Chinaboxer video - 3 beats in training

[sihing]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-qSbi8cyyI ,

One of Jin's newier videos, I thought I would post it here to start a topic of discussion. Let's try to keep it on subject:)

I found what he has to say interesting, as I never looked at it quite the way he does. Timing is so important in everything we do in life, combat is no different. What I can appreciate about the video, is when Jin talks about what happens when you age and your physical attributes start to fade, this is beat and half mode according to him, and requires us to use our "body frame" to slow the other guys movement down so that we can apply our own tools.

Jin's been putting up tutorial video's for about a year now, and I think he should be applauded for it. Not everyone agrees on what he teaches, that is ok, as no one will agree with everything anyone has to say about anything, it's not about agreeing or disagree, rather it is about exposing one to anothers method and learning about it. Most of his vids, regarding Wing Chun that is, are basic level stuff, SNT material and how to bring that body frame alive within you. Without that basic foundation, as can be seen in most of the WC vids on youtube, your WC is non existent in what you are doing and how you are applying it.

James

[t_niehoff]

His explanation of "beats" is simply wrong. When YOUR OPPONENT moves, he has a rhythm/timing, let's say 1-2 (jab-cross). If you move on his 1, then you are moving on his beat. When you move between his actions, you move on the half-beat. It is not about speed per se. You can, for exmaple, hit on the half-beat and move slower than your opponent.

Yes, WCK's method involves slowing the opponent down -- that comes from contact, from attachment -- by closing him down (dap, jeet) and by making him go through or around your structure. You can't slow your opponent down at non-contact.

[SAAMAG]

^^^^

http://images.starcraftmazter.net/4chan/ethug.jpg



Though more on topic, I think Bruce Lee explained it well in the TOJKD.

[sihing]

His explanation of "beats" is simply wrong. When YOUR OPPONENT moves, he has a rhythm/timing, let's say 1-2 (jab-cross). If you move on his 1, then you are moving on his beat. When you move between his actions, you move on the half-beat. It is not about speed per se. You can, for exmaple, hit on the half-beat and move slower than your opponent.

Yes, WCK's method involves slowing the opponent down -- that comes from contact, from attachment -- by closing him down (dap, jeet) and by making him go through or around your structure. You can't slow your opponent down at non-contact.

I believe what you said above is what Jin said, so how is he wrong? I agree that it's not about speed, but timing and having the tools in the right place. If I try to hit the guy between his actions, but my fist is coming from behind my head, it won't work. The tools have to be in front, plus my ability to perceive it has to be developed, and lastly the timing has to be right. There's also the factors of how fast my opponent is, if he's slow then I can work off the half beat, but if he's fast it will be on beat 1 or 1 1/2, lots of factors to consider, none of which can be adequately realized on a MA forum or thru a video, but at the least the information is being exposed.

James

P.S. I agree with your last point, contact is need to apply the structure. Since most of us slow down as we age, and in the street contact is usually the MO, you would think WC training would be an asset here, correct?

[t_niehoff]

I believe what you said above is what Jin said, so how is he wrong? I agree that it's not about speed, but timing and having the tools in the right place. If I try to hit the guy between his actions, but my fist is coming from behind my head, it won't work. The tools have to be in front, plus my ability to perceive it has to be developed, and lastly the timing has to be right. There's also the factors of how fast my opponent is, if he's slow then I can work off the half beat, but if he's fast it will be on beat 1 or 1 1/2, lots of factors to consider, none of which can be adequately realized on a MA forum or thru a video, but at the least the information is being exposed.


No, we aren't saying the same things.

I object the the whole theoretical nature of his "talk" -- it's all nonsense (as is his video series). All he is doing is what most theoretical guys do: over-complicate things. When people talk "concepts", they are talking crap. And WCK doesn't need more crap.

When you begin to look at WCK from a skill-based perspective, you'll see what I am talking about. To learn a skill, you don't need concepts or other crap, what you need is for someone to show you HOW TO perform that skill, when, where -- the context -- to perform that skill. That's it. That's how we really learn skills. That's how you learned to ride a bike, to drive a car, etc.

Any video (or class or seminar or instruction) that doesn't include showing what they are teaching working successfully in fighting is probably bullsh1t.



