How to practice body movement - Tai sabaki?

[WVMark]

I always thought is just meant 'body movement' but perhaps some of our more enlightened JMA members can explain more.

But as i have never studied JMA nor do i read/speak/write Japanese i am more than happy to put my hands up and say 'my bad' and will correct it if given the right words.

EDIT: If/when in the OP has been fixed!

Read this thread:
http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15054

Taisabaki doesn't have to mean "body movement" such as getting out of the way.

I think Kent had a very good post:

Well, sabaku doesn't mean "move". It means something more along the lines of "handle/deal with/manipulate", so while it does mean things like "step to the left with your left foot", that's not *all* it means.

Though they often get glossed over at lower levels, and I've not seen any indications of a purposeful curriculum for teaching body skills directly, at higher levels, there seems to be lots of attention to small details that affect how one moves and generates power: tension in the legs, alignment of the hips and spine, etc. It wouldn't surprise me at all for kendo people to visit someone who moves well to see if they could learn how to improve their own movement.

[JusticeZero]

Ah, so Aikido is halfway decent at stuff I do all the time, good to know. =) From what I saw in the little experience i've had with it, Aikido tends to incorporate stepping into most of their techniques. That would give them a lot of practice stepping under pressure and force.

How much time do you spend moving around in different directions with your stance transitions?
The exercise that I was showing the other day involved using just stance transitioning to deflect and roll away what were essentially committed body checks from different directions; the students doing the checking were flying around in a way associated best with aikido demos, in part because they were twisting away from the elbows that were suddenly appearing at their throat.

Alas, I need to work on their tumbling more, so I was keeping it very tame and they were still taking a beating. This drill is best done blindfolded, I suspect. I was not even stepping for this; stepping goes into the realm of the more basic stuff that doesn't register as a technique on people who are still learning how to step. Further, the checks were defined simply as incoming force.

The way to get good at body movement is by moving.

Go for a walk using nothing but full stances, move forward, move sideways, move diagonally, move back and forth. -we- have people ginga - which is basically a short pattern of deep stance transitions- ad nauseum; probably at least half an hour in each class if you add up the dribbles and drops that aren't associated with a technique. Use footwork to move around the room, experiment with different transitions, use modified kicks as stepping techniques, etc. This is one of the main reasons why we're so mobile even though we spend our time hanging out in deep low leg-length width stances.

[cerebus]

This is what my instructor refers to as "empty body" training, and it's definitely an important, yet neglected aspect of Tai Chi training. Hsing-I & Bagua tend to have a bit more of such training in general, depending on the instructor. This is something that I find I am much better able to manifest though when I'm working on my Tai Chi, which is what I've been doing since around September.

If a person trains long and intensely in a variety of empty body drills, they can be very hard to hit. Then, of course, they can spend their time choosing when and where they will strike their opponent...

[Dmitri]

So do you practice this?

If so how do you do it?

We practice some engagement drills but it always implies contact (even though we DO get out of the way every time).
If you just evade, you can't stop the fight (i.e. prevent your opponent from continuing to attack). Also, with physical touch you can determine opponent's movement and intent much easier and more definitively than without.

[Strange]

...also must move away just before contact is made
i think this is important point

[Chris McKinley]

Ian and Andy_S,

RE: the "If?" comment. It very well may not be a mistranslation. Like many CMA, JMA are often taught as specific paint-by-numbers defenses against department store mannequin attacks. The attacker comes in from long range with a single committed attack with no setup, then leaves the attacking limb hanging out there in space.

RE: footwork. It's intelligent to train a hand and body response before a footwork one. While good footwork is one of the most overlooked aspects of any martial arts training program, its proponents can often go too far the other direction in their advocacy by forgetting that the human has never been born whose footwork is faster than all hand attacks. Put simply, if someone is willing to sacrifice some committed momentum in order to get a hand strike in, there's is no way to avoid it by attempting to match footwork speed to it. It's simply impossible to step far enough offline to avoid a strike faster than an opponent can place that strike if the strike originates inside the single-step distance, i.e., that distance it takes to reach out and touch the opponent without taking at least a single step. From that close, footwork will never beat hand speed no matter who is involved. One's own hand speed and body movement may still match it, however....

