Safe teaching

[Patrick]

I know there is no point in discussing anything here.

If a force or a mass is greater than your ability to keep your stability, you will loose your balance.
If you have good proactive/reactive balance skills (which is required for good "pushing hands" skill and which Dan may have)
you may still keep your equilibrium, but the more force/mass/speed the harder for your CNS to cope with the other disturbances.
If my light and small girlfriend pushes me, I feel pretty stable, but if a big guy, lets say an ex-powerlifter pushes me, I wont.

[origami_itto]

I heard there was this martial art called Taijiquan that helps with that.

[Bodywork]

........

[Subitai]

....
Not to you directly, but rather a general overview:
The topic of how to deal with forces is complex and from the start I disagree with most people's understanding of traditional martial arts basic tenants. This whole "connection to someones center "in order to move that center...I think is a modern corruption and is dead wrong.
...

Please read my italicized comments below in an "Austin Powers" voice:

MY MY MY..... Is there an elephant in the room???

Did Dan just suggest something contrary to popular teaching or did I read what he said the wrong way???

Is nobody gonna stand up to big scary Dan...and address the "elephant"

Come on guys seriously...I can't be the only one thinking it??

* I think you're wrong and your right (with a caveat) = It's really more shades of grey man...no I don't have to have a connection with your center to move it...but it's not wrong to seek it either. I don't have to be directly connected to your center to move it but it helps to know where it is and KEY POINT, to know what state you're in. I.e. this may or may not make sense to you but you can look up such terms as the body being open or closed and in other cases... different sides of your body being Empty or Full. It helps in understanding where a person is strong and therefore potentially week.

Dan...I applaud you for thinking outside the box. Moreover since you don't expressly claim to be an ICMA...i don't really have a problem with it in so much as you can demonstrate it in a way that is believable. ** I also realize you couldn't give a crap what I think.

So here it is: You may have good skill, you may understand how to move people but when I see a demo such as the one you did in the YT video Aiki: 2 Sides of Same Coin part 4 starting at (1:40):

I know you were going slow ok, I really do...I know you're trying to demonstrate a concept. But there-in lays your own trap! If you're going slow...there's no reason for the UKE to have his arm magically straightened against his will and therefore you'd have a connection to his center. He should easily adjust to your movement and blend with you. It's not difficult at all.


To be fair, for every movement you have...it accounts for an equal chance of movement by the student. You say he cannot release the hand? Be real he could...(especially if he wasn't straight body stiff like that) and most people don't react that way...funny thing is...only other martial artists do that, I wonder why?

Be realistic Dan...you claim to represent MMA. I take a look at some of the strikes you did on those vids and say to myself: "there you go...he looks good there!!!" But some other things on there, I'd have to be the most clueless SOB in the world to fall for that.

I have a student that studied under Sensei Lopreore (who's under Roy) he's a newb as a martial artist but he's got the right instincts and he's smart. When we were at SMAF in NY...he took Roys seminar and nobody could do anything to him. They told him he was doing it wrong. He had to grab the instructors arm with such intent that he was practically OVER-committed. Of course anyone can apply in that scenario.

[origami_itto]

I actually wanted to talk about that idea myself, maybe start another thread on the topic?

Here I'll just say that "connecting to the center" can mean different things, and each of those things is just one option for making somebody do what you want. Using four ounces to control a thousand pounds is another way. There are other ways.

To paraphrase Mr Docherty, if you say that Taijiquan is or isn't a certain thing, you are absolutely right, the Taijiquan you study is or is not that thing. That doesn't mean it's representative of all Taijiquan.

Same applies to all of these arts. Seek and ye shall find. Look for fraud and you can find it in diamonds. Look for gold and you'll find idiots dropping ingots everywhere.

[johnbecker]

....
Not to you directly, but rather a general overview:
The topic of how to deal with forces is complex and from the start I disagree with most people's understanding of traditional martial arts basic tenants. This whole "connection to someones center "in order to move that center...I think is a modern corruption and is dead wrong.
...

Please read my italicized comments below in an "Austin Powers" voice:

MY MY MY..... Is there an elephant in the room???

Did Dan just suggest something contrary to popular teaching or did I read what he said the wrong way???

Is nobody gonna stand up to big scary Dan...and address the "elephant"

Come on guys seriously...I can't be the only one thinking it??

* I think you're wrong and your right (with a caveat) = It's really more shades of grey man...no I don't have to have a connection with your center to move it...but it's not wrong to seek it either. I don't have to be directly connected to your center to move it but it helps to know where it is and KEY POINT, to know what state you're in. I.e. this may or may not make sense to you but you can look up such terms as the body being open or closed and in other cases... different sides of your body being Empty or Full. It helps in understanding where a person is strong and therefore potentially week.

Dan...I applaud you for thinking outside the box. Moreover since you don't expressly claim to be an ICMA...i don't really have a problem with it in so much as you can demonstrate it in a way that is believable. ** I also realize you couldn't give a crap what I think.