P.S. I agree with your last point, contact is need to apply the structure. Since most of us slow down as we age, and in the street contact is usually the MO, you would think WC training would be an asset here, correct?

My view is that WCK "training" as most people do it only makes people worse fighters.

[LSWCTN1]

No, we aren't saying the same things.

I object the the whole theoretical nature of his "talk" -- it's all nonsense (as is his video series). All he is doing is what most theoretical guys do: over-complicate things. When people talk "concepts", they are talking crap. And WCK doesn't need more crap.

When you begin to look at WCK from a skill-based perspective, you'll see what I am talking about. To learn a skill, you don't need concepts or other crap, what you need is for someone to show you HOW TO perform that skill, when, where -- the context -- to perform that skill. That's it. That's how we really learn skills. That's how you learned to ride a bike, to drive a car, etc.

Any video (or class or seminar or instruction) that doesn't include showing what they are teaching working successfully in fighting is probably bullsh1t.



My view is that WCK "training" as most people do it only makes people worse fighters.

so you have all the keys...

i was actually having a rant at you for a while then, but deleted it all. its not worth it

[k gledhill]

I watched but didnt agree ....

[SAAMAG]

Terence,

ChinaBoxer explains it that a beat is a full beat like in music (citing cha-cha dancing of Bruce's yesteryear). He say's a half beat is 50% of a full beat, whereas a 1-1/2 beat is 150% of a full beat, here he's explaining the relative relationship of the beats.

Next, he says that attacking on the half-beat is like hitting the opponent before the opponents attack can be fully realized (i.e. the jeet-da). This can also be likened to hitting in between beats 1 and 2. So YOU DO agree with this part it seems.

He says in short that attacking on the full beat is matching the opponents timing. So like a standard pak-da or tan-da would be done on a full beat according to him. I don't see any problem with this explanation, and based your original take I doubt you would either.

He says attacking on the 1.5 beat is basically defending the attack and countering afterwards on the "escort what comes" part of the "loy lao hoy sung lut sao jik chung" saying. This one is where I'm like...eh. I don't consider that part of the whole beat and rythm equation because at that point you're not timing your opponent to hit on or between you're simply counterattacking once the opponents attack is finished. If it was between attack 1 and 2, then we're back to the first explanation of timing.

Though essentially, he is saying that that the beat is based on the opponents rythm, not your own. He's not talking about mechanical speed, he's talking about timing the opponent. Though I think the way he explained it could have been a little more succinct as its not a difficult concept or even a necessary concept.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I like CB stuff, evenif I don't always agree, I know that there are many paths up the same mountain.

As for timing, in my limited ( :D) experience I know that timing is very style specific and person specific.

Timing in TKD is different than in Shotokan, just as timing in WC is different than in MT.
Boxers (as an example) us the first round or so to "find their range", ie: their timing VS that particular opponent, that shows that even when fighting a person of the same style, timing is effected by the individual.

Of course you can just "throw out" timing and NOT make it an issue at all.
;)

[couch]

Of course you can just "throw out" timing and NOT make it an issue at all.
;)

I like this idea instead. Spar, move around, do Chi Sau...figure it out as you go along...that way it's personal and organic.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I like this idea instead. Spar, move around, do Chi Sau...figure it out as you go along...that way it's personal and organic.

Becareful Bro, those very things, if you are not careful, will create a dependance on timing.

[SAAMAG]

Becareful Bro, those very things, if you are not careful, will create a dependance on timing.

Man everyone's into organic stuff nowadays! Organic vegtables, organic meats, organic wing chun, organic organics!!

[sihing]

The timing things the Jin talks about in his vid, for me it's more about an awareness of it. When you are learning something physical, you are learning the timing of it as well as the other things involved with successfully performing that activity. Successfully performing an activity has nothing to do with winning or losing, but rather is about your ability to perform the movement correctly, with proper mechanics and natural flow and timing. Everything physical is made up of these things, but when you are aware of them, on intellectual and feeling level, it can help you self correct and perform it all more proficiently.

