen]

I was thinking hard about your post, and then about my training, and what I told to my own students.

You're indeed right in my eyes. Ive found that the people that have the most trouble with fluidity are the ones who are worried about the various technicalities, the what, when, where, how, etc...

I overcame this myself by constantly using what I learned in free moving "sparring" or free drilling environments. Environments where the goal was not to make sure things were done right technically, but moreso if the principle was being adhered to and the end result was what you wanted. Now obviously at this point one must be confident in the proper execution of their techniques, as drills of this level shouldn't even be practiced until that point of skill is met.

The people who move the best, are the ones that just move. The training is the time to evaluate and to make sure things are "being done right". When the real things happens, one should just move, instinctively and spontaneously.

"From one thing know ten thousand" - Miyomato Musashi, Book of five rings

"Loy lau hoi sung, lut sau jik chung"

[apoweyn]

Vankuen,

I've been thinking a lot about how to overcome that myself. I like the approach you suggested.

My approach is largely visualization. I noticed that when I was sparring, I was breaking it down the same way mentally. I was thinking about hitting the opponent with a roundhouse, or a punch, or whatever. Not necessarily even specifying a technique in my head. But focusing on a hit.

The problem with that, I think, is that it creates mental speed bumps. I go to hit the opponent, and I either succeed or fail. But either way, the mental template in my head has been fulfilled. Either I hit and, feeling successful, break off the attack. Or I miss and think, "Hang on, that's not what I was visualizing." Then I get stymied.

So what I do now is visualize a more overarcing picture. Visualize the opponent getting backed into the corner, dropped on the floor, thoroughly overwhelmed in some way. Then I don't stop until that template is fulfilled in my head.


Stuart B.

[Vankuen]

Hey man...just make sure you dont tell any pyschologists any of those visualizations you have allright? :D

But something I also do to overcome this, is to create a scenario with a good group of students and fellow martial artists, best if from different areas of expertise. The person being "tested" is the butt of the joke so to speak, and the other guys are all part of the scenario to make it more realistic. Most of the time I use the typical "youre in a bar" or "youre on the street and someone tries to mug you" kind of deal. We then discuss how we could have improved our reactions after the fact, and why we failed if it was shown to have been unsuccessful.
This works really great learning to deal with groups of aggressors. You realize that most of the time the odds are against you and you will probably be hurt when the odds are too far against you, but you also learn how you would react in such a situation and whether or not you may have been able to at least live through it.

We try to bring in as many variables as possible, fake knives, or guns, whatever. The thing is that the person or persons under "pressure" are not going to know the scenario before hand. They will just have to deal with the situation, sometimes, it doesnt even get to a physical level if I think theyve used good psychology to talk the person(s) down. But most of the time its a whoop ass fest. haha!

Just some food for thought my man.

"From one thing know ten thousand" - Miyomato Musashi, Book of five rings

"Loy lau hoi sung, lut sau jik chung"

[apoweyn]

Vankuen,

My visualizations are mostly reserved for the sparring match. "Back him into the corner and keep him there." That sort of thing.

Occassionally, I try the "Take him down, steal his wallet, knock up his daughter, and key his car" visualization. But not often.

[Disclaimer: The above was a joke. I didn't really visualize keying his car.]

I'm going to have to write some of your suggestions down. That's good stuff. Do they appear on your website, by the way? I have it bookmarked but haven't been in a while.


Stuart B.

[Vankuen]

I will check on that. I give a basic idea of where the drills come from....but I dont give away aaaallll my secrets. haha!

I will probably make the site a bit more user friendly and provide more in depth information soon. Theres a lot of info on there as it is...and so its a long process to figure out what Im going to do with it next and how Im going to do it.

I still need to update the videos. I havent done that in sometime. Spent do much time on training that Ive forgotten about the video camera!

"From one thing know ten thousand" - Miyomato Musashi, Book of five rings

[apoweyn]

Well, I look forward to seeing what you do with it next.

