deliberate praactice

[t_niehoff]

Here's an interesting blog on deliberate practice as applied to chess:

http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/2010/01/chess_intuition.php

It explains how intuition is the basis of expertise (something Gladwell talks about in "Blink").

Consider "an expert is 'a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field'" along with "this is why we shouldn't be surprised that a chess prodigy raised on chess computer programs would be even more intuitive than traditional grandmasters. The software allows him to play more chess, which allows him to make more mistakes, which allows him to accumulate experience at a prodigious pace."

It's the same for the fighting arts.

[grasshopper 2.0]

so...

is the computer program the drills you practice?

and

the sparring matches equivalent to the traditional chess player, who practices only when he's playing with others?

the drills can be repeated a thousand times..while not so much in a fighting scenario.

i see your point - i just thought i'd bug you.

[Wu Wei Wu]

Excellent topic. Good article.

theory of dp has lots of relevance to WC;

sets out importance of -
concentration,
adopting model for self-correction,
modeling based on skilled people,
goal setting,
use of technique oriented goals (e.g. elbows in, forward pressure),
overcoming barriers using rapid positive feedback,
the need for increased effort (e.g. sparring against skilled fighters).

unfortunately for most wc folk is that they are too busy arguing about correct height of fook sau!

suki

[YungChun]

Here's an interesting blog on deliberate practice as applied to chess:

http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/2010/01/chess_intuition.php

It explains how intuition is the basis of expertise (something Gladwell talks about in "Blink").

Consider "an expert is 'a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field'" along with "this is why we shouldn't be surprised that a chess prodigy raised on chess computer programs would be even more intuitive than traditional grandmasters. The software allows him to play more chess, which allows him to make more mistakes, which allows him to accumulate experience at a prodigious pace."

It's the same for the fighting arts.
Unless there is a holo-deck for fighting (which is not a narrow area of study btw) then I can't see the correlation of an ever present AI partner who is always at your beck and call, and offers the option of never loosing face (or injured).... LOL

Closest thing might be ChiSao in the sense of it being a narrow field of study (close contact) and available to be done many times over and over... (similar for ground work) Whereas those conditions (close contact) study via experience would not offer itself as much in straight sparring, etc.. But I know ChiSao is "crap" blah, blah, blah... I only offer it as an example because this is a Chun forum.... :eek::rolleyes::cool:

[t_niehoff]

Unless there is a holo-deck for fighting (which is not a narrow area of study btw) then I can't see the correlation of an ever present AI partner who is always at your beck and call, and offers the option of never loosing face (or injured).... LOL

Closest thing might be ChiSao in the sense of it being a narrow field of study (close contact) and available to be done many times over and over... (similar for ground work) Whereas those conditions (close contact) study via experience would not offer itself as much in straight sparring, etc.. But I know ChiSao is "crap" blah, blah, blah... I only offer it as an example because this is a Chun forum.... :eek::rolleyes::cool:

The point is that we develop skill through lots and lots of deliberate practice of that skill. Chess players and poker players are developing at amazing rates because with the advent of computor and internet technologies, they can practice much more than they ever could in the past. Yes, we can't duplicate that -- but it seems many haven't caught on to the rationale behind deliberate practice, i.e., you get better at a skill the more you do it.

The other aspect is that this experience is important because what makes us good is not conscious knowledge but intuition, which comes from doing the skill and making a ton of mistakes. So, again, if you are not doing the skill, you can't make the mistakes, so you can't develop expertise.

How does this apply to WCK or any fighting art. Well, your skill level will be determined by the amount of quality practice of that skill (fighting) that you do.

[Xiao3 Meng4]

I rule at Tekken, soul caliber and virtua fighter, so I must be AWESOME on teh str33t! :D

Deliberate practice also involves the idea of developing what Gladwell calls our ability to "thin slice": to let our practiced, intuitive, split-second decision making process guide us.

Why is this better than consciously analyzing and deconstructing/constructing systems? Because our intuitive mind, our "adaptive subconscious," is way, WAY better at sorting relevant information in real-time, and even more adept at sorting relevant information in real-time within one's own developed "narrow field" of practice.