Some of the things Jin talked about, it made me more aware of some of the timing issues. Now I agree, in the beginning of learning I wouldn't want to be concerned with these things, but after years and years of training I think it is okay to explore it. For me, when he mentioned the idea of us getting older and less able to use our physical attributes of speed and timing, it made sense that we would have to use a slower beat rhythm (which isn't a conscious action), instead of always trying to be a step ahead of your opponent. This IMO works in perfectly with the WC way of doing things, since for the most part bridging is what we do. But if bridging is not there, it still works as well, since the primary idea is to hit and KO your opponent.

James

[sanjuro_ronin]

The thing with timing is that it is too subjective.
Take stop-hitting or simutaenous strike/blocking, it requires near-perfect timing to work well and that timing can't be drilled and developed in class and sparring, though it MAY seem to be.
And here is why:
In sparring we are fighting people we know in a system we know and they move the way we know, timing them is "easy".
Bring into the equation a new guy, same system but new and awkward, timing is effected already.
Now, add to that the element of stress, AND the opponent not being known AND probably having a different style of movement and timing is out the window and why fighters use "feeling rounds" to get their timing adjusted.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Timing is always dependent upon the movement and the speed of your opponent. So "practicing" timing can be very overated - other than to try and "drill" hitting on the half beat with your workout partners (nothing new with this, been taught this from day one in wing chun with both instructors, Moy Yat & William Cheung)...

But as was said, this is all relative to the specific opponent...and can only come into play on a case-by-case basis during sparring, fighting, chi sao, whatever.

Hitting on the half beat may work against this guy, but not against that guy (ie.- the second guy is too fast).

So the whole concept of hitting on the half beat can be very overated.

You just have to find what works - in terms of timing - against each individual opponent.

[sihing]

The thing with timing is that it is too subjective.
Take stop-hitting or simutaenous strike/blocking, it requires near-perfect timing to work well and that timing can't be drilled and developed in class and sparring, though it MAY seem to be.
And here is why:
In sparring we are fighting people we know in a system we know and they move the way we know, timing them is "easy".
Bring into the equation a new guy, same system but new and awkward, timing is effected already.
Now, add to that the element of stress, AND the opponent not being known AND probably having a different style of movement and timing is out the window and why fighters use "feeling rounds" to get their timing adjusted.

Correct, things are much different in application like you said re: the stress and new guy things, that is why there is no concern with that type of stuff in application, stop hitting or simultaneous hitting, you just engage when the distance is right. Think if it this way, if you can hit me with any type of strike I can hit you as well, the distance is right for both of us, so one has to understand the distance equation and how to use it. Sometimes you will be engaged with physical contact already in place (someone has grabbed you from behind or from the side), so the distance is already set and this is danger zone, as now you arehave to catch up. Other times there is no preset contact, and the guy has to engage upon you, when that time comes when both of you are able to connect, you just enter and hit, as most all the WC movements include both elements entry and hittin in one move. From there all you can do is "Play your game" and shut the guy down with your offence, no one can predict here what will happen, either you defeat him or lose, or you run, lol...

The best you can hope for is that you beat him to the punch (half beat), the worst is that you have to stop and hit (beat and half).

James

[Pacman]

a few comments:

1. Jin says WC only moves forward. I was taught that you should never move back, but lateral movement is ok. If you are taught to only move forward, no wonder you see two people spar and "chain punch" each other into oblivion, trading blow for blow

2. wouldnt it make sense to not fight on a rythm? wouldnt that make you more predictable?

[Matrix]

The timing things the Jin talks about in his vid, for me it's more about an awareness of it. When you are learning something physical, you are learning the timing of it as well as the other things involved with successfully performing that activity.

James,
The problem I have with this video is that the timing is always based on what the opponent is doing. It seems that the opponent is dictating the pace, and we're supposed to time ourselves off that. If you find yourself in front of someone in a "real fight", trying to assess how athletic or fast or slow or whatever they are, doesn't make sense me. By the time you figure out they're faster, it's probably too late.

I have to agree with Terence here. It seems overly complicated to be practical. Just perform the skill and forget about the theoretical chatter. Yes, you can and should work on different timings, but they are timings that you are dictating based on the situation, not as a result of constantly reacting.

Besides, WC isn't based on being physically stronger or faster than the opponent. If it was, I would have to spend more time lifting weights and doing plyometrics.