Thanks Vankuen.


Stuart B.

[HuangKaiVun]

What is "flow"?

Smooth ballet-like soft new-age Taiji motion? In a context of a TRADITIONAL martial art like Taiji or Bagua (let alone a real streetfight), NO.

Being able to respond to an opponent's intent and either accept it or mow through it? YES.

[curtis]

HI gentleman
I believe both of you know what you are talking about. I believe the lack of flowing techniques is a simple problem. (In concept)
Peolpe have to under stand the only way to have any natural movement is to make it natural. The techniques must be trained through neural responses in order to make them natural. (Ex. swimming, or riding a bike. Once you know how to do them, you never forget no matter how long it's been sent to last swam or road.)
The reason for most martial art's mistakes are they never really learned the techniques.
Let's try another example. There is a thing called lag time, (the time it takes for your eyes to see something and brain to respond.) A punch or any technique should be like touching a flame. The hand will pull away as quickly as possible, with out the brains interaction. (This is what I call natural)
there are many ways to learn. Everyone knows this to be true. But all too many martial artists take years to make things natural. Where all natural street fighters will flow in their movements. The reason being they do not think, they just react by instinct, much like a animal's reaction to a threat would be.
A just thought I'd add a little to your conversation.
Good luck in training, and I pray you never need to use it.
Sincerely C.A.G.

[SanSoo Student]

Very important, it can make the difference between sucessfully landing a hit or getting hit. If you are more fluid, then you will be faster during a fight, because you can't think in a real fight.

[apoweyn]

curtis,

well said. that is a fundamental problem with martial arts education, i think. an emphasis on adding information on constantly rather than an emphasis on embedding responses.


stuart b.

[curtis]

Hello Ap.
You may be right? (sorta) execpt whin it comes to natural movement, I belive you should be a master of a few techniques, to have them ingrained so they become a part of you.(thats what techniques you will use in a fight)
after you have mastered your fighting techniques then you can become the artist,(the other part of the M/A's.)which is what I belive you are looking at, AP.

I belive that is the proper,understanding of Musashi's quote, that some others have used out of context.

"From one thing know ten thousand"

or if you have MASTERED one thing,everything else will fall in line.
AT LEAST THATS how I understand it.
see you latter AP. C.A.G.

[This message was edited by curtis on 10-18-01 at 05:10 PM.]

[This message was edited by curtis on 10-18-01 at 05:12 PM.]

[apoweyn]

curtis,

i agree with you. but i don't think many schools are operated according to that principle. in my experience, advancement in an art is very often measured by accumulation. you learn a basic kick, then you learn a more complicated version of it (spinning, jumping, skipping, etc.) rather than learning to implement that basic kick in varying conditions.

many students from that background, i believe, end up being capable of performing a wide variety of techniques, but never really becoming all that familiar with any of them. sparring becomes a showcase of techniques rather than an exchange between people because so few techniques come that naturally to the participants and because, in their minds, skill is measured by the performance of certain techniques and not by the successful application on an opponent.

this is definitely a generalization though, and is as such of very limited use.


stuart b.

[dnc101]

ap and Van, I think you've got it. I've used the scenario concept in training, and it is excellent.

Curtis, I'm going to have to disagree with you. I don't look at techniques as an " if he does this I will do that" propisition. They simply teach us to move. Puting the movements together, changing the technique as the fight changes, and borrowing between techniques are all part of flow. If you have to think technique in a fight, there won't be much of a fight- you loose.

As for Musashi's quote, "Frome one thing know ten thousand", I interpret that differently. In war, as in individual combat, all the principles are interwoven- to the extent that if you know only one principle, all the others can be derived/learned from that single principle. Ballance is a good example. Say you know to use torque to generate power- you will soon learn the principle of ballance if you wish to remain upright. And of course posture is essential to good ballance, and so it goes that from one principle applied to another we eventually develope them all.

