Difference between actual training and information

[CANDANeh]

At a recent seminar a very aggressive presenter indicated that he had put to the test 50 drivers who felt they could handle a car in a crisses situation.
The drivers were to keep the vehicle under control after driving over chemicals that sent the car into a spin... 97% failed as they looked at the object they were to steer away from instead of where they wanted the car to go..
He blamed the failure on the drivers only being given information instead of actual training and asked us if any knew the difference between information vs training as we were the source of that problem by feeding only information(no takers).

After a long uncomfortable pause, he told the story of his teenage daughter bringing home a letter from the school indicating sex education was going to be part of the school program and to check off whether he wished for her to be given information or... training...

[2Green]

This strikes a chord in me, because I believe that many people who believe they are TRAINING are simply acknowledging information, perhaps assimilating it, but doing nothing with it.
They then believe "knowledge is power" or, "because I know it, I can do it."
Big mistake.

Knowing is not doing. Only doing is doing.
Knowing is the first half of the battle; perhaps the easiest part?
But doing...that's what actually wins the battle..and perhaps the hardest part.

NM

[Mark Weitz]

I agree completely with what's being raised in this thread. Another variation I see a lot from some teachers is, if I show you once or twice, but don't make it a regular part of training, then you've learned it.

Students often do this as well..."oh yeah, so and so showed me X technique, yeah, I know that one". Really grinds my gears.

We'll only do in the heat of the moment what we've practiced many times on a regular basis. If someone practices stupid, fantasy techniques, that's what they'll do in the moment of truth, and suffer greatly for it. We are/do what we practice.

Respectfully,

Mark

[gmattson]

The problem with much of the information we read and hear about is the each segment requires much training and constant refresher sessions.

At best, we can only be aware of the many facets of the self protection field while hopefully attempting to become adapt at one or two.

[2Green]

...and this is exactly what I like about Uechi Ryu. A relatively few, simple effective techniques, therefore easier to keep refreshed.
8 Kata, not long, but deep, and containing much useful and realistic technique. Some ornamentation, but every artist has a signature.
Someday I'm going to sit down and count how many Uechi defenses there are against a basic right-hand punch, which is what most people are going to throw. How many do you need, and how many can you do instinctively under pressure?
The MOST INTERESTING one I've seen, although it's not a taught technique, is the amazing ability of "defenders" in the Dojo to actually grab and trap a fist thrown "wrong" in a drill by the "attacker."
Or do a completely effective "wrong" block out of pure reflex.
This tells me something very real is going on underneath the drills, kumites, kata and hojo undos.
Something is taking place within the student ; being learned without being overtly taught. These are not "thought" responses they are "thoughtless" in the way that Bruce Lee expressed "formless".
They are "without thought" and "without form" in the sense that they are not consciously directed.
Start looking for these and you will see. Think about what this means.

NM

[benzocaine]

although it's not a taught technique, is the amazing ability of "defenders" in the Dojo to actually grab and trap a fist thrown "wrong" in a drill by the "attacker."
Or do a completely effective "wrong" block out of pure reflex.

ha ha... as anyone who has taught a lower rank a kumite knows!

Maybee this is the true essence of kumite. Seriuosly though I agree with you on this statement ;

8 Kata, not long, but deep, and containing much useful and realistic technique. Some ornamentation

I have been to a few kung fu classes lately and it is really opening my eyes up to just how practical and effective our style is. It is like you say. Our techniques all become automatic. I would agree that it is partially because we begin with the foundation of sanchin, and build from there. When we fight we automatically go into a sanchin like stance, because everything we do emiinates from it. Our partner work also has a strong effect on how we defend ourselves... and when someone does the "wrong" attack, in some small way we are defending ourselves. I think that as long as the Sensei leaves no illusion that a wauke will always work against a punch, but rather that the drill is merely a training aide the student should be ok.


Thank you for your insight into how our style leads us to formless, or logical actions. I love it

One thing I beleive you should do is reassess your belief that there is "Some ornamentation" involved in our kata. Ask just about any senior Dan rank how they interpret what you perceive as an ornamentation, and they will find a martial application .... well.. except for maybee the bow. Ha ha.. watch someone will have a martial use for that



Sincerely,

Ben

[Mark Weitz]

Of course there's a martial application to the bow: a head-butt.

[benzocaine]

Of course there's a martial application to the bow: a head-butt

Yes... truly all is in Sanchin.

[Mark Weitz]

[I think that as long as the Sensei leaves no illusion that a wauke will always work against a punch, but rather that the drill is merely a training aide the student should be ok.]

Good point. The Wauke is really a blocking system containing within it many blocks that are useful for a variety of strikes. The closest I've seen to an effective use of the whole range of motion against a punch is Senseis Mott and Maloney (only seen him on video, unfortunately). Both of these seniors have a relaxed yet powerful way of using the circular motion, though in the videos of Maloney doing this block he appears to be more linear using the sweep arm more as a strike than a block (see his latest DVD).

Just like every technique, each student will find within the Wauke what works for them given their physical make-up and abilities.[/quote]

[Mark Weitz]

[I think that as long as the Sensei leaves no illusion that a wauke will always work against a punch, but rather that the drill is merely a training aide the student should be ok.]

Good point. The Wauke is really a blocking system containing within it many blocks that are useful for a variety of strikes. The closest I've seen to an effective use of the whole range of motion against a punch is Senseis Mott and Maloney (only seen him on video, unfortunately). Both of these seniors have a relaxed yet powerful way of using the circular motion, though in the videos of Maloney doing this block he appears to be more linear using the sweep arm more as a strike than a block (see his latest DVD).

Just like every technique, each student will find within the Wauke what works for them given their physical make-up and abilities.