Unabashed Training - The End Goal is

[Vash]

Here's my technical training regimen. PLease take into consideration I rarely have a partner outside of our two one hour classes each week.

Basics:

=Stepping, Striking, Kicking; General movement

Forms training:

=Whole Form run-through
=Partial Form run-through
=Technique Isolation, drill over and over
=Run whole form, parts thereof, in different sequences, substituting footwork, angles, et all

Bag training:

=Working myriad of technical possibilities of whichever singular form studied during given time period in singles, combinations, etc, on heavy bag. Use for studying power generation, basic positioning for attack/counterattack/positional dominance

Partner Training Uno:

=Take lessons learned from above training, get some applicable drills together, go over with partner. Include constantly increasing pressure (not necessarily attacking/defending force) to get set techniques accomplished.

=Train ad nauseum

Partner Training Dos:

=Take lessons learned in above, work into sparring. Difference from final level of drilling should be in intensity only.

There is no other way. Look at my finger. Avoid the moon.




With all due seriousness, that is, in effect, the way I prefer to train my art. It works for me. It sticks with all the sensical and scientific precepts of constantly increasing resistance. It allows for applicable training of the classics of my style (*gasp*). And here's another reason:

I train sets (forms/kata) much in the same way I read a science book: I go over the material, not really latching on to anything but the most painfully obvious facts. However, upon review of what I've learned, I can apply quite often the lessons contained therein. So, I like to think of myself as a general learner. Yes, I did invent that word. It's copyrighted, by the by. I can take the gist of something, and use that to get at the specifics of the lesson, whether that be in the form of a book or a "crystalized" fighting methodology of a classical style.

Please, in all your pursuits, and in your life, remember this:

Originally Spoken by Andre Gide (1869 - 1951)
Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it.

[yenhoi]

I agree that "forms" and similar pattern training is necessary and fundamental but I think, specially for begginers that partner work and padwork are higher priority. Much bigger bang for the buck so-to-speak in the short-term. Specifically the partner training. In my own personal training partner work (sensitivity "drills", progressive sparring, padwork, etc) makes up over 70% of the time.

[Vash]

I have to agree with you. I feel the ability to perform (even somewhat incorrect technique) under a certain bit of pressure is necessary for the initial education of the artist.

[Yaksha]

of course - you have to have the individual techniques down well before practicing sequences of techniques.

IMHO Forms aren't to learn the techniques as much as to learn how to think and feel about the techniques. Then you go back to technique training after you had a lesson from the form.

But you have to have the techniques first.

[yenhoi]

of course - you have to have the individual techniques down well before practicing sequences of techniques...

...But you have to have the techniques first.

Disagree. I think the "technique" level comes somewhere aftetr begginer, and teachers/instructors should work hard to make sure people dont get stuck there.

[Yaksha]

Its fair to have an opinion, but what are your reasons?

[yenhoi]

One main reason: "work hard to make sure people dont get stuck there"

I also think its easier for people in general to learn from macro (general, abstract, non-specific) to micro (specific technique and other factors) instead of micro to macro.

Faster, better learning IMO.

[Yaksha]

Well, you convinced me.

But do you agree with;
"IMHO Forms aren't to learn the techniques as much as to learn how to think and feel about the techniques. Then you go back to technique training after you had a lesson from the form?"

[yenhoi]

I agree mostly. Even then I think the curve should go form/abstract to technique/detail and then back to form/abstract. Probably always waving back and forth. Specially in the beggining I think its most important to stay away from detailed technique and concentrate on moving correctly, getting faster, stronger, etc.

[AmanuJRY]

All single person types of work, I do on a near daily basis.
To include;

Forms
isolated technical drills
and general fitness (with technique specific focus)

I don't do bag training as often, I don't have the resources at this time.

During a group session (because everyone in the group does the form work separately), we spend about;

*30% on partnered drills, usually on one or two 'ranges' per practice.

*70% on sparring/alive training

I have to agree with you. I feel the ability to perform (even somewhat incorrect technique) under a certain bit of pressure is necessary for the initial education of the artist.- vash

Actually there is a term for this (can't think of it right now) in psychology. There is a point where learning is greatest. Too little pressure/stress, less learning. Too much and learning starts to decay and info is not retained as well.

I also think its easier for people in general to learn from macro (general, abstract, non-specific) to micro (specific technique and other factors) instead of micro to macro.- yenhoi

That is correct. As well, in a stress related situation (fight) it is harder to employ the micro than the macro.

[SevenStar]

What yenhoi has been saying.

[Vash]

Yenhoi = correct

[rogue]

Specially in the beggining I think its most important to stay away from detailed technique...

Not sure that I agree. I've been seeing some success with the small group of kids and white and yellow belts that I've been helping to train. When I teach kata or basics I show them a basic but practical example of the move. But I could be misunderstanding you.

[yenhoi]

Well.... Inward/outward/upward/downward "blocks" from many similar karate styles (kosho? danzan? etc?) might be just one application of that motion. An inward motion might also be used to strike the temple or inside the bicep of an arm thats punching at you. Of course, at first you would just show them the basics of an inward motion, maybe not even telling/showing the wrist/forearm rotation. As you go you add more and more details or elements of the inward type motion and eventually you end up with this huge general idea that is the inward block which might be embodied by your original abstract show and tell of the same motion. Getting stuck being convinced that an inward block and an inward strike are fundamentally different techniques with thousands of minute details that have to be performed in concert, in detail differently from each other is a trap that happens to many individuals, schools, and styles. When it comes time to test/sparr/fight, the inward motion is the root of both (or many) "techniques."

Its early. Hope this makes sense.

So for example, in their first lesson, I might show someone the "Jab" by just having them lightly punch their lead hand towards the oppnent. Then as they perform that motion with me, add all the detailed elements like the hip/foot rotation, elbow on centerline, tucking the chin, and turning over the knuckles. Its still an inward motion, and the study of the "inward motion" ( which has many manisfestations as technique.... jab, hammerfist, downward/horizontal elbows... etc) is more important then the study of the "jab."

Judo might be another good example of both ends. Many of the throws fall into the same general categorys of body movement, grips, and motion but at the same time could have hundreds of small pieces that are specific to each technique (throw.) For the begginers, I think its more important to focus on the abstract general end of the theory/technique.