[gungfuguy]

DNC...I don't think Curtis had that thought in mind at all. I think he is trying to say (correctly, I might add) that of all the layers of techniques that you learn, you should emphasize mastering the lower layers before adding more techniques on top of them, otherwise you will have engrained nothing and have unnatural movement and your flow will be stifled. Of course it would be better to be a master of many, many techniques...but mastery is the KEY! It is better to be a master of a few techniques than a novice at many. The purpose of engraining techniques is so that the brain does NOT have to be involved during confrontation...that is the begining of mastery.

As far as Musashi goes...I think his book illustrates this example well. The 5 rings were actually 5 basic sets of concepts for dealing with any potential threat. Simplicity allowed Musashi to excel beyond the greatest of masters.

AP, I agree that many schools pile on info upon info and hope some actually hits home. A school should focus on creating mastery one element at a time. The speed with which you master these levels is individually based...isn't that purpose of advancing from one belt to the next?

Any thoughts?

<font color="royal blue" size="5" face="Comic Sans MS"><marquee direction="left">GungFuGuy</marquee></font>

[apoweyn]

cheers dnc

[apoweyn]

gungfuguy,

i agree. i think that progression should probably be a question of learning a technique and then learning to apply it in increasingly 'interactive' situations. 1) learn technique, 2) one step sparring, 3) three step sparring, 4) concentrated sparring drills of one sort or another, 5) free sparring, and so on.

i think one of the biggest hinderances to flow is simply that the event so rarely resembles the practice. if you practice the kick in the air, it's as perfect as you make it. sure you still have to get the form right. but the imagined 'effect' can be flawless. introduce an opponent into the mix, and things quickly get less perfect.

so when a student without much interactive experience throws a kick and it doesn't land the way it's supposed to, i think there's a mental speed bump. "hang on! that was supposed to land!" and the flow is halted.

the more progressively accustomed people are to all the variables that can occur with an opponent, i suspect the more flow a person is capable of. but that level of comfort doesn't come with constantly introducing new techniques.


stuart b.

[curtis]

Ap I thought you understood. Simplicity is the key. You must have a few basic responses ingrained, to handle all potential threats. (Much like Miyamoto Musashi's book of five rings.) the goal should be survival. In order to survive conflict, you really need just a few things. And those techniques should be ingrained properly so that they become as natural as breathing.
So the question should be, How do you learn to ingrained techniques ?NOT IF YOU SHOULD?
The ways that you have suggested are the traditional approach. And although they work, it takes a very long time to learn, (the big problem is really, students don't want to take time to learn correctly.)
You must remember the Asian culture is quite different than the American culture. In Asia spending 15 to 20 years to learn an art is not unheard of. But in the United States, four to five years, is almost too much time to take for the average person.
So what I was suggesting is to modernize the learning process, to speed up the learning process.
It really is nothing new.
You must learn technique's first. (Intellectually,how, why, when, where.)
Second you must teach the body (slowly)
Third you must train to ingrain those given technique. ( To give brain out of the way!) In the third phaze of learning, you must always make sure that you are training correctly, so it would be advisable to go back fourth between steps 2and 3 often to make sure your training correctly.

Okay for those of you can do not want to THINK!
Look at it this way.
YOU HAVE TO CUT OUT ALL THE [Bull'S with a capital HIT] OUT OF THE ART! And take it back to its roots (to learn and teach the art of war), COMBAT/SURIVIAL is the real purpose of all martial art's. Now if you want to take 20 years to learn to defend yourself. Be my guess! But those who want to learn faster, must learn correctly. And to make it is simple as possible is always the best option.
C.A.G.

[HuangKaiVun]

Neither curtis nor dnc are wrong.

Both are right, though they're addressing totally different issues.

The old incarnations of styles usually were very simple and yet hardly rudimentary. For example, Hsing Yi once had only 5 fists. My Seng Men style has only 1 set with 36 moves.

