aliveness revisited

[IRONMONK]

This was posted on another forum:

"Hi Bk (and the rest of you),

I thought I'd lend another voice to the discussion. I've been training the martial arts for many years, but only started attending SBG gatherings and training with their methodologies in the past 3 years or so. So I've seen both sides of the coin. While I can see why you might have some of the ideas you currently hold about Aliveness and how SBGers train, my own experience with it has shown it to be very different.

One definition of Aliveness could be "training with a resisiting opponent all the time." But it's of vital importance to specify that it must be a PROGRESSIVELY resisting opponent. If a beginner is learning a technique and their partner is resisiting 100% from the get go, that beginner will never learn the technique and at best will come close by having to apply a lot of strength, speed, and other physical attributes. Their partner should begin by giving almost no resistance; as the beginner gets the technique down, the partner should slowly begin to give them more trouble. Gradually, the partner builds them up to the point where they are still having success when near 100% resistance is offered. It's common sense, and most people do it in some aspects of their training. But I think it's rare for people to apply it in ALL aspects of their training.

Addressing your specific points:

1. As far as the size and coordination level of SBG athletes, we come in all shapes, sizes, and skill levels. Matt himself is very tall, but he's not incredibly muscular and in overall size is smaller than many of the guys that I teach and train with on a day to day basis. He just happens to be taller than most, and has been doing this stuff for long enough to make it look sickenly easy - but don't mistake that for what he teaches to be some special "tall man's techniques". I have students ranging from 135 to nearly 400 pounds at the gym where I currently teach! I have four or five women in my class, the smallest of whom is probably 95 pounds. My youngest student is 16 and the oldest is 48. Everyone trains with everyone else, everyone trains Alive with progressive resistance, and no one gets hurt. No one is beat up or brain damaged, everyone leaves smiling and tired. And that's been the case at every SBG seminar/gathering I've attended. Little people, big people, men, women, cordinated, uncordinated, all learning the same techniques in the same manner, and improving in actual ability faster than anywhere else in my experience.

2. For people that have no patience for structure or drill and want aliveness all the time, there are two possibilities. The first is that they don't really understand Aliveness, they just think it is fighting 100% from day one. A lot of these times, these are people with ego issues who are there to prove something, not to learn anyway. The other possibility is that they do understand what Aliveness is all about, they've had a taste of the "truth" and now anything less is waste of valuable training time. These athletes know very well the importance of drilling, and to an extent structure - as long as those structured drills involve a progressively resisting opponent!

What SBG advocates is a 3-step method for teaching any technique: first, introduce it to the student. Show them the when, why, and how of the movement, whether it be an armlock, a throw, or a right cross. No resistance, just enough repetitions so they know they are doing it correctly. This is the shortest of the three phases.

Then, move on and isolate that movement in a drill that involves a progressively resisting opponent. For the right cross, that could be defending several of your partners punches, then finding the timing and range to return with a right cross at the appropriate time. If both students are beginners, they will be closely monitered, ensuring that they are not going anywhere full speed or power, simply learning timing and motion along with the technique at hand. This is where most of the training time is spent. If form breaks down and the students aren't getting it, they go back to the isolation phase until they do.

Lastly, the student will be given a chance to integrate that tool into his entire game. Here, especially when striking is involved, this will be done in a slow and controlled manner, but always with a progressively resisting opponent. It may take several weeks for a raw beginner to feel comfortable trying some light "timing sparring" with a partner in an unrehearsed script, but the goal is to get them there as quickly as possible, and to keep them at that comfort level once they achieve it. Eventually, when they are ready, they can choose to test themselves with hard sparring using all the protective equipement that allows us to do this safely. But that intensity is not where most of your training time should be spent. Just because it's Alive doesn't mean it has to be damaging.

3. I think SBGers have an extremely high amount of respect for the various benefits of any art they find effective, spirituality included. I think we simply look for that spirituality in different places within our chosen arts, and are selective in what styles we choose to pursue based on our experience with their usefulness under fire.

4. The three step "I" method I outlined above pretty much covers this. In addition, I have been using Aliveness principles in teaching all my students for some time now. Many of the people I teach are smaller, weaker, and less coordinated than I am. But they are getting SO much better, so much faster than I did when I was first training martial arts. I'd like to say it's because I'm such a great coach, but I really don't think that's the case. It's this silly idea of "everything with progressively resisiting opponents". I shake my head and wish I could get that lost time back again, I would be so much better than I am now if I had simply used better training methods back then.