[Matrix]

1. Jin says WC only moves forward. I was taught that you should never move back, but lateral movement is ok. If you are taught to only move forward, no wonder you see two people spar and "chain punch" each other into oblivion, trading blow for blowPacman.

I pretty much agree with you. When he said WC only steps forward, that struck me as inaccurate, to say the least. I don't like it when people try to put these kind of limits on WC. There's more footwork than that. I would even say you can step back. :eek: However your intent is still forward as you do so.


2. wouldnt it make sense to not fight on a rythm? wouldnt that make you more predictable?Yep. Especially if you're letting the opponent dictate the rhythm.

[sihing]

James,
The problem I have with this video is that the timing is always based on what the opponent is doing. It seems that the opponent is dictating the pace, and we're supposed to time ourselves off that. If you find yourself in front of someone in a "real fight", trying to assess how athletic or fast or slow or whatever they are, doesn't make sense me. By the time you figure out they're faster, it's probably too late.

I have to agree with Terence here. It seems overly complicated to be practical. Just perform the skill and forget about the theoretical chatter. Yes, you can and should work on different timings, but they are timings that you are dictating based on the situation, not as a result of constantly reacting.

Besides, WC isn't based on being physically stronger or faster than the opponent. If it was, I would have to spend more time lifting weights and doing plyometrics.


Hi Bill:)

That's why I said it's more about an awareness of it, an understanding intellecutally and while you are "training". I agree, when fighting and in application, you wouldn't concern yourself with this stuff, nor would you let the other guy dictate the pace or situation. Like they say you need to play your game and not let him play his:)

I also agree that there are backward type steps in Wing Chun, and one cannot limit themselves to a specific dogma like "we only move forward, or like this or that". In application, when the reality of a confrontation is in front of you, you are not in "training" mode, but in the midst of survival mode and the reality is that someone is intent on puttin some pain on your body, you do what you need to do without any preconceived idea or notion of what is about to happen. Sometimes you will intercept and become the aggressor, beating him to the attack, sometimes not, and you have to catch up, no one knows what will happen, you just do the best you can do when the time comes.

James

[Matrix]

Hi Bill:)
That's why I said it's more about an awareness of it, an understanding intellecutally and while you are "training". I agree, when fighting and in application, you wouldn't concern yourself with this stuff, nor would you let the other guy dictate the pace or situation. Like they say you need to play your game and not let him play his:) Hi James,
I know were pretty much on the same page here. I just find that sometimes things to be over-intellectualized, if I may use that phrase. I am all for concepts, principles and theories, and ideas, don't get me wrong. They are important, but they should guidelines not straight-jackets. Too much thinking, too much theory, too little application.




I also agree that there are backward type steps in Wing Chun, and one cannot limit themselves to a specific dogma like "we only move forward, or like this or that". In application, when the reality of a confrontation is in front of you, you are not in "training" mode, but in the midst of survival mode and the reality is that someone is intent on puttin some pain on your body, you do what you need to do without any preconceived idea or notion of what is about to happen. Sometimes you will intercept and become the aggressor, beating him to the attack, sometimes not, and you have to catch up, no one knows what will happen, you just do the best you can do when the time comes.
Agreed. We're definitely on the same page here.

All the best,
Bill

[sihing]

Hi James,
I know were pretty much on the same page here. I just find that sometimes things to be over-intellectualized, if I may use that phrase. I am all for concepts, principles and theories, and ideas, don't get me wrong. They are important, but they should guidelines not straight-jackets. Too much thinking, too much theory, too little application.


Agreed. We're definitely on the same page here.

All the best,
Bill

Cool:cool:

I guess for me, as someone that is teaching as well, I look at all sorts of WC video's, and even if I don't agree with the mechanics or the particular way the person on the vid is doing something, once in awhile a vid sparks something in me, makes me think of something forgotten or reminds of something I haven't trained or taught in awhile. So on some levels, for me personally, I don't mind the over intellectualization of things, it sparks my imagination as a teacher, but I totally agree, if all we are talking about is personal application, then the only thing need to be said is "Just hit the M FO..." lol

James

[Pacman]

I would even say you can step back. :eek: However your intent is still forward as you do so.


hi matrix

lets say for arguments sake that your intent can still forward while moving backwards, i would say that it is always more beneficial to move laterally than backwards. by moving backwards you are letting your opponent advance gameplan. by moving laterally you can make use of angles etc.

its like if a train is coming at you. would you run backwards or step to the side.

i agree with what james says in that in a real situation maybe for some reason you have to step back (especially with multiple opponents), but for the sake of training and the mindset that you have when you are training, moving backwards should not be a part of it.