If you know one technique well, variations arise naturally.

[Spectre]

To some point I believe that everyone is right.

Everyone's thought/response process is not the same. What I understand or what works for me is not going to allow someone else to understand or even be able to 'work' the same.

The bottom line? What works for you? If it works for you and you are able to defend yourself or your family/loved ones than you have accomplished the main goal.

I don't think that anyone misses the point. If an idea makes you think about it instead of standing stagnate without thought than at least you were willing to try and see it from a different angle.

As for 'From one thing know ten thousand'....I personally believe that this means to always start with the basics or foundation. Sometimes as creatures of habit we tend to reverse engineer things when we have problems - we start with the last step or the hardest things - often having to work backwards until we find the problem. If we look at the simplest step, the basics, we can often correct all of the problems throught the rest of the chain.

But that is just my two cents...

Kevin

__________________________________________________ ______________

Continued blessings in your life and your training.

The key to understanding is to open your mind and your heart and then the eyes will follow.

[gungfuguy]

I read your profile and I really like your response for how long you have trained: "not long enough".

I agree with you in principle. but what do you mean by a movement? Or sets?

We classify things differently so I have a hard time understanding the concept of having specific techniques for a specific response. We concentrate on clearing an area instead of one specific response. Classical wing chun calls it open or closing perimeters or gates. If something enters your gate, you clear it out...the technique that you chose is less important then getting rid of the offending limb. It also allows you to be offensive and defensive at the same time. This was hard for me to understand at first, but now it makes perfect sense. Instead of block, then strike...it is now clear and strike in a single motion. :cool:

<font color="royal blue" size="5" face="Comic Sans MS"><marquee direction="left">GungFuGuy</marquee></font>

[apoweyn]

curtis,

while i don't think that martial arts training needs to be about combat necessarily, i agree with you that if a person's emphasis is combat, that's the way to go about it.


stuart b.

[Spectre]

Martial:
1 : of, relating to, or suited for war or a warrior
2 : relating to an army or to military life
3 : experienced in or inclined to war

Art:
1 : skill acquired by experience, study, or observation


Is the purpose of martial arts in reality to be anything other than combat? Not that individuals do not use it for exercise or as just a hobby, but seriously! What should the primary definition be when applying principles and theories?

Just curiousity killing the Spectre...


Kevin

__________________________________________________ _____________

Continued blessings in your life and your training.

The key to understanding is to open your mind and your heart and then the eyes will follow.

[apoweyn]

spectre,

you pegged the first definition of art that appears in my dictionary. but here's no. 4: the conscious use of skill and creative imagination esp. in the production of aesthetic objects.

that, to me, suggests a level of subjectivity and individual interpretation that leaves room for different motivations.

art is often inspired by something without necessarily adhering to the reality of that inspiration. so that a painting like 'la guernica' (sp?) may reflect the chaos of war without actually physically resembling the war. but the title, 'la guernica' means... something war related (la guerre being 'war').

so, to me, the term martial arts means a practice inspired by the idea of personal combat. whether you're a realist or not is entirely up to you.


stuart b.

[Spectre]

ap Oweyn...

Just to be the role of the antagonist for awhile... ;)

so, to me, the term martial arts means a practice inspired by the idea of personal combat.

A practice of [BLANK] inspired by the idea of personal combat?

What is it that is inspired by the idea of personal combat that you practice?

I enjoy understanding other's perspectives!

Kevin

__________________________________________________ _________

Continued blessings in your life and your training.

The key to understanding is to open your mind and your heart and then the eyes will follow.