5. You don't need to duke it out all the time to train with Aliveness all the time. That's the misconception that makes people want to stick with two-man forms, katas, etc., the idea that they have to get beat up and hurt to train like an athlete. It's not the case at all. On the other hand, it does depend on what their goals are. If they are interested in learning how to do showy flips and kicks, they should take Wushu. If they want to learn relaxation, tai chi is great. Aikido is also very artistic and spiritual in its training methods, and that is perfect for people who place a high degree of importance on those things. But for people who want to be able to learn to defend themselves against someone who is aggressively fighting back, a combat art trained in an Alive manner is the only choice. I agree it's more difficult to train raw beginners in striking arts in Alive fashion from the get go. But it can be done, as per my example above, it just has to go a little slower than the grappling and clinch games. The great thing about "Aliveness" or whatever you want to call it, is that you can integrate it into your training with whatever style you like. It doesn't have to be with SBG or even with any of the arts they advocate. It just has to be trained and tested, day in and day out, against progressively resisting opponents.

Sorry for the length of this post...I hope this doesn't come across like some sales pitch for SBG, because it's not. I just really believe in this idea and it doesn't always get explained in enough detail over net. Hope this helps!

Best,

Jeff"

So my question is do you guys train with progressive resistance?if not please explain why?

[kj]

Originally posted by IRONMONK
So my question is do you guys train with progressive resistance?if not please explain why?

Of course. You elaborated nicely on the concept.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

[old jong]

I can tell that everytimes I practice with my sifu,he hits me and I do my best to defend 100%.I do the same for him. My students try to hit me at 100% but I respect their level by giving them just enough "challenge" for their capacities.

What is SBG?....:confused:

[anerlich]

www.straightblastgym.com

I train BJJ as well as WC, so I understand the principles at some level at least I think. To my mind there does seem to be a bigger gap than there should be between doing isolation techniques as a beginner and going from there to full contact sparring in our WC practice, but at my academy we're always working on ways to get past that and improve.

I've always enjoyed Matt Thornton's philosophy and his posts on the Underground, though I don't agreee with everything he says. But I've found it intriguing enough to have ordered his Functional JKD and Crazy Monkey boxing DVD sets last year, and waiting breathlessly for them to arrive.

[reneritchie]

Andrew, please let me know what you think of Crazy Monkey. I saw Dhira raving about it, and am curious as to what its all about.

[Tom Kagan]

Originally posted by reneritchie
Andrew, please let me know what you think of Crazy Monkey. I saw Dhira raving about it, and am curious as to what its all about.

'Crazy Monkey' is a name for a method to teach a progression from a very effective defense posture designed to protect mostly the head and to build a strong overall defense through the development of a platform to launch confident entries into infighting. From what I know about both, 'Crazy Monkey' is, in my opinion, ends up to be virtually identical to Cus D'Amato's 'peek-a-boo' boxing style.

Among other things, Matt Thornton uses the 'Crazy Monkey' method to bring along beginners very quickly to a level where they are no longer afraid of being hit because their defensive skills would be very, very good at that point. It would be up to the practitioner at that point as to how far they want to take it from there.

Believe me or don't (it doesn't particularly matter to me), but Ving Tsun actually has the exact same 'full defense' posture as Crazy Monkey. The Ving Tsun method to bring a person to the point of when to train it, however is inverted in that this is taught/used at a much later stage instead of initially. But, I think Ving Tsun's methods of progression are nearly 180 degrees inverted from styles descendant from the military. With every day that passes in my training, I am even more convinced this was 100% intentional from its origin (which throws a lot of the stories of why it was developed out on their ass, but that's another thread - or, perhaps a whole book. ;) )

I haven't seen Rodney King's Crazy Monkey video series yet, but I do know Matt Thornton personally - he was the one who showed me what 'Crazy Monkey' was. Matt's a very nice guy and has excellent skill. You can't argue with his results. ;) (I still chuckle to myself when I remember when Matt asked me to try a head snap-down on him - he's 6'9" and I'm 5'8".) His organization puts out videos with top notch quality information.

"No, no, the other Rodney King." -- Matt Thornton

[yuanfen]

Tom Kagan 's post and bracketed comments::

From what I know about both, 'Crazy Monkey' is, in my opinion, ends up to be virtually identical to Cus D'Amato's 'peek-a-boo' boxing style.

((On the D'Amato framework-- when Tyson grounding in the peekaboo began to fade post D'Amato he also began to be more vulnerable down the center as first shown in the Buster Douglas fight- continued slide after that together with lack of mobility related to deterioration- faster in some sports than in other activities with some variations in rates in individual cases))

Among other things, Matt Thornton uses the 'Crazy Monkey'

(Havent looked into Thornton))

Believe me or don't (it doesn't particularly matter to me), but Ving Tsun actually has the exact same 'full defense' posture as Crazy Monkey. The Ving Tsun method to bring a person to the point of when to train it, however is inverted in that this is taught/used at a much later stage instead of initially. But, I think Ving Tsun's methods of progression are nearly 180 degrees inverted from styles descendant from the military.