[Pacman]

Take stop-hitting or simutaenous strike/blocking, it requires near-perfect timing to work well

i disagree. your fist doesn't have to hit the guys face and your hand does need to block the guys strike at the same moment for it to work.

training simultaneous blocking and striking is simple...the point is to get you to be able to use two hands at once, to do two things at once. to train you to not block/evade when you see a punch and then fire back a punch of your own. its to train you to block/evade as you strike.

when people bob and weave or cover up when punches come at them and then hit back when its all over--this is "tit for tat" and that is not what wing chun emphasizes.

this goes back to the idea of always keeping pressure on the opponent and always advancing, however some people misunderstand the core concept and turn it into "in WC you only move forward". again, this is probably why we see sparring videos where people fly at each other and chain punch as fast as they can. and then people like terrence say "thats how wing chun is in reality! good for them!"

[Matrix]

i agree with what james says in that in a real situation maybe for some reason you have to step back (especially with multiple opponents), but for the sake of training and the mindset that you have when you are training, moving backwards should not be a part of it.So, why don't you train for real situations? I don't necessarily agree that a lateral move is ALWAYS better. I have this thing about being able to move wherever I want, when it's to my best advantage to do so, but I guess that's just me.

I prefer not to move backwards, and not even laterally, in the pure sense of to the side. More on an angle, or diagonal, rather than to the side.

My point is that when someone says NEVER move back, then I question that. I didn't say it is preferred most the time, or even some of the time, but it has it's place on occaison. I'm just saying, never say never.

Sometimes you need to move back, and maybe not straight back, to create some space for yourself. If you don't train to move in all directions, then odds are it will never come to you when needed.

And, just what kind of stepping are we talking about anyways?

Bill

[Added]

its like if a train is coming at you. would you run backwards or step to the side.I guess that would depend which way I am facing, relative to the train. If I'm standing sideways relative to the train, and I step to the side, what has that done for me?
It seems you need to have all the details before you can decide which course of action is the best.

[Pacman]

hi matrix

yes when i said laterally i really mean more diagonal.

when i say it is ideal not step backwards, i dont mean you can never step backwards ever in a situation, i mean that when training, you should not make it a habit to move backwards when someone moves in towards you and attacks.

i also want to move wherever is best to my advantage, and to me backwards is usually not the case. i cant imagine a situation where moving backwards is more beneficial, assuming you are fighting one on one



So, why don't you train for real situations? I don't necessarily agree that a lateral move is ALWAYS better. I have this thing about being able to move wherever I want, when it's to my best advantage to do so, but I guess that's just me.

I prefer not to move backwards, and not even laterally, in the pure sense of to the side. More on an angle, or diagonal, rather than to the side.

My point is that when someone says NEVER move back, then I question that. I didn't say it is preferred most the time, or even some of the time, but it has it's place on occaison. I'm just saying, never say never.

Sometimes you need to move back, and maybe not straight back, to create some space for yourself. If you don't train to move in all directions, then odds are it will never come to you when needed.

And, just what kind of stepping are we talking about anyways?

Bill

[Matrix]

yes when i said laterally i really mean more diagonal.

when i say it is ideal not step backwards, i dont mean you can never step backwards ever in a situation, i mean that when training, you should not make it a habit to move backwards when someone moves in towards you and attacks.

i also want to move wherever is best to my advantage, and to me backwards is usually not the case. i cant imagine a situation where moving backwards is more beneficial, assuming you are fighting one on one
I think we're in agreement. :cool:
It's just when the terms ALWAYS or NEVER are used, they are absolute. It doesn't make sense to me to say NEVER do this, except when......

[t_niehoff]

I like this idea instead. Spar, move around, do Chi Sau...figure it out as you go along...that way it's personal and organic.