[apoweyn]

spectre,

me? well, if you're asking for styles, i started in taekwondo. then eskrima. then i found an instructor in dan inosanto's lineage. i'm a mutt. that's the long and the short of it.

here's the thing, though. people love to offer up the dictionary definition of the word 'martial.' warlike. of or pertaining to war. and so on.

but show me one other instance of the word 'art' where it's not used to denote something subjective and interpretive.

i don't understand why we would tell other people how to refer to their arts. am i going to tell someone else that they can't use the term 'martial' simply because they mostly point spar? nope. do i doubt that point sparring will translate in reality? yep.

how many of us who train for 'reality' have ever been in a life-or-death situation? how many of us have actually killed someone? because that's what happens in war, right? if we haven't faced that situation, aren't we, technically, practicing 'brawling arts' or 'civil arts'? or something?

to my mind, the term 'martial arts', taken that literally, cannot help but be ironic when applied to anyone but those who have been in actual mortal combat. the rest of us are just posers by comparison.

so am i going to tell this guy next to me that he's not a 'martial artist' because i practice with low kicks and he doesn't? knowing full well that there are people out there who were fighting for their lives while i was safely tucked away in training studio fighting for a win or a pin? too ironic for my taste.

but in the end, it's all just words. yeah?


stuart b.

p.s. forgive me if this was a bit intense. tomorrow, i'm starting college classes again after graduating with my B.A. eight years ago. and, frankly, i'm a little anxious about it.

[Spectre]

Let me reassure you that I am asking these questions because I enjoy debating and hearing other's interpretations. I mean no ill intent by any of these posts as I am sure you do not as well.

You said: "...while i don't think that martial arts training needs to be about combat necessarily..."

I fully agree with you that the word 'art' by definition is always open to creativity and interpretation. This goes for any form of art.

In the martial arts (Art of War), every style at some point is open to personal interpretation and creativity (modification). That does not however negate the fact that all of the martial arts were designed by it's original artisans to be a means of self defense, offense, or general combat.

In my humble opinion, combat needs to be the determining perspective when looking at a martial art and it's effectiveness or even when breaking down it's different facets (techniques). After all, I am sure that you can agree that most people who come and post here are looking at the martial arts from a combat effectiveness perspective.

This is not to say that your ideas, regarding martial arts not being just for combat, are not valid. I just believe that they are not valid on the topic of whether fluidity plays an important role. I do believe that your ideas on the martial arts not just being combat oriented would make a great post that draws out other's unique outlook.

I definitely enjoy reading your posts however as they do make me stop and look at things a different way!

Kevin

__________________________________________________ ___________

Continued blessings in your life and your training.

The key to understanding is to open your mind and your heart and then the eyes will follow.

[apoweyn]

hey kevin,

no offense taken or meant. like i said, i started college again today 8 years after graduating with my b.a. my nerves are a bit frayed. [grin]

perhaps this should be a different thread, but whatever.

as far as this pertains to the importance of flow in combat, i think you're right. it doesn't. and as far as my personal outlook, i think i'm walking the tightrope between combative and not. on the one hand, i'm devoted to the concept of reality, not so much because i believe my life to be a battle for survival, but just because... it's reality. if a drill won't work in life, i'm not really that interested. but what works in life isn't necessarily combative. if it makes me feel good, like a difficult wushu routine might, then it's worked within the context of my life.

i don't know. that's a bit complicated.

back to the question. yeah, when these arts originated, they were indeed combative. life or death. do or die. but that scene has changed considerably. in war, air power, assault rifles, and missiles will have as much to do with dominance as the capabilities of individual soldiers will. indeed the know how of large groups of soldiers will dictate victory more than the martial prowess of one soldier.

as for the urban battlefield, i don't know. like i said, my life isn't a daily struggle for survival. perhaps one day that situation will arise. and perhaps it won't. and if it does, will the situation be such that my training will help? multiple attackers? guns? i don't know. but with that kind of uncertainty and probability, it just seems... wasteful to consider that martial arts would be solely about fighting.

i don't think that was your stance anyway though.

the face of personal combat is, to my mind, somewhat different than it once was. society protects many of us from truly life-or-death situations. and when it doesn't, judgment is as likely to come from a glock as a fist. martial arts will certainly help get you through a friday night ****up, mind you. but i feel like martial arts needs some relevance beyond combat because combat simply isn't a daily reality for most of us. and for some of us, it never has been or will be.

this is a complicated issue, and i tend to see the validity of both sides of the fence (particularly given recent events). but you did say that this was a friendly debate, so i feel safe enough in playing this side out a bit.

cheers kevin.

stuart b.