((VT/WC- completely agree imo- on above.I show that defense-
with wing chun framework -details of posture))

With every day that passes in my training, I am even more convinced this was 100% intentional from its origin (which throws a lot of the stories of why it was developed out on their ass, but that's another thread - or, perhaps a whole book. )

((Reasonable view IMO))

Joy

[foolinthedeck]

can someone put SBG in basic terms.
that website just looks like zoo animals wrestling.
sure i could look for myself.
but i have better thinsg to do.

[anerlich]

"can someone put SBG in basic terms."

It is in basic terms.

"sure i could look for myself.
but i have better thinsg to do."

sure, I could explain it to you in words of one syllable if I felt like it, but I have better thinsg [sic] to do too.

[anerlich]

Tom,

I have to say I was actually expecting something along those lines with the Crazy Monkey.

My Sifu is quite the peekaboo boxing aficionado, both in history and deployment. He also sees strong similarities.

I was looking for something which would help me avoid getting my clock cleaned quite so regularly when we box. By the sound of things, I need to work with it for about six months before I tell him I have it ;-)

I agree with your remarks about Mike Tyson, though to my mind his career was stunted as much by his asociations with Don King and Robyn Givens, and his separation from his orginal management team as it was with his separation from CdA. While everyone was in awe of his punching power in his early title fights, he was also an excellent defensive fighter, much better then than later, and this was no doubt Cus d'Amato's influence.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Jeff:

I've been training myself and my students with what you call Aliveness and Progressive Resistance for many years now...probably first got into it in high gear about 1991...

It's everything you say it is...I haven't read this entire thread yet -only read your opening post - WHICH WAS EXCELLENT.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Anerlich:

You might be interested to know that GM Cheung did a little-known semi-private video of himself and a peek-a-boo boxer who lives here in NYC...wherein they do some light sparring. This gentlemen, whose name is Raphael Ramos, studied some TWC here in NYC for a period of time back in the early 90's...

Very interesting stuff. (Email me about it if you wish.)



Jeff:

Forgot to mention on my first post that I do Traditional Wing Chun (TWC) and Catch-as-Catch-Can Wrestling.

[lawrenceofidaho]

Here's a video clip of Rodney King demonstrating and teaching crazy monkey at a seminar.

http://www.openmat.dk/video/sbg/rodney_dvdteaser.wmv

The thing I noticed about this clip, is that all the students who try the crazy monkey defense end up getting blasted with body shots, and although Rodney is shown using it, we never see a body shot thrown at him to witness how he would deal with it.

Is there anyone with some experience at using CM, that could shed some light on how it is used against bodywork? Do you think some of the CM ideas could be used to effectively protect your head if you have been mounted and your opponent is raining down with punches? What are it's strengths and weaknesses?

Also, can anyone who use a similar concept in their Wing Chun lineage share some insights about their stuff. Are you deriving the structure from the Biu Tze form? In what situations would you advocate deviating from "normal" Wing Chun structure to the Crazy Monkey /defensive structure, and why?

Thanks for anything you're willing to share.

-Lawrence

[yenhoi]

"Using" CM structure, you would intercept body strikes with your elbows, or move into clinch range and get a tie-up or hold, into a takedown or damage in the clinch.

There is at least one or two threads on the main forum about CM.

www.defend.net and www.mma.tv both have MANY threads on CM.

:eek:

[Shadowboxer]

"Do you think some of the CM ideas could be used to effectively protect your head if you have been mounted and your opponent is raining down with punches?"

>I don't think so. I don't know the name of the tech but there is a submission from the mount where you press your opponent's right arm down to the ground as he covers his head with your right arm. You work your other arm up underneath his pinned arm and grab your right wrist and pull it towards you, dislocating the shoulder and elbow.

We do a "boxing" drill where we cover like that so our response to that is lap sao with lan sao using the double turning lan saos from CK to rip those hands away and hit with elbows in the process.

[Tom Kagan]

The thing I noticed about this clip, is that all the students who try the crazy monkey defense end up getting blasted with body shots, and although Rodney is shown using it, we never see a body shot thrown at him to witness how he would deal with it.


The reason for your observation is because Rodney King knows how to box, whereas the people shown within what is a very short DVD teaser are just "head hunters."

I have not seen the recording of the entire seminar. However, based on what is shown within the DVD teaser, I have no doubt nearly all of your questions are answered thoroughly within the context of Rodney King's 'Crazy Monkey' methods on the full DVD recordings.

[AndrewS]

On Crazy Monkey-

I've seen what Dhira's shown me, watched a SBG guy use it to spar Dhira, and have been playing with it myself for about 4-5 wks now.

Basically you use a tight structure to protect your head, keep your body back to bait them in for body shots, dropping levels to stop the shots with your elbows, and counter, keeping pressure on.