So here it is: You may have good skill, you may understand how to move people but when I see a demo such as the one you did in the YT video Aiki: 2 Sides of Same Coin part 4 starting at (1:40):

I know you were going slow ok, I really do...I know you're trying to demonstrate a concept. But there-in lays your own trap! If you're going slow...there's no reason for the UKE to have his arm magically straightened against his will and therefore you'd have a connection to his center. He should easily adjust to your movement and blend with you. It's not difficult at all.


To be fair, for every movement you have...it accounts for an equal chance of movement by the student. You say he cannot release the hand? Be real he could...(especially if he wasn't straight body stiff like that) and most people don't react that way...funny thing is...only other martial artists do that, I wonder why?

Be realistic Dan...you claim to represent MMA. I take a look at some of the strikes you did on those vids and say to myself: "there you go...he looks good there!!!" But some other things on there, I'd have to be the most clueless SOB in the world to fall for that.

I have a student that studied under Sensei Lopreore (who's under Roy) he's a newb as a martial artist but he's got the right instincts and he's smart. When we were at SMAF in NY...he took Roys seminar and nobody could do anything to him. They told him he was doing it wrong. He had to grab the instructors arm with such intent that he was practically OVER-committed. Of course anyone can apply in that scenario.

1. Mr Harden has very clearly stated that it fundamentally comes down to controlling your own center. From that you can take and control the other person's center. And once again, you can't understand it until you feel it, and watching it on a video isn't going to help, but instead reinforce prior prejudices.

2. It was a workshop demonstrating Aiki principles within a Daito Ryu framework. That was very clearly stated.

3. Training drills, practices are just that. Training. They have their purpose of imparting principles across to a learner without, hopefully, any mishap or injury. As long as all parties understand this, then there should be no problems or confusion. And, I think that was very clearly stated also.

As for the "nobody could do anything to him" comment, it simply looks like the student in question completely missed the point of #3: understanding that it is training, in this instance, with a view to learning and developing understanding and skill regarding the principles being taught.

People with long enough time and training usually learn that being the training partner who 'nobody could do anything to' means you benefit nothing and run the risk of being one of those unfortunate contributors to the medical industry.

Case in point. Another 'Dan', this one being Dan Docherty, once wrote an article on how a student, a former American football player, was intent on showing off, being difficult and generally trying to show the world what a tough guy he was. During the practice of a shoulder locking/dislocating technique, this 'student' refused to allow his training partner to apply the technique at all, depriving that other student of the opportunity to learn. Dan offered to demonstrate how the technique should be applied. Confident that by continuing to be uncooperative, he could stop Dan, and continue to show how hard he was, he tensed up when Dan applied the technique. Dan then eased-off, and said student relaxed. On feeling the student relax, Dan applied the technique and dislocated the student's shoulder. (I write 'Dan' and not 'Mr Docherty, as the Dan in question told me many years ago that 'Mr Docherty is my father' and to call him Dan.)

I once experienced a disciple of Andre Noquet apply a technique and it was the most painful thing I've felt in all my years of training. I fully understood then why Dave Lowry stated he'd seen grown men wet themselves after Nikkyo was applied to them. I also witnessed said disciple train at speed with dan grades, and slowly explain the more vicious older applications. This disciple never damaged me in training, though he could have. His son was something of a prat though, and liked to apply more pain than needed. I heard later that father had broken son's arm in training, and I remember not having much sympathy but some understanding of how that could have happened.

A friend who teaches scary people how to survive and kill if needed on the battlefield once told me, in complete sincerity, he thought that dueling-to it's 'conclusion'-should be brought back, in order to rectify the general lack of manners found in modern day life. He's sent a few challengers to the hospital in the past himself.

I'm happy to admit I'm far more Lieutenant Bressler than Harry Callahan, so I'm happy to follow Harry's admonition that 'a man should know his limitations' and try to show some courtesy, especially when I'm a guest in a school, who has agreed to enter in the spirit of learning, not showing off.

[Patrick]

I heard there was this martial art called Taijiquan that helps with that.

I´ll bite. Why is it that most of the traditional IMA exercises train "only" a continuous form of balance training, when in practice proactive/reactive training is needed?

[front]

Why is it that most of the traditional IMA exercises train "only" a continuous form of balance training, when in practice proactive/reactive training is needed?

I can't comment on the "only" part but about the rest look at it this way:
If achieving dynamic balance takes some years and this is a must have before you go further in the art, if you are a teacher won't you try to somehow emphasize it? Especially if most simply won't do the work to get the skill.

[origami_itto]

I heard there was this martial art called Taijiquan that helps with that.

I´ll bite. Why is it that most of the traditional IMA exercises train "only" a continuous form of balance training, when in practice proactive/reactive training is needed?

This assumes an unproven premise and is extremely vague.

1. What do you mean by "a continuous form of balance training"?
2. What do you mean by proactive/reactive training? Jointly or separately.
3. What is your actual experience training in Taijiquan?
4. What analysis are you basing the claim that "most" traditional Taijiquan exercises are only "balance training"?

