Effects of chaos on combat

[jon]

Im gonna try and start up a debate here relating to practical application of traditional movements.
I will start by relating my personaly opinion on the matter and then if anyone else would like to state there's then we can start to find out some of the different attitudes to this.

For me personaly i relate combat to Chaos theory.
Put simply.
Random unpredictablity within complex systems.
This relates to combat on a fundamental level becouse EVERY movement the humun body makes could be considered a 'complex system movement' and according to chaos every complex system has the eventual problem of breaking down with time due to its own inherent over relience on complexity, hence something, somewhere WILL go wrong.
Take someone throwing a lead jab from a regular stance over and over again at the same target. You may think that you could block every one of these movements with the exact same defence but in practical terms could you really?
When you think about it there is ALWAYS a variable within every single punch, infact no two movements the human body makes will EVER be exactly the same. With our puncher every punch is going to be the same and yet 'slightly' different. So in real terms we start to see that by us using the same counter we are putting ourselfs in a dangerous position of getting into a set mind that is actualy false. What we need to do is to stop looking at our punch as simply a 'jab' but rather take it EXACTLY as what it is. If its fast, if its snappy, if its timed, if its subtle, if its hard. All of these things could all be expressed differently within the same rough movement. Hence how we deal with this same movement should be in actual fact different according to what actualy happens, not different according to what we think will happen.
Ie this makes basicaly any practical application you learn in the class room funadmentaly flawed as you could in reality NEVER apply it exactly as you are shown.
For me i believe that practical application is a means of example, you are given a technique to play with and start to understand but when it comes to fighting with it the way you use it could be totaly different. Any movement imo should only be a source of power generation and mindset, practice should NEVER become a case of 'if you do this ill do that' as this is false thinking and leads to overconfidence in poor technique.
Rather what needs to happen is preasure testing and forcing the student to think lateraly.
A good example of this is sparring using only 3 techniques against an opponent using a full range. At first it will seem impossible as your mind simply is not capable of comprehending how such a thing could be done but over time you beguin to learn to actively find ways to make your techniques fit in. Take for example an uppercut. If you are only allowed this attacking movement you will pretty soon start using it to defend with as well, from this training you will learn how to actively addapt the uppercut to any situtation you feel fit. Now imagine what happens when you have trained the majority of your movements this way! You start to find a feel for simple combat not technique, your technique becomming simply an expression of your intent.
Your intent matching your skill is what causes you to excell in combat.
This also leads back to preasure testing, you must use opponents who are resisting and dedicated to breaking your structure. To many people practice in this half hearted hit you from a mile away fashion and its rubbish.
If your training application and you fudge your defence you SHOULD be hit, if not your partner has either held back or simply missed. This is rough but its the right way to do it, ive copped pleanty of punches to the face over my time and i dont regret any of them, Im just happy that they happened with a partner who didnt decide to take advantage of the opening.
Im not saying people should train from scratch like this but there comes a day when you have to stop pretending your skills and start properly seeing if they work.
I also think for this same reason that all martial artists should activly look at there own structure and style and find its flaws and weak points. If you dont think it has any then your not going to be any good in combat so give up now! Seriously this is a funadmental step to using your art as it lets you understand how an opponent might react towards your own movement. You should not second guess them but you should certainly know what you need to protect. Otherwise your going to be in a world of hurt againsts a skilled opponent.
I hope i havent gone to heywire in this post but this is something that interests me and im hopping someone else might be interested in discussing such things.
Plus ive been sparring with an old Hung Ga partner a lot lately and cant get combat out of my mind.

[Sharky]

hit first, and learn to hit f*ucking hard.

he who hits first, usually wins.

[apoweyn]

jon,

i'm a bit short on time this morning, but this is a good post. and i hate to ignore good posts. so keep it up.

your chaos theory certainly doesn't invalidate the application of techniques from class, which i realize isn't your point. what it does show is the extreme amount of variability in such a simple exchange as one guy jabbing and the other slipping (taking his head off of the line that the punch follows).

conceptually, you're right that the exact same defense won't be guaranteed to stop the jab every time because of minute differences in the performance of the jab each time. but by the same token, there will be minute changes in the performance of the slip too. or the parry. or catch. or however you opt to defend that attack. some of that variability is going to result in you getting tagged. but some of it is under your direct control. same as the jab. variables like speed, angle, etc. can be manipulated to change effects in both the jab and the defense. so no, you aren't doing exactly the same defense each time, but you can do much the same defense each time, but with necessary adjustments made to timing, angle, initiation, speed, etc.

and like you said, the ability to do that comes with concentrating on a small number of options at a time and testing them under duress.

it's an approach i'm trying to use more myself these days.


stuart b.

[PhoenixPangaryk]

"Your intent matching your skill is what causes you to excell in combat".

Best comment in the thread. I wish I had more guys like you around so we could do some good Hung Ga work. Combat - gotta love it. I am not going to elaborate on your thread as it might take it off on a tangent (you know - me and the animals and magic and shapeshifting etc). I think what you have said was well thought out and pretty much accurate.