Without getting in to its vulnerabilities, I see a few excellent uses for CM-

1). Nice place to go when you're being out boxed- if someone is teeing off on you, CM offers you nice protection to get your wits about you and regroup- especially at a time when opening up may get your clock cleaned.

2). Very nice defensive bait when sparring- you can sucker someone into range, let them keep throwing, then explode in, riding a shot back, breaking their rhythm and messing with their head. Frankly, this is worth the price of admission.

Dunno about use from mount.

Lawrence- think escrima/WT transition.


Andrew

[lawrenceofidaho]

Yenhoi,

thank you for the thread links. -I'll definitely check them out.......


Tom Kagen,

I'm sure Mr. King discusses it in depth on the DVD. -I was just hoping to understand a bit more about it before I would consider spending $50. ;)

I don't mind purchasing videos once in a while, but my budget isn't limitless, so I generally like to do a little research (if I can) before I part with my cash.

I'm also interested to hear any analysis from a Wing Chun viewpoint, which might be somewhat different from the viewpoint of SBG guys on the DVD who mostly train Boxing and Muay Thai for striking.


Shadowboxer,

I think the submission you are referring to is a "keylock".

Nice idea for a boxing drill. -I'm going to try it out tonight. :)


Thanks for all of your responses so far.
-Lawrence

[lawrenceofidaho]

Hi Andrew,

"think escrima/WT transition"

I remember Master Bill Newman teaching similar concepts when he was showing pocket stick techniques at the millineum seminar. It was slightly different though, because his palms were a short distance away from his forehead, and he was also using the small stick to hit incoming attacks, whereas if you were performing CM empty handed, you would probably just be using the elbows.

"keep your body back to bait them in for body shots, dropping levels to stop the shots with your elbows"

So the palms stay on the forehead, but the legs bend to drop the elbows down on the attack?

"Nice place to go when you're being out boxed- if someone is teeing off on you, CM offers you nice protection to get your wits about you and regroup- especially at a time when opening up may get your clock cleaned."

I've been experimenting using a slightly modified version of Sifu's "street defense" pre-fight position to work against the jab and cross. I angle my forearms a bit upward (thus pushing the palm heel forward and the fingers back) to protect my wrist in case I happen to catch a hard shot into my hand. -So far it's been working quite well, but I haven't had the chance to try it against a HIGHLY SKILLED boxer yet. (I have a friend that's got a few amateur fights under his belt, but I he won't be available to train for a few weeks.)

As always, thanks for your frank and informative response.
-Lawrence

[AndrewS]

Lawrence,

As far as I know the palms stay on the forehead- Dhira's been through this stuff with King and Thornton, so he's the best one to ask.

You gonna be in Vegas this summer?

Andrew

[anerlich]

A word of warning -

I ordered Street Boxing and Functional JKD from SBGi back in Dec 2003. Despite several emails and phone calls, including an undertaking from SBGi to resend my order in early March 2004, it still hasn't arrived.

On Saturday (2 months anniversary since the second delivery was supposed to be sent, and nearly five months since my original order) I'll be emailing Matt Thornton direct to ask for a more robust and trackable arrangement to get my order to me. Posts on the Underground Forum indicate my experience is not unique.

I'm sure the DVD's are great, but the delivery system appears in need of improvement. hope your ordering experience is better than mine.

[KenWingJitsu]

Believe me or don't (it doesn't particularly matter to me), but Ving Tsun actually has the exact same 'full defense' posture as Crazy Monkey.

No, it doesn't.



So the palms stay on the forehead, but the legs bend to drop the elbows down on the attack?

Correct.
In the begining most people (myself included) tend to focus on attacking & defending the head, becoming 'lazy' with the body defense. After a few body shots, you will do it properly. :D

Andrew's description of it and when best to use it is right on. As for mixing it with WC/WT.........well, that's another thread altogether, but sufficeth to say, I am doing quite well at doing so.

I spent the weekend with Matt Thornton, and he may actually have a slightly better progresssion of Crazy Monkey than Rodney who developed it.

As for aliveness.......whew...dont get me started. Lets just say I refuse to train WT/WC or anything for that matter...any other way, and yes the first post is a perfect description of aliveness...or "training live" as Andrew and I say. With WC, take your techs OUT of chi-sao, form a 'real' application, and then...drill it live. Live means 'real & unexpected' - real intent. (KJ, this is a brief answer to the last thread).

I could go on & on.

[Edmund]

From watching the clip, it looks a bit like "Boxing for Those who can't Box" - i.e. you may not be able to outbox a good boxer but he'll have a hard time getting a big punch through for a couple of seconds. For NHB fighters, it can give them enough time to move in and take their opponent down or at least tie them up.