That's exactly right. You can't teach timing -- it only comes from sparring.

My objection is when people try to intellectualize what is essentially a physical process -- and typically, that is only done by people who can't actually do the skill itself (since if they could, they'd realize it isn't an intellectual process). That's why when I hear people talk like this guy, I know he doesn't have it, but still feels the need teach. Blind leading the blind.

[t_niehoff]

That's why I said it's more about an awareness of it, an understanding intellecutally and while you are "training".


This is the problem in a nutshell -- you CAN'T "intellectually understand" it. It's not about intellectual understanding. Learning and developing a skill doesn't work that way. Do you need to intellectually understand how to catch a ball? No. Is your skill at catching a ball in any way a product of your understanding? No.

Trying to intellectually understand it only impairs our development.

To learn and develop a skill what NEEDS to happen is that (1) you are shown what it is you want to do (the task), (2) shown how to do it and then (3) you practice doing it. That's it.

[YungChun]

Trying to intellectually understand it only impairs our development.


There's where you go too far.. (God it sounds like a prelude to book burning...:eek:)

There is nothing wrong with, and in fact it is useful to know and understand the science of performance... The science of Human Performance.

If there was no need to think about 'stuff' then there would hardly be any need to do a prefab system of fighting, unless it offered some useful knowledge base..

Timing and understanding how to use timing, different kinds of timing, etc, can certainly be useful when trying things in training.

If folks want some ideas on timing then look into Bruce's work on 'Broken Rhythm' in his JKD which is light years ahead of this guy in the clip...

WCK moves however you need it to.. I find it funny some folks are so "worried" about how WCK doesn't move.. LOL

Different conditions and tactics could mean your WCK will let you move wherever the F@$# you need to... :D

"Backward" is a great way to set up certain kinds of opponents.. If you are fighting or sparring and your opponent is not aggressive enough (staying out of range); shallow rearward movement on his initial leads can setup a 'broken rhythm' "forward" attack..:D

[t_niehoff]

There's where you go too far..

There is nothing wrong with, and in fact it is useful to know and understand the science of performance... The science of Human Performance.


In so far as it pertains to how to effectively learn and train.



If there was no need to think about 'stuff' then there would hardly be any need to do a prefab system of fighting, unless it offered some useful knowledge base..


The various fighting methods are various skill sets that pertain to fighting. These methods were developed/evolved from the experiences of various people fighting -- just like how sports develop from the experiences of its players.

Do you need to intellectually understand basketball?



Timing and understanding how to use timing, different kinds of timing, etc, can certainly be useful when trying things in training.


Timing you only get from sparring. It's not based on intellctual understanding. The people who talk about it are talking out their asses.



If folks want some ideas on timing then look into Bruce's work on 'Broken Rhythm' in his JKD which is light years ahead of this guy in the clip...


I guess that is why JKD is producing all those top-notch fighters. Funny, how boxing and MT doesn't talk about any of that nonsense yet seems to keep producing high level people.



WCK moves however you need it to.. I find it funny some folks are so "worried" about how WCK doesn't move.. LOL

Different conditions and tactics could mean your WCK will let you move wherever the F@$# you need to... :D


Sure, anything and everything is WCK. ;)



Backward is a great way to set up certain kinds of opponents.. If you are fighting or sparring and your opponent is not aggressive enough; shallow rearward movement on his initial leads can setup a 'broken rhythm' "forward" attack..:D

Why don't you show us how you can do that against decent boxers or MT fighters?

[YungChun]

The various fighting methods are various skill sets that pertain to fighting. These methods were developed/evolved from the experiences of various people fighting -- just like how sports develop from the experiences of its players.


Right.. The Classical Chinese Arts are not esoteric at all.. GMAFB..



Timing you only get from sparring. It's not based on intellctual understanding. The people who talk about it are talking out their asses.


Top Olympic trainers "think about it"... They also research it, study it, as does the armed forces... Where "it" means content that applies to training effectively..

All I can say is your head is waaaay up something it shouldn't be..



Sure, anything and everything is WCK. ;)

Yes WCK allows human movement and does not limit you to only one direction.