Even if your hand speed can match the opponent's exactly, he still has the speed advantage of initiating movement. Your hand speed in countering is only as fast as the combination of your own hand speed plus your speed of perception. Same with body movement speed. Once you've closed to a distance where neither combatant has to take a step in order to reach the opponent, whoever moves first generally lands his blow unless he's facing structural obstacles or the defender has learned to effectively move his body evasively.

In most modern IMA's, this presents a problem because it, of necessity, requires violation of zhong ding momentarily, and almost all applications/defenses/responses in IMA are taught with strict zhong ding intact.

[Chris McKinley]

Graham,

RE: "If you want to avoid quick jabs, then why not have somebody quick jab you until you get the hang of it? All I'm saying, is that if you want to learn to deal with "attack X" then why not have somebody do "attack X" on you until you learn to deal with it? Am I being crazy or is it really not that complicated?". It's not a matter of being complicated. It's a matter of training someone's speed of perception and matching it to taking appropriate action. You and Rob aren't necessarily at odds with each other on this, it's just a matter of where the student is in his development. You're both presenting salient points.

A) If the student is brand new to fighting/training/martial arts, and has sub-par perceptual speed, unresolved flinching issues, fear of being struck, etc., it can be far more useful to start with the kind of thing Rob is talking about. The movement is purposefully slower, larger, more easily recognized, contains less threat of injury/pain should it accidentally strike, etc. Most importantly, if it's tailored correctly to the student, it won't trigger the fear response, and so will allow the student to spend significant time in the training scenario familiarizing himself both with the attacks and his own responses. It will also allow him to spend more time allowing the fear response threshold to reset at a higher level as well as allowing certain less useful behavioral responses to diminish and eventually extinguish.

As the student's perceptual speed improves, his fear response threshold begins to rise, and his tactical responses become consistently effective, the speed of the stick movement can increase and the telegraphic can be minimized. Eventually, switching over to unarmed jabs at medium and later full-speed can be introduced at a pace that matches the student's development.

B) If the student already has sufficient perceptual speed, has effective tactical responses, and lacks sufficient fear of getting hit so as to trigger the fear response, he may be ready to start in with untelegraphed jabs at close range immediately, without the kind of stick training Rob described. Depending on his level of development, it may still be useful to start with slow to medium-speed jabs at first to callibrate perceptual speed, timing, body movement, etc. Likely, such a student will quickly progress to dealing with full-speed, untelegraphed jabs at close range within a very short period of time. Such training is generally much more efficient and specific, given that the student is already prepared for it.

Again, both are good....they simply represent different training points along the spectrum of development.

[Andy_S]

Allan:

To answer your Q:
Yes, some of the bagua step drills are similar to the Aikido.

Years ago, I met Mike Harvey, the brigadier and MA expert who formulated the British Army's unarmed combat training in the 60s. Although he also did judo and karate, he told me the basic Aikido step method is very useful to adopt as a platform to base all H2H moves on. There are two very basic drills:
(1) Oppo attacks with a round attack (haymaker, hook, etc). You simply step forward inside his circle
(2) Oppo attacks with a straight attack (jab, cross, etc). You simply back swivel step to 45 degrees.

I'd recommend Park Bok-nam's bagua book. It has some excellent stepping drills, which are rather more advanced than the above.

Yim Hon-suk, a very good master, privately taught me this system. From a santi stance:
No 1 was a half step forward.
No 2 was a half step back.
No 3 was a full step forward.
No 4 was a ful step back.
No 5 was a back swivel step.
No 6 was a half circle step, and it went on - there were 16 in all. He'd have me drilling up and down the gym, calling out 1! 2! 5! 6! etc, so you had to react as well as do the step - this was mindful, not mindless drilling, good training for instinctive movement. Then you would to them against an opponents attack, and then you would add these into the circle walking.

This was the best footwork method I have ever come across. Once you get good at this, you can zip around like a pinball. I have been concentratnig on Taiji for the last decade, though...but it was a very good method. Yim took some film of me when I was at my peak...I wouldn't mind seeing that again!

Chris:

I agree that hand defense is the simplest and most easily learned - it is, in fact, instinctual. In the bagua, we learned first hand defense, then added body angulation, then added footwork. If you can combine all three, you are in excellent position to defend yourself and counterattack most effectively.

[everything]

play sports

[Waterway]

I have first hand experience of Rob's stick training and it is a great excercise for developing movement.