Having plenty of opportunity to experience mistakes in an authentic setting is one way to develop our adaptive subconscious and "thin slicing" abilities: our exposure to and solving of real problems/situations within our chosen narrow field is pivotal to developing intuitive skill. It's not a question of thinking "he's doing x, so I'm going to do y," it's a question of thinking "oh sh1t!" and unthinkingly, through practiced action, turning that thought into "oh yeah!"

Deliberate practice allows for this. By now, we all understand that simple fighting is a way to develop skill, albeit a crude an uneven method. Ranked fighting is much better, because it promotes fighting at higher and higher levels of skill.

Play practice is also a good method. By organizing "mini fights" with narrow limitations such as throwing (Shuai Jiao, Judo rulesets,) grappling (Pin wrestling, catch wrestling, BJJ rulesets) and striking (Muay Thai, Kickboxing rulesets,) then gradually combining the mini games together (throwing + striking, throwing + grappling, throwing + grappling + striking,) it's possible to create a competitive practice environment that fosters deliberate practice, learning from mistakes and an understanding of "fight sense;" all important ingredients in the ongoing growth of our intuitive skill.

Play practice can be broken down even further, into live drills, which focus on very specific elements of the various "mini-fights." For instance, one live drill might be to avoid being hit by real jabs. Another might be to control a resisting opponent towards a specific spot. These "live drills" are like mini-mini-fights, and again, they help develop our intuitive skill.

Wing Chun has plenty of opportunity to use play practice and live drilling: I'm prone to thinking that Kiu Sao were the live drills, Chi Sao was a mini-game, and San Sao were the Sparring/fighting practices. Taken as a whole, Wing Chun from this perspective provides a wonderful framework to actually develop skill. As long as the material is practiced intelligently, with plenty of opportunity for guided trial and error, its practitioners should easily be able to develop at least a competent level of skill.

[t_niehoff]

Wing Chun has plenty of opportunity to use play practice and live drilling: I'm prone to thinking that Kiu Sao were the live drills, Chi Sao was a mini-game, and San Sao were the Sparring/fighting practices. Taken as a whole, Wing Chun from this perspective provides a wonderful framework to actually develop skill. As long as the material is practiced intelligently, with plenty of opportunity for guided trial and error, its practitioners should easily be able to develop at least a competent level of skill.

I think you are overlooking an important aspect. Whether deliberate or "play" practice, you only develop skill with what you do practice. When you perform things like chi sao, san sao, kiu sao, etc. you are not practicing realsitic fighting skills since you are not fighting -- since neither you or your partner are behaving like you do in fighting. Practice chi sao and you will get better at chi sao, not fighitng. Your trial and error would be for chi sao mistakes, not fighting mistakes.

The critical aspect of deliberate practice is that you are making mistakes in the same, exact situations that you will in your game (target skill) -- this is why actually playing the game (chess or fighting) is vital. Only by facing realistic situations over and over can you develop realsitic responses, realistic actions, etc. and become better at playing the game. Without those realistic situations, you can't develop realsitc skill.

And the evidence supports this. All kinds of people can play chi sao well but can't fight worth a lick. Whereas the arts which stress realistic practice (where you spar as the core of your training) can -- they can fight because they practice fighting.

[Xiao3 Meng4]

I think you are overlooking an important aspect. Whether deliberate or "play" practice, you only develop skill with what you do practice. When you perform things like chi sao, san sao, kiu sao, etc. you are not practicing realsitic fighting skills since you are not fighting -- since neither you or your partner are behaving like you do in fighting. Practice chi sao and you will get better at chi sao, not fighitng. Your trial and error would be for chi sao mistakes, not fighting mistakes.

I don't think I'm overlooking that aspect: I'm not saying that Chi Sao is fighting, I'm saying it's "mini-fighting:" It's supposed to be (in my mind) Wing Chun's throwing platform: one person tries to throw the other person, who's trying to hit them. No fancy shmancy stuff, really, just one person trying to hit, the other person trying to throw. If that's not to be called Chi Sao, so be it.