Best Regards Jon
Phoenix

[JasBourne]

Jon - excellent observations.

Principle over technique, focused intent, combat condition sparring over choreographed drills - yep, good recipe for success.

[Cody]

Jon, I liked what you had to say. Funny thing is that I had just been grazing for Chaos, by James Gleick, in the bookcase. Just got up this morning and, hmm. I hadn't read it. Family member I bought it for some time back hadn't either. Saw your post and returned to the bookcase, with real intent to find, and did. Probably won't understand all that much, so I'll skim; otherwise, wouldn't read it at all.
I agree with what you had to say, as a practical application of how natural occurrence of variability mixed with personal preconceived rigidity makes for unrealistic sailing. It's a realistic attitude towards training in martial arts, or just living. I think it makes for fine instruction.

Thanks for the breath of fresh air,
Cody

[Mutant]

Great post, interesting topic.

I agree that one cannot follow a pre-established 'recipe' for dealing with any kind of assault due to the infinite variables, the chaos. In Chaos we cans see patterns emerge, but within these patterns are randomness and unpredictablility...the only thing predictable is the randomness itself. While one can possibly better the odds by training for probable responses or gauging an opponents possible actions through experience, conditioning and repetition, the attack itself will contain random elements and therefore nullify a rigid preconceived notion of an ordered counter-action. The only thing that can adjust for this chaos in real-time is the living, thinking (not 'hmmm, what the hell should i do?!?' thinking, but more base reactionary animal-like thinking), creatively improvising with good core fundamental training as to minimize mistakes.

Many people train and for awhile and then expect their particular system or style to fight for them, and then they wonder why a particular tool or style 'doesn't work' for them in a fight. Many take a pedantic approach to training and simple regurgitate a technique verbatim, not realizing that the technique is a principle or core method, much like learning a mathematic theorem. When you apply the theorem to a real-world dynamic physics problem, the solution would be unique every time you apply it due to the infinite variables of the world, eg. speed, size, location, angles/vectors ,psychological and physiological factors, etc.
The application comes from within the person, and will probably vary in every person in every situation. Some will even argue that they weren't fighting their style or performing the application correctly (of course one does need a mastery of the fundamental technique first) because it looked different than the form or core technique, but in order to work within the chaos the technique must be internalized and become part of the practitioner, and may take on a different expression each time.

So does that mean that all training should be randomized? No, I think a structured approach to learning and understanding the core techniques, fundamentals, and principals is nessesary. The structured basic training is also important in order to pass the knowledge on to others. But at some point, this needs to be internalized and become you, which is different for everyone, and that is, in essence, the beauty of it which makes it an art form.

[jon]

Hi everyone thanks for your imput
I will try and get to a few individualy but thank you to everyone for any insights. Please continue i want to keep this ball rolling if possible.

Sharky
"he who hits first, usually wins."
* 'Usually' is a dangerous word when your talking about your life in your hands

apoweyn
Good thoughts, i agree that my thinking does not invalidate learning the ropes though set practice methods and basic attack defence play. My big issue is i think at some point its necessary to move on from this and into the realm of creative addaptation. Its more of a aquired skill than one which should be forced but at the same time there must come a time when you move beyond the 'this is for that' mentality.

PhoenixPangaryk
Im glad you have joined in, your experience and thoughts are certainly of value to myself and i would actualy consider many of your methods of practice and training as quite addaptable to chaos theorys and my own theorys for combat application. If you would care to maybe state a little how you relate your animal instinct training to application of set techniques i would certainly love to hear it. On the other hand i know your thinking sometimes creates a fuss so if you dont wish to go into here i will understand.

JasBourne
Thank you for the kind words

Cody
Try and have a look though the book if you can, chaos can be hard to grasp at first but it has had a profound impact on my thinking both in terms of martial arts and in terms of general day to day life.
"natural occurrence of variability mixed with personal preconceived rigidity makes for unrealistic sailing."
Great line you summed up my post in one sentence

MutantWarrior
Brilliant post and im not just saying that becouse your line of thinking is close to my own You clearly have a good understanding of chaos and how to relate it to the world as a whole.

"Many people train and for awhile and then expect their particular system or style to fight for them, and then they wonder why a particular tool or style 'doesn't work' for them in a fight. Many take a pedantic approach to training and simple regurgitate a technique verbatim, not realizing that the technique is a principle or core method, much like learning a mathematic theorem. When you apply the theorem to a real-world dynamic physics problem, the solution would be unique every time you apply it due to the infinite variables of the world, eg. speed, size, location, angles/vectors ,psychological and physiological factors, etc."
* That was exactly where i was trying to head with my post, i also get sick of people blaiming there style for there poor combat ablity and think it has much more to do with application of principle and ability to understand movement and physics as a whole rather than only abstract parts of them.