I studied Aikido for nearly 3 years. It has some fantastic movement for avoidance, and it also has great ways of moving with a person (e.g. a person is holding you, you are holding them etc...).

Tomiki/Shodokan Aikido have solo drills for training body movement called Unsoku:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DF_Y6YbvnA

Yoshinkan Aikido also has solo training movement excercises called Kihon Dosa:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAWW85LcKps

[Chris McKinley]

Andy,

RE: "If you can combine all three, you are in excellent position to defend yourself and counterattack most effectively.". Agreed. However, while this is true, it's not always possible regardless of how effective it may be, and it is that concept that a lot of folks miss.

If a guy throws a simple jab, cross, hook combo, for instance, footwork alone won't get you out of danger completely, even if you had the superhuman speed to match his hand speed with your footwork. Whichever way you step, one of those strikes is going to be in position to hit you. If you step left to avoid his left jab, his cross is still in range to nail you. If you step right to avoid his left jab, you might put his cross out of range as well, but you've just walked right into his left hook. If you step backward, he can always step forward faster, putting you back at square one.

Now, I realize that no one is going to employ footwork in isolation, and that no one is advocating that as a strategy, per se. However, what I'm illustrating is that even with optimum footwork, one still won't be placing himself into a position of "fence" (i.e., where you have positioned yourself so as to nullify/prevent the opponent's attack while still able to issue a counterattack of your own) unless the opponent has executed a committed attack where his body momentum is involved. As long as he doesn't commit his body momentum, he can effectively prevent you from achieving a position of fence either by body movement or hand/bridge movement or both.

It is this fact that is often not accurately reflected in the applications practice of many TMA, including both JMA and CIMA. Trying to apply Lu/roll back against an uncommitted jab, for instance, is in most every case entirely futile. Now, it doesn't take long to figure this out empirically if one spends even a modicum of time sparring against more realistic attacks rather than the more common mannequin variety, but therein lies the rub. Sadly, such an easily and quickly learned lesson is typical of the kind of tactical mistakes made by the typical IMA practitioner, especially of Taijiquan, when first applying their art in any kind of realistic environment, whether backyard sparring with friends or facing a real assault on da str33tz.

Most practitioners haven't had the experience to realize that some of the admonitions in their art represent Platonic ideals and that one still has to have significant reserve skill and a backup game plan for when it's not possible to manifest the Classics in textbook fashion.

[johnwang]

For me this is one aspect that is missing from taijiquan ... So do you practice this? If so how do you do it?

Do you just use a simple "stealing step" and spin out of it? I agree that Taiji doesn't use enough "stealing step" or "cover step" for some unknown reason. The "fair lady work on shuttle" may be the only place that "stealing step" is used. The "cloud hands", "Lu - pull back" may also be proper places to use the "stealing step".

I do think that Taiji stationary PH training may give people the wrong impression that "moving around is bad."

[JusticeZero]

While it is true that simply avoiding attacks forever would be less than effective, it is also important to be able to use your stepping to better your own position. If you sidestep an attack, you end in a position from which the side of the opponent is open, often with their ribs briefly exposed. You also have entered a stance which is no doubt well suited to taking advantage of that hole, which you might not have had before.

[Dmitri]

I do think that Taiji stationary PH training may give people the wrong impression that "moving around is bad."

It definitely does -- for those (probably many?) schools that limit their practice that way.

In "moving-step PH" there's a LOT of "stealing steps".

[AllanF]

Andy: It is these type of aikido steps that i have been trying to incorporate into my training. So it is interesting to note that someone like Mike Harvey advocates them.

Everything: Play sports...yeah played rugby union for 15 years, including international development squads/international age groups and semi professional (when the game first turn pro) the evesive manovers in sports like rugby and MA are not the same.

IMO the purpose of movement in martial arts is to enter the oppoent's gate AND avoid his blows at the same time.
The movements should be: 1) light 2) quick 3)smooth/relaxed 4) unnoticed 5) natural (as in enter the opponents gate naturally). In contact sports like rugby it is a little more obvious and you are not trying to enter into the opponents defense in fact you are trying to get as far away from them as possible.

John: I agree that fixed step push hands gives the work impression or perhaps trains movement out of you. Which is why i have never been a a fan of it the PHs we do is completely free, with the exception of striking to the face.