Using the Chinese words is confusing, because it doesn't allow for clear understanding in English. My idea of Chi Sao is above: my idea of Kiu Sao is similar - for instance, two people face off, one person throws live attacks of a very specific nature and the other person tries to accomplish something very specific in response. San Sao always just meant "fighting" to me. Maybe my interpretations totally suck, but I like 'em better than what the three Saos are usually expressed as. :)

EDIT: Another version of Chi Sao I'm happy with is the "get behind Satan" game... you know, rounding your opponent's corner (I actually prefer this one, I think.)

[YungChun]

I don't think I'm overlooking that aspect: I'm not saying that Chi Sao is fighting, I'm saying it's "mini-fighting:" It's supposed to be (in my mind) Wing Chun's throwing platform: one person tries to throw the other person, who's trying to hit them. No fancy shmancy stuff, really, just one person trying to hit, the other person trying to throw. If that's not to be called Chi Sao, so be it.

This definitely begins to get the point of ChiSao.. It is mini-fighting in the sense of this discussion, very much so.. The tools and tactics and errors in ChiSao done right (not about throwing really) does apply to the larger picture of WCK fighting.. Anyone who doesn't "get that" doesn't get WCK and her remarkable thin slice drill..

[Xiao3 Meng4]

This definitely begins to get the point of ChiSao.. It is mini-fighting in the sense of this discussion, very much so.. The tools and tactics and errors in ChiSao done right (not about throwing really) does apply to the larger picture of WCK fighting.. Anyone who doesn't "get that" doesn't get WCK and her remarkable thin slice drill..

Yes, my description of Chi Sao as a throw/hit game was quite gruesome. I seek redemption in the other thread. :D

[YungChun]

Yes, my description of Chi Sao as a throw/hit game was quite gruesome. I seek redemption in the other thread. :D

Yes, cool thread, I'll be there in a minute..

Actually nothing wrong with introducing throws into ChiSao IMO, it's just not the typical use of the drill in Chun...

[t_niehoff]

This definitely begins to get the point of ChiSao.. It is mini-fighting in the sense of this discussion, very much so.. The tools and tactics and errors in ChiSao done right (not about throwing really) does apply to the larger picture of WCK fighting.. Anyone who doesn't "get that" doesn't get WCK and her remarkable thin slice drill..

Chi sao is NOT mini-fighting in that it is nothing like fighitng. You say these elements do apply in WCK fighting -- and I agree they do -- but NOT as they are used in chi sao. You are learning the various contact elements of WCK but you are not learning them or practicing them in their appropriate combative contexts. In other words, while you are learning the various tools, you are not learning when, where, how, etc. to use those tools in fighitng because you are not facing the same situations you will in fighitng. The game will change when you fight.

This is incredibly simple to see for yourself -- get a nonWCK partner (so that they don't use "programmed" WCK movement), start in contact (and both try to stay close, on the inside) and then fight. You'll see it isn't like chi sao, and you'll see that you won't be able to apply your contact skills. And the reason is because you will -- at first -- be trying to apply them like you do in chi sao. You won't beable to make things work until you work out for yourself the proper context for using the various elements. Or, to put it another way, until you learn how to play THAT (fightng) game.

[Phil Redmond]

Here's an interesting blog on deliberate practice as applied to chess:

http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/2010/01/chess_intuition.php

It explains how intuition is the basis of expertise (something Gladwell talks about in "Blink").

Consider "an expert is 'a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field'" along with "this is why we shouldn't be surprised that a chess prodigy raised on chess computer programs would be even more intuitive than traditional grandmasters. The software allows him to play more chess, which allows him to make more mistakes, which allows him to accumulate experience at a prodigious pace."

It's the same for the fighting arts.

Does that theory apply to spelling "deliberate praactice". ;)

[t_niehoff]

Does that theory apply to spelling "deliberate praactice". ;)

Whaat aare you taalking aabout? :)