From a Wing Chun viewpoint, perhaps it can be a "Bridging for those who can't Bridge". i.e. When a boxer is going for a big overhand, you go in CM style and step forward to the inside of the punch. Then you use your Crazy Snake and Crazy Crane all over his face. ;)



Originally posted by lawrenceofidaho


I'm also interested to hear any analysis from a Wing Chun viewpoint, which might be somewhat different from the viewpoint of SBG guys on the DVD who mostly train Boxing and Muay Thai for striking.

[lawrenceofidaho]

(posted by Anerlich)


I'm sure the DVD's are great, but the delivery system appears in need of improvement.

LMAO!! :D
You have a way with words, Andrew.......

[lawrenceofidaho]

Dhira,

thanks for clarifying. -I appreciate it.


Andrew S,

I'll PM you later this week about Vegas.


Edmund,

Crazy Snake and Crazy Crane? -Aren't those both "lost" styles from the Red Boat? (I hope their practitioners write books about them soon.) :D

[Edmund]

Originally posted by lawrenceofidaho

Crazy Snake and Crazy Crane? -Aren't those both "lost" styles from the Red Boat? (I hope their practitioners write books about them soon.) :D

Actually it's an upcoming instructional in DVD format.
Pre-Order NOW from Red Boat Gym International!
PHONE: 1800-RED-BOAT
(Warning: Orders may get lost for countries below the equator)

[AndrewS]

Ed,

'Bridging for those who can't bridge' is a nice way to put it- if you're outclassed and are eating shots 'cos you can't get in, that's another nice use.

An aside on the alive training thing- mixing rounds of clinch and range work with chi sao tends to bring out some very nice things- you find the chi sao in your sparring, and the intent gets much stronger in your chi sao, forcing things to get cleaner. Those little 'I touched you' shots disappear, and you start lining each other up for termination- which is what you should be doing, IMO.


Andrew

[Edmund]

Andrew,

As an aside on your aside on alive training, I just read a very enlightening post by Roy Harris on another forum.

Makes me wish I had devoted a bit less time sparring and having fun. I guess the best method is to do the 4 to 10 hours of work first and have a little fun after the work is done.

If the correct mechanics and intent of a technique are ingrained properly, I'm going to be less likely to use the little touch shots and more likely to use clean techniques.


Quote of Roys follows:


Developing a repeatable skill has very little to do with having fun. While it is possible to develop a skill by while having fun, the process is much slower.

The process to performing the reps is simple: Do the reps. Start out slow. Build up your speed with time. Don't spar right away. Don't talk. Stay focused. Do them on each side of your body. Pay attention to each and every movement. Write down your observations and epiphanies. Spar with it after four to ten hours of reps. Add one form of resistance as you master each movement. Spar with it. Add variables as you progress. Review your notes and observations. Do more reps. Repeat the process.

Notice I said nothing about doing this with an instructor or during class. Performing repetitions is something you should be doing with a training partner outside of the classroom. Those who say an instructor is trying to milk a student for money by having them do more reps are ignorant of this subject matter. Time, numerous styles and numerous masters have honored this training method for hundred of years.

An experienced wrestling coach will emphasize repetitions. An experienced boxing coach will emphasize repetitions. An experienced Muay Thai coach will emphasize repetitions. Yes, there is a progressive method to performing the repetitions, but still, the emphasis is on repetitions.

Repetitions build musclar strength, endurance, memory, familiarity and confidence. And, if the student is disciplined enough, the student is guaranteed to experience numerous revelations!

[reneritchie]

TTT for South African MA ;)

[AndrewS]

Hey Ed,

I'd say that he's describing *one* successful training approach out of many used by a variety of coaches.

While just mucking about is a Darwinian way to train (only a few get good), there's a continumn of good methods.

What I've been having fun with these days are rounds of 2-5 minutes, alternating technical work (in which we still keep each other sharp unless there are major coordination issues), with live rounds set up to bring out the technical piece done immediately prior, and done at low to moderate intensity 30-40%, just on the edge of needing headgear and pads depending on the app and the day- i.e. the shoulder bump from SNT is in our chi sao sections, so we work that, then do some greco-clinch work where you're looking for the go-behind- if a guy is fast and loose on the go behind, but a shade too tight to turn to face, the shoulder bump works as a body check to make space to re-face. This approach is working very well for me right now.

I've seen the 'do the reps' approach, and unequivocally think that if you do the reps without a kinesthetic context (i.e. feeling the real deal as you'ld actually use it), you're wasting your time.

Repetition is necessary, but you have to know what you're repeating. In BJJ that's fairly clear, but in Wing Chun, sadly, rather less so. IMO, every piece and impulse of simple poon sao- fook/bong/tan is a body mechanic, strategy, and setup, applicable through almost any contact situation. Basic and easy as those ideas are, most people who do Wing Chun never even get to know them.

Andrew

[reneritchie]

Not my response from Roy's thread, but from the same/similar thread on Jen's forum:

Most people need both kinds of training. They need no-stress stuff to build basic movement patterns, and resistance training like sparring to embed those movements into stuff that holds up under stress conditions.