[dzu]

Just to clarify: What kind of 'fluidity' are we discussing? When most people use the term 'fluidity' they either refer to:

a) their own response - transitioning from 'technique' to 'technique', i.e. linking up several actions together

AND/OR

b) interaction with their opponent - using the appropriate response to the opponent's attack
i.e. aplying the right action at the right time

Both are closely related of course, but from my experience, it's easy to confuse one for the other.

Dzu

[curtis]

'Dzu
good question.
Question of fluid movement, as far as I see it, is the ability to move/react to the opponent, no matter what the opponent does. (To strike and restrict the opponent ability to defend or attack you.)
In order to do this. You have to be loose, (if the muscles are tense, the body's ability to adapt is greatly reduce.) This looseness, only comes through consistent proper training habits. As well as confidence in what you are doing.
I find fear, to be a big part of the problem. If trust in your techniques is not present, the uncertainty will show, giving the opponent and offense potential.
Now question should be, how to stop fear? Since it is part of the flow.
I believe, that I should shut down the opponent's ability to counter my attack, this is done by using an offensive threat in which a natural defense is also present. In doing this properly, will only leave a few variable options open to the opponent. With 1 or 2 possibilities to respond to, means that there will be less thought involved.
Another way is. The get the brain out of the way. Your brain is just too slow to see and react to what is happening during of confrontation. The body must be trained to react naturally to possible variables in which the opponent might use.
I could go on and on... In the belief of flowing techniques, you should have a few techniques/concepts to handle a wide variety of responses. By training just a few, you can learn quicker and build the confidence in yourself defense skills. And then move on. One step leading to another,and another until you're happy with where you are at. (Me personally each step I take leads to a new step. A never ending quest for personal excellence. One step at a time.)
sincerely C.A.G.

[Spectre]

I personally think that being fluid goes hand in hand with blending your techniques.

All of your techniques should blend right into the next as if it were one fluid movement.

Water as it travels down a stream never stops. If it encounters an obstacle like a rock, it just continues to flow around it - continuing with it's intent.

A fighter should be the same way. You should not have to stop and think about what you are going to do. It should be a reaction to the intent of your opponent. If you stop to think - you will break the blending and cease to be fluid.

If a fighter is no longer fluid, their intent can be read much easier.


Kevin

__________________________________________________ ______________

Continued blessings in your life and your training.

The key to understanding is to open your mind and your heart and then the eyes will follow.

[curtis]

per haps I was a little long winded.
trying to get outsiders an inside veiw,isnt always easy.
your point was very nicely done,but I feel that leaveing things vage can tend to lead people in the wrong direction.(on the other hand saying to much can do the same thing.)
I feel its like finger painting over a masters peice of art,and trying to explaneing why and how you made it better.(but thats only one persons apponion.)
lets hear yours?
have a great day. C.A.G.

[Spectre]

Being too vague can often lead to more confusion.

My post addressed two questions in just a simple manner: What is fluidity and why is it important in a fight?

You addressed the question of fluidity as well as shutting down the opponent's fluidity, which is also an intregal part of keeping one's own fluidity. This brings us back to the simultaneous offense and defense. Yin and Yang - the offense should compliment the defense and vice versa.

In the end - we are saying the same thing as you already know!! ;)

Kevin

__________________________________________________ _________

Continued blessings in your life and your training.

The key to understanding is to open your mind and your heart and then the eyes will follow.