Why don't you show us how you can do that against decent boxers or MT fighters?
If you really fought good fighters you'd know and use tactics like this to manage distance and closing..(as opposed to simply charging in)

[Matrix]

Trying to intellectually understand it only impairs our development. You know, I've seen this happen many times. Some people are so into their heads that it prevents skill development. The over-intellectualize things. They are too much in their heads, even having conversations with themselves. Their physical development is essentially frozen by intellectual road blocks.

Having said that, I think there is definitely a place for intellectual understanding. You can't be purely physical either. Just doing, without thinking. As seems to be the case in most things in life there is a point of balance.

You give the example of catching a ball. Once that basic skill has been "learned" you can actually improve the efficiency, accuracy and power of pitching and catching a ball. You also need to take that basic skill and learn how to use it in the context of a real application ( i.e. a game). As a ballplayer , how do you catch the ball, analyse the play, and then throw the ball accurate and as quick as possible to where it needs to be for a successful outcome.

We are physical, and intellectual , and some would say spiritual beings. To me, it's about finding the right blend of these attributes that makes it work well. I'm sure you will disagree.

Bill

[sihing]

This is the problem in a nutshell -- you CAN'T "intellectually understand" it. It's not about intellectual understanding. Learning and developing a skill doesn't work that way. Do you need to intellectually understand how to catch a ball? No. Is your skill at catching a ball in any way a product of your understanding? No.
I disagree. IMO you can intellectually understand something, as well as physically understand something, and both may not be at the same level, I'm personally experiencing this right now. Also your examples, they have nothing to do with what we are talking about, catching a ball, riding a bike, throwing a frisbie, etc.. has nothing to do with timing a strike in a fight or dealing with timing, one's a simple movement, the other isn't, the reason is in combat you are dealing with another alive stimuli that thinks and reacts.

Trying to intellectually understand it only impairs our development.
I disagree again. One cannot train 24/7, but inbetween training I can read or watch video's and help myself understand that which I am learning. And since WC is about training, and since I teach it, it helps even more to intellectually understand what it is all about, it helps me translate the information to others. Like I said before, if it is only about your own combat effectiveness and application of those skills (can we really discuss that here, you and I are like how many 100's of miles away from one another??), then I agree, all of this stuff is a waste of time, just hit the guy already. You have to realize that what may not be YOUR way, may work for another. One mans trash is another mans treasure.

To learn and develop a skill what NEEDS to happen is that (1) you are shown what it is you want to do (the task), (2) shown how to do it and then (3) you practice doing it. That's it.
"But teacher, but teacher, how should I hold my fist", Answer -"You fist should be like this"- Q - "Why teacher" - A "Because .... bla bla bla bla..." intellectual understanding right there bro, or do you not verbally transmit information to those you teach or trade information with. I know your a fan of Steve Morris, if anyone is intellectually looking at combat it is him, he also does the physical of course, he has skills that can be easily seen. I have one of his NHB DVD's, it's got a ton of good info, but the guy is talking for 3/4 of the video, intellectually explaining to the two guys what he is teaching, lol. It's pretty obvious you read his blog, so do I, all of it is intellectualization based on his experiences and thoughts on things.


James.....

[sihing]

You know, I've seen this happen many times. Some people are so into their heads that it prevents skill development. The over-intellectualize things. They are too much in their heads, even having conversations with themselves. Their physical development is essentially frozen by intellectual road blocks.

Having said that, I think there is definitely a place for intellectual understanding. You can't be purely physical either. Just doing, without thinking. As seems to be the case in most things in life there is a point of balance.

You give the example of catching a ball. Once that basic skill has been "learned" you can actually improve the efficiency, accuracy and power of pitching and catching a ball. You also need to take that basic skill and learn how to use it in the context of a real application ( i.e. a game). As a ballplayer , how do you catch the ball, analyse the play, and then throw the ball accurate and as quick as possible to where it needs to be for a successful outcome.

We are physical, and intellectual , and some would say spiritual beings. To me, it's about finding the right blend of these attributes that makes it work well. I'm sure you will disagree.

Bill

T should use the example of a pitcher, pitchers in the pro leagues have pitching coaches, why? Because they are constantly looking at the pitcher, telling him things to help him throw the ball more accurately and harder. Why is it that Tiger Woods changed his swing a few years ago? Maybe just maybe someone (or even himself) took a look at his swing and decided that it needed to be changed or adapted. IMO that is an INTELLECTUAL process.