It's probably better as it's own thread if you want to pursue the dialogue.

[origami_itto]

....
Not to you directly, but rather a general overview:
The topic of how to deal with forces is complex and from the start I disagree with most people's understanding of traditional martial arts basic tenants. This whole "connection to someones center "in order to move that center...I think is a modern corruption and is dead wrong.
...

* I think you're wrong and your right (with a caveat) = It's really more shades of grey man...no I don't have to have a connection with your center to move it...but it's not wrong to seek it either. I don't have to be directly connected to your center to move it but it helps to know where it is and KEY POINT, to know what state you're in. I.e. this may or may not make sense to you but you can look up such terms as the body being open or closed and in other cases... different sides of your body being Empty or Full. It helps in understanding where a person is strong and therefore potentially week.

1. Mr Harden has very clearly stated that it fundamentally comes down to controlling your own center. From that you can take and control the other person's center. And once again, you can't understand it until you feel it, and watching it on a video isn't going to help, but instead reinforce prior prejudices.

That makes perfect sense to me and essentially reduces the disagreement to semantics.

You perfect your own structure and that allows you to influence their structure.

I don't feel it's completely necesarry to "connect" to someone's center. You can work on a limb or a finger and the center is going to go along for the ride. It's a way to describe it I guess, but words fail me beyond the most basic and ultimately errored conceptions.

[Bodywork]

.........

[Subitai]

Dan, I guess after reading your response, I need to just accept that's one of your training models. Sorry, that I don't get it's value. In my mind, it doesn't help you or the UKE become better. Again I'm talking about that one particular video segment.

Please understand, I'm confused because the models we follow are similar to these: "the way into danger is the way out"( and vice versa) In mandarin we're taught: Bu Diu / bu ding... meaning basically "Don't become disconnected" yet "Don't resist or fight against". So you can hopefully see where our training models might cause confusion or at least not jive.


=====================================================================
To John Becker, LOL, I don't need to "feel that for myself"...I've been training long enough to know what's going on here. Now to be fair...In Dans vid my gripe is as I've said repeatedly only about the UKE.

But I'll take it a step further and just look at this video for example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syiLl3Tuzes
skip to 21secs.

If you think that's a valid training methodology, you're right up there with mister "itto". ( I saw his comment about Roy on the locked thread) Then wow, I guess we're not on the same plane. Shakes head Massively

Lastly when I said, "Nobody could do anything to my student" please understand he is a nice and respectful kid almost timid. When he grabbed them he would do it in a soft way...the way I taught him. Enough to listen and follow yet not over commit.

They couldn't do anything to him because he wasn't grabbing with whole body connecting stiffness. So yeah, you're right there was confusion!

[willie]

brainwashed

[johnbecker]

1. To directly experience is to understand. To watch a video is not, and only reinforces previously held prejudices. Without direct hands-on experience of Mr Harden or Sensei Goldberg, then opinions given remain speculation.

I will expand on that point and say I am not arguing that people who think otherwise don't have skill and understanding in respect of what they personally practice. It doesn't mean it is the same or similar to what the above mentioned teachers do. CMA have very effective, but varied, methods of developing and delivering force. Even within taijiquan alone not everyone is doing the same thing. I've experienced different branches of the Wu (Quan You) line delivering power in noticeably different ways. That's fine by me, and I don't feel the need to be any kind or arbiter on what is 'right', 'wrong', or 'better'. I'm quite happy going where I choose and others doing what works for them.

2. I've no intention to get into exchanging insults, debating what 'plane' someone is on, or entering into belittling others.

3. In cooperative martial arts training, both the 'attacker' and 'defender' have clearly defined 'roles' to play. If one deviates from their role, then the other party will not benefit from the training. If the drill requires a committed grab, then that is because that is relevant to the skill being taught. No different to someone defending a jab to expect their training partner to do that, and not go with a hook or uppercut. There are numerous ways to grab, lock, control, trap an arm, depending on circumstances and the art being done. I can play Filipino, Malaysian, Indonesian, Chinese, Japanese, off the top of my head, but if I'm in an Aiki dojo then I do the attack as per their training method. It's a fundamental point of respecting where you are, what you are doing, and who you are with.

Therefore, using a loose grip, when the training drill requires a committed grab, is ignoring essential training etiquette. If you don't want to train that way or think it's a waste of time, then make your excuses and leave. Respect that others may choose to do things differently, even if you don't see the value of it. When in another's house though, respect the house rules.

[origami_itto]

If you think that's a valid training methodology, you're right up there with mister "itto". ( I saw his comment about Roy on the locked thread) Then wow, I guess we're not on the same plane. Shakes head Massively

Hey now, that's Doctor Itto, I didn't spend 50 years in paper medical school to be called mister, thank you very much.

I don't believe I've ever called this sort of display valid training. I am pretty certain I've only ever called it a demonstration. But you'll have to be more specific about the locked thread with Roy.