Thanks to all who are replying this is turning into an interesting discussion and im glad to see i wasnt to difficault to understand, its a hard thing to discribe in text.

[apoweyn]

jon,

i agree wholeheartedly. that was the way much of my eskrima curriculum went. learn through drills, then go freestyle. the freestyle practice (sparring, the gauntlet, etc.) was always much, much uglier than the drills. but you did start to feel, after a while, a little more comfortable with the chaos. even as far as that school went with it. and i think it would be possible (read: preferable) to go further with the idea.

so, if you were to structure a curriculum with that end in mind, how would you go about it? what skills and progression, generally speaking, would you train and in what order?


stuart b.

p.s. thanks again for a really good thread.

[Ray Pina]

I look at it like this:

Straight force ( a jab) is straight force. I'll shield it the same. I'm shielding my head/chin.throat. If you are punching my face, you will hit the shield.

Now, depending on how HARD you hit, my reaction will equal it. If I stand feet together and you give me a little push, one foot goes back a little to stabalize. Give me a BIIIG push, and the foot goes back a lot naturally to stabalize.

Do not insist. Go with what comes, but shielding is a must. From there, contact, use gung fu. Now, rounded force, must change the shield a bit, perhaps use a little wedging to take the edge off. Same theory though. Works the same with high kicking. Don't insist. Keep your defensive position but let the force move your whole if necessary.

I believe the problem raised above comes into play when blocking like karate or a "Kung Fu" guy: Inside to out, or outside to in. This way you are reyling on speed and timing, now you have a variable.

My master calls this blocking like a windshield wiper. The window still get's wet. Better to be like an umbrella.

But, that's too much info already. I don;t like to go into too much detail. I feel discussing technology is one thing, handing over a blue print quite another. Then again, no one really listens to anyone else here anyway.

[apoweyn]

i'm listening. thought it was a great response. not too wild about the blueprint analogy though. you suggesting that sharing information with us is somehow dangerous?

[Ray Pina]

Yes I do. I have seen it many times. Go beyong principle and show technique, then this guy over here incoprorates it (wrongly) into this and claims that, this guy incorporates it into this and then that guy goes and developes JKD.

I think it is great to pass IDEAS around, get feedback, but for arguments sake, let's say a Hung Gar guy with a great lineage starts blabbing inside door info to guys who are say, not so liget, then things get watered down, taken wrongly.

I think the idea expressed above is more then enough. I think there is a lot of useful information there for a martial artist.

I open Kung Fu magazines and see a guy holding a filipino stick with three inches to spare below his grip and think: Who taught him? In a fight, especially weapons, three inches might as well be a mile. That guy is not legit, and does not have the full understanding.

Wait. Maybe he does and just isn't showing it. But then again, if you're going to be on the cover of IKF, wouldn't you make sure you were pleased with that you were showing? Look at the example in IKF this month. A few pages in there's a guy bending over and hitting the other guys knee with the stick. What prevents the other guy from sending his head into right field, or in this case the water behind them. TERRIBLE!

Somebody didn't get something right. I'm not about to go into detail with an art I consider myself priveleged to be learning. Sorry. I understand. But really, few would get it by reading it, it would take at least 45 mitues for me to really explain it well and write it in a simple way. And then what, I just gave away an advantage for me or one of my brothers. That's not cool ... or smart.

In fact, I'm sure someone will slam me saying, "who the hell do you think you are, no body want's your ideas anyway."

Fine, for one they are not my ideas but rather my weak interpretation of my masters. But I know a gem when I see it and am not about to run down Broadway with it out visible in my hand for all to see.

I hope you understand. I would. No one is coming here to learn martial arts, just pass the time. I like Jong, think he's a stand up guy (from what I can tell). I tried to answer his question AS I SAW IT, maybe share my VIEW.

[apoweyn]

well, i can respect your reservations. fair enough.

regards,


stuart b.

p.s. as a sidenote, in many eskrima styles, it is customary to leave room between your grip and the butt of the stick (punyo). this space can be used in grappling and controlling the opponent. yes, some range is sacrificed, but some practitioners (myself included) feel it is worth it.

i'm not sure whether that constitutes a technique or an idea, but there you have it.

[KC Elbows]

EF,
You're talking to yourself.

Just kidding.

Slightly off topic, but I think sharing at this point does more for martial arts as a whole, than keeping secrets. However, I can see your reasoning, but I think there are occassions where something is shown, and the viewer actually gets it right, which you've ruled out somewhat.

I think keeping secrets only help the individuals that are keeping the secrets, but is risky for the art, which only lives in its practitioners. Just my .02.

[DelicateSound]

Jon - nice post. I can;t say anything better than what's been said already - so I'll shut up. A good read though!

As for the whole "sharing" thing - at the moment I can't pigeonhole myself into a style - mainly cause so many experiences with other styles hae made me rethink my application and direction. IMHO sharing is the way forward.

After all - once I know over 50 Martial Arts I can join Budoman5000000 in Lichfield and set up the Ultimate Fighting System (TM)