There has to be a happy medium. One is not going to get any good at a Martial Art without the physical time put in training in the system, rep after rep, drill after drill, sparring session after sparring session, this has to be done, that is a given. But in my experience it helps when the student understands, at least on a basic level the HOW'S and WHY'S of what they are doing. If your teaching this becomes even more important, and sooner or later someone needs to teach others otherwise the art will die within this generation, none of us come by this stuff naturally.

James

[YungChun]

Having said that, I think there is definitely a place for intellectual understanding. You can't be purely physical either. Just doing, without thinking. As seems to be the case in most things in life there is a point of balance.


Of course.. One must constantly do and analyze what they do...and then apply that to the science of whatever the thing is. This IS what the pros do.

I can't even fathom how folks can say understanding is problematic, assuming one does understand.. WCK is essentially a set of ideas that no doubt went through a process of ideation and doing/testing/refining.

We humans create in our minds and then test with our bodies, rinse repeat.. To deny that is to deny what we are and be left at the level of non thinking blobs of impulses and instincts.

[Matrix]

I can't even fathom how folks can say understanding is problematic, assuming one does understand.. WCK is essentially a set of ideas that no doubt went through a process of ideation and doing/testing/refining.

We humans create in our minds and then test with our bodies, rinse repeat.. To deny that is to deny what we are and be left at the level of non thinking blobs of impulses and instincts.Hey Jim.
As usual, we seem to be on the same page.

The problem, as I see it, is not understanding per se, but the mental gyrations some people put themselves through. They are over-thinking. WCK is about practical application, but some folks make it into a more cerebral pursuit. It's less messy that way, but it's too much lip sao.

Some times (actually more often than not) you need to stop thinking and do it, but you also need to take some time to reflect on what you're actually doing. The key is to know when it's more appropriate to be doing or thinking. I'm sure you've seen people who are supposed to be training but are so into their thinking process that they can't move. Thought can inhibit the flow of action. So it's important not to turn WCK into some sort of mental gymastics that is an end unto itself. You need to be mentally present, but observing and not limiting the physical training. .....................or maybe I'm just thinking too much. ;)

Bill

[HumbleWCGuy]

His explanation of "beats" is simply wrong. When YOUR OPPONENT moves, he has a rhythm/timing, let's say 1-2 (jab-cross). If you move on his 1, then you are moving on his beat. When you move between his actions, you move on the half-beat. It is not about speed per se. You can, for exmaple, hit on the half-beat and move slower than your opponent.

Yes, WCK's method involves slowing the opponent down -- that comes from contact, from attachment -- by closing him down (dap, jeet) and by making him go through or around your structure. You can't slow your opponent down at non-contact.

I can't stand his videos. He usually demonstrates his techniques reasonably well but his explanations are almost always filled with errors and usually not just debatable errors, dead wrong errors.

Although I think that this video actually seems to be accurate albeit a bit confusing.

[HumbleWCGuy]

This is the problem in a nutshell -- you CAN'T "intellectually understand" it. It's not about intellectual understanding. Learning and developing a skill doesn't work that way. Do you need to intellectually understand how to catch a ball? No. Is your skill at catching a ball in any way a product of your understanding? No.

Trying to intellectually understand it only impairs our development.

To learn and develop a skill what NEEDS to happen is that (1) you are shown what it is you want to do (the task), (2) shown how to do it and then (3) you practice doing it. That's it.

Intellectual understanding does not hamper development. The problem is when sifus who don't know what they are talking about try to intellectualize to students. Students then try to train to incorrect understandings and then they never learn to fight.

[YungChun]

Hey Jim.
As usual, we seem to be on the same page.

The problem, as I see it, is not understanding per se, but the mental gyrations some people put themselves through. They are over-thinking.


Yeah, I'm talking more about, for example, knowing what the correct mechanics are for training something; or understanding the tactic in play, the conditions needed for a technique to work, etc.. Understanding what we are trying to do.. Otherwise you just do, and hope you get lucky, which I can attest to, is not real efficient.