This is why thousands of reps of form or non-resistance drills will not translate *IF* you don't spend a good amount of complementary time doing the same thing under progressive levels of stress.

(Some people can greatly reduce the solo/non-resistance stuff due to natural movement aptitudes, and some people can reduce somewhat the stress training due to natural timing and mental sets)

[kj]

Originally posted by reneritchie
Most people need both kinds of training.

Yup.



(Some people can greatly reduce the solo/non-resistance stuff due to natural movement aptitudes, and some people can reduce somewhat the stress training due to natural timing and mental sets)

Yup again. The solution is not in debating extremes, but rather in balance and timing optimized for the individual.

Regards,
- kj

[Edmund]

Originally posted by AndrewS
Repetition is necessary, but you have to know what you're repeating.


Definitely.


]Originally posted by reneritchie
This is why thousands of reps of form or non-resistance drills will not translate *IF* you don't spend a good amount of complementary time doing the same thing under progressive levels of stress.


True. But Roy still advocates doing the thousand reps first which is interesting coming from someone who teaches BJJ.

[anerlich]

Hi guys,

I emailed Matt Thornton direct today and suffice to say I got a very prompt, generous and professional reply to my complaint regarding my missing order, which I am quite happy with. Reading between the lines (though he didn't say this), he may have had some issues with staff who couldn't quite keep their end up.

Will keep U posted on its delivery.

[reneritchie]

Roy's not alone in that in BJJ. Sperry posted that he doesn't let his students onto the mats unless they've done 100 reps of at least 3 techniques. Bravo commented that BJJ (and MA by extension) is one of the few endeavors where people expect to get good without doing any work. He said imagine if all a football team did was play games, and never did the drilling and training in between.

People in TMA often have an inverse problem, where they'll drill for decades but never get close enough to actually touch each other.

[Edmund]

Originally posted by reneritchie
Roy's not alone in that in BJJ. Sperry posted that he doesn't let his students onto the mats unless they've done 100 reps of at least 3 techniques. Bravo commented that BJJ (and MA by extension) is one of the few endeavors where people expect to get good without doing any work. He said imagine if all a football team did was play games, and never did the drilling and training in between.

People in TMA often have an inverse problem, where they'll drill for decades but never get close enough to actually touch each other.


100 reps x3 is not very many.

[anerlich]

100 reps x3 is not very many.

Is that before their first free roll, or before EVERY session? In the latter case I think it would be significant - probably taking up at least 30 minutes of a class if each partner were to have a go.

[Edmund]

Originally posted by anerlich


Is that before their first free roll, or before EVERY session? In the latter case I think it would be significant - probably taking up at least 30 minutes of a class if each partner were to have a go.

Well then how many reps of a technique do you do every BJJ session?

[anerlich]

Well then how many reps of a technique do you do every BJJ session?

Not that many. IMO if you get over 20 reps of a tech per class, that's pretty high. Most classes I've been to expect you to do the high-rep stuff out of class. But I've not been to Sperry's.

Occasionally, for a lark, we've got the standup class to do 1000 kicks and timed that. While not exactly trying to break world records, in my experience anything under half an hour for that many kicks is a pretty good time.

BJJ's techs generally take longer to execute than kicks, so 300 armbars, triangles and omoplatas from the guard with two guys is going to take a similar order of magnitude of time to 1000 kicks per person IMO, esp. if you are going for finesse rather than speed. Replace one of those techs with a twister, it will take considerably longer.

I was asking for clarification from Rene about Mario Sperry's Academy, not necessarily challenging your opinions or statements. I'd agree that if you got newbies to do only three techniques 100 times and then unleash the blue and purple belts on them, that would be pretty minimal preparation.

[Edmund]

Originally posted by anerlich


Not that many. IMO if you get over 20 reps of a tech per class, that's pretty high. Most classes I've been to expect you to do the high-rep stuff out of class. But I've not been to Sperry's.


So in terms of class time percentage, how much would you generally devote to reps of a tech?



BJJ's techs generally take longer to execute than kicks, so 300 armbars, triangles and omoplatas from the guard with two guys is going to take a similar order of magnitude of time to 1000 kicks per person IMO, esp. if you are going for finesse rather than speed. Replace one of those techs with a twister, it will take considerably longer.


Good point. So Roy's "4 - 10 hours" may add up to a lot less reps of BJJ techniques.



I was asking for clarification from Rene about Mario Sperry's Academy, not necessarily challenging your opinions or statements. I'd agree that if you got newbies to do only three techniques 100 times and then unleash the blue and purple belts on them, that would be pretty minimal preparation.

OK. Understood.

Perhaps I've got a mistaken impression of what TMA schools generally do but I think newbies don't do enough reps before sparring because it's too boring.

[anerlich]

So in terms of class time percentage, how much would you generally devote to reps of a tech?

It varies, but usually about 80%. You need to free roll a lot in BJJ, but I get nearly all of mine in informal sessions out of class.

AS somebody said above, its not just how much you practice but what you practice as well. At our school BJJ is not the major part of the curriculum (wing Chun is) and so if students want to progress in BJJ, they have to do a lot of sussing out of stuff on their own, getting books and videos, asking more experienced people for favours, etc.

We probably are guilty of getting guys to practice more advanced stuff too quickly, so that they don't have a decent grounding in fundamentals. I was trying to show some guys what I thought were reasonably simple ways to foil the pass and keep the guard, and the guys I were demonstrating it on had great difficulty keeping posture in the guard well enough for me to do the demonstrations. I'd say "Stop there" mid pass to show the others what to do next, then the passer would fall over or drop my leg or something before I could finish.

But that's a result of poor teaching rather than anything to do with the students, so it gave me a big wakeup call as an instructor. If you try to get them to drill stuff they aren't ready for, the results can be VERY counterproductive.

Next couple of months will be spent reviewing EVERYBODY's basics. I did it on Sunday and the guys there really liked it, and improved - lesson learned.

Got a bit off topic, sorry.

[IRONMONK]

good post from everyone.

anyone use the I -method of aliveness training?

this is a good description of it:

What is the “I” Method?
It is a misconception that the SBG guys only spar and never drill. In fact, about 80% of the training at the SBG involves drilling, but performing those drills with aliveness, using progressive resistance as a way to ensure that whatever techniques we are training, in any range, will be functional and translate to something that is actually useful in a combative situation. Our teaching method is known as the “I” Method and it is broken down accordingly.

Introduction
The technique/concept is introduced or "taught". This usually begins with a demonstration then the class follows with little or no resistance. The curriculums of most traditional martial arts stay at this point. While we prefer not take more time than is necessary at this stage, the emphasis here is still on slow, detailed, precision and orientation. What is important here if for the athlete to understand how and why a particular move works and receives the proper coaching to ensure good form before moving along. This stage never stands alone and is always followed by Isolation.

Isolation
The majority of the class is spent at this stage. The specific skill or skills are isolated and drilled against progressive resistance to help acquire a proper sense of timing. This is where the athlete learns how to make the move work for him/herself, along the way learning to make the proper technical adjustments according to the pace at which they wrestle, their particular body type, and of course, that of their opponents'. The isolation stage is critical to enhancing performance because it bridges the gap between merely learning random techniques and all out sparring, this is where the athlete must ultimately take responsibility for their own growth and progress within the art.

Integration
This is where the skill is brought back into the specific game through free sparring. Stand Up, Clinch, Ground or the overall game where everything comes together. The athlete will now be able to apply the timing gained through isolation sparring in this setting and if the opportunity presents itself he/she will begin to add new tools and techniques to their game with confidence
-----------------------------------------

[reneritchie]

I couldn't find Sperry's original post, but my recollection is that it was something each student had to do *before* class began (a form of additional work outside class time). And 100x3 can take a bit of time, especially if both partners do it. Then I'm sure they'd have reps in class too (what BTT calls 'scholino (sp?)', a type of cardio drill using base bjj movements).

Considering some folks think 3-5 times is sufficient reps ever, and just want to roll, roll, roll, it makes a certain impression.

[anerlich]

there's a good thread on the Roy Harris approach and the SBGi take on it currently running on the JKD forum on the Underground (which for all intents might as well be an SBGi forum):

http://www.mma.tv/TUF/index.cfm?ac=SetMasterFrame&FID=21&PID=17

The thread is entitled "High repitition training in BJJ"

[KenWingJitsu]

Anerlich is correct.


Most people need both kinds of training. They need no-stress stuff to build basic movement patterns, and resistance training like sparring to embed those movements into stuff that holds up under stress conditions.
Rene, according to the SBG guys, the "I"ntroduction stage does include the "no stress" repetitions. Thinking it through further, I agree. the only question is how much time is put into the introduction (no resistance) stage. If you repeat the cycle they suggest over and over again the 'no resistance reps' are "hidden" in the Introduction stage, so you still get the reps but mix it in with some resistance. So in the end, in their own way, they have included both.

[Edmund]

I think Roy's idea is counter-intuitive.
The amount of reps is very high and seems at first glance to be excessive.

However it may just be a stroke of genius. His reasoning is sound.
There's no reason not to try it.

The SBG method is the more conventional approach. The "most traditional martial arts stay at Introduction stage" line is a wrong one. As far as I have seen, most of your karates, TKDs and kung fus are heavily oriented towards Isolation and Integration.
Their problem is that a lot of their techniques simply suck. They aren't practical. (Some techniques are, some aren't.)

They can practice a particular technique whatever alive way they like for a million hours. If it's not practical, it's just not going to work.

[KenWingJitsu]

As far as I have seen, most of your karates, TKDs and kung fus are heavily oriented towards Isolation and Integration

Incorect. You must understand; by "Isolation" and "Integration", they mean "Isolated SPARRING" and "Integrated SPARRING".
This is seldom if ever done in 'most' Kung Fu/Karate or TKD styles.

Most of those styles do stay at the "Introduciton stage" where there is no sparring or resistance, only repetition without resistance. This is why as you say

a lot of their techniques simply suck. They aren't practical.
If they trully sparred those techniques, they would know they didnt work and would have stopped using them a long time ago. Even in WCK, we have many techs that fall into this category.

[Edmund]

Incorrect.

Wado Ryu, Goju Ryu, Shotokan, Kyokushin karates all do full contact sparring. TKD is full contact sparring. They have to. Their sport is full contact. Kyokushin's sport is full contact with no gloves, or padding allowed. Aside from your taiji/wushu forms, most kungfu do sparring.

Just because they're sparring doesn't mean they know good technique.

I don't know what weird American TaeBo aerobics classes you're referring to. They aren't considered martial arts in Australia.




Originally posted by KenWingJitsu


Incorect. You must understand; by "Isolation" and "Integration", they mean "Isolated SPARRING" and "Integrated SPARRING".
This is seldom if ever done in 'most' Kung Fu/Karate or TKD styles.

Most of those styles do stay at the "Introduciton stage" where there is no sparring or resistance, only repetition without resistance. This is why as you say

If they trully sparred those techniques, they would know they didnt work and would have stopped using them a long time ago. Even in WCK, we have many techs that fall into this category.

[Brodie Bortigno]

Even in WCK, we have many techs that fall into this category.

I'm not trying to defend Wing Chun in general, as most of it doesn't deserve to be defended, but what techniques fall into the redundant category? I have seen many that I could name off the top of my head that certain "Sifu"s have added to "improve" the system, when all it really ended up being was them either a.) finding a way to legitimise themselves by adding something new to the system, regardless of whether or not it's a superfluous addition or b.) creating pseudo techniques that fill in gaps in their lacking skill.

I could mention one technique that was borne from a certain Wing Chun "grandmaster" at a certain International Academy in a certain large Southern Hemisphere country, but I won't. ;)

[Ultimatewingchun]

If you're talking about the TWC "Entry" technique...and I think you are...

I can tell you categorically that the move works very well.

When coming in from a long range distance it really serves to neutralize your opponent's ability to kick - while at the same time providing the man doing the move with an opportunity to put his opponent on the defensive...

because when done properly - the move takes his space away and brings you to the close range inside position, where Wing Chun is primarily geared to fight in (ie.- hand and elbow strikes).

[KenWingJitsu]

Edmund, if you're going to respond with an "incorrect", instead of mimicing me, perhaps you should re-read my post and try to understand what I wrote. I didnt say those styles didnt spar. I said they dont do "isolated" or "integrated "sarring. Perhaps you need a clearer understanding of the difference or the definitions of those terms before rushing to make your comment.

[Edmund]

I was giving my opinion based on the definitions provided by Iron Monk.

You stated there was no sparring or resistance in traditional karate and kungfu, only repetition without resistance.


Originally posted by KenWingJitsu
Edmund, if you're going to respond with an "incorrect", instead of mimicing me, perhaps you should re-read my post and try to understand what I wrote. I didnt say those styles didnt spar. I said they dont do "isolated" or "integrated "sarring. Perhaps you need a clearer understanding of the difference or the definitions of those terms before rushing to make your comment.

[anerlich]

Finally, after five months!

Only a quick look, but Matt T's stuff, technically, is not particularly complex or unusual (nothing wrong with that), but the context (aliveness) in which it is presented makes it extremely thought provoking. He's obviously a clever dedicated and thoughtful person.

Rodney King's stuff is definitely one of the better boxing instructionals I've seen. Street aware and MMA savvy as well. Did some of his drills with a training bud this morning and had a lot of fun, even though I ate an occasional glove as well.

I'm definitely going to have fun with this.

[KenWingJitsu]

"You stated there was no sparring or resistance in traditional karate and kungfu, only repetition without resistance."

Umm....no i didnt state that lol. Sheesh.

[Edmund]

Originally posted by KenWingJitsu


Incorect. You must understand; by "Isolation" and "Integration", they mean "Isolated SPARRING" and "Integrated SPARRING".
This is seldom if ever done in 'most' Kung Fu/Karate or TKD styles.

Most of those styles do stay at the "Introduciton stage" where there is no sparring or resistance, only repetition without resistance. This is why as you say

If they trully sparred those techniques, they would know they didnt work and would have stopped using them a long time ago. Even in WCK, we have many techs that fall into this category.