Look from the side

 As the time goes on and technology keeps progressing and developing, we are often tempted to look for the latest piece of training gear, gadget or app that could propel our training further and faster. In that search for new and more it is easy to lose sight of the fact that often the improvement can be achieved quicker by working on the old. Specifically, on mercilessly identifying and removing the mistakes we make in practice, and with this insight working on enhancing our performance through the elimination of own weakness(es). 

Of course, this identification process is best achieved in the presence of a good instructor/coach. But what to do when left to one's own devices? Exactly that - use the device we all normally use on the daily basis! While martial arts have been around for much longer than video recording technology, I am dumbfounded that there is still so many people who fail to recognize the valuable aspects of regularly taking footage of their training. 

Not all cameras are spying on us

If you are on a true, incessant pursuit of improvement in training, video recording is priceless help. Even if you do have a coach, they are only able to see and process so many things at once, but when analyzing footage, it is possible to rewind, slow down, isolate and really focus deeply on any little minutia of the practitioner's work. Even more so when forced to work on your own. And it works both ways - finding out good solutions that have emerged spontaneously in some situation, and then trying to work them in one's regular game; also, recognizing the recurring mistakes and omissions that need to be eliminated. 

Cameras can be very useful in a group setting, too. As an example, when the whole class is involved in an activity, some people may be more successful in doing it, and the video footage may later be used to better explain to other trainees how to approach it more effectively. 

Finally, if you are an instructor in a system that does not rely on ranks/belts as the means of tracking the student's progress (or even if it does), as I have witnessed in the RMA circles, you will be regularly met with students' periods of doubt and resignation with their progress. Naturally, it may lead to their sub-optimal effort, or even giving up on training altogether. In such  situations, letting them compare their performance, captured on video in the span of a few moths can offer a great boost to their confidence and motivation to carry on with the work. 

A word of warning - depending on you age, pulling out a phone for its camera capacity may tempt you to make the training session into a posing session for Instagram or TicToc or whatever... Make sure that other participants in training also understand that at issue is not a demo, but the regular workout, so that you would have authentic material input to work with it for the benefits down the line. 

Changing views

 There is this thing of viewing, i.e. quantifying, one's training from one of two main vantage points - in term of hours spent, or years invested. It probably obvious that those two outlooks are nor really mutually exclusive, but rather complementary. Especially since both require certain level of commitment from the practitioner... Quite recently, the good folks from the FMA Discussion community had a very nice debate on the topic of hours vs. years, and it yielded an excellent episode of their podcast. 

All three participants in the talk were able to really nicely present their points of view and arguments relating to the subject, with a lot of excellent insights. I especially liked how they underlined that when things take their natural course, the hours will eventually turn into years. It really resonated with me, because it immediately reminded of how my path with Alex Kostic unfolded. Namely, when he first started teaching Systema as a guest instructor in the club/group where I was a member, it was only natural that my tendency was to squeeze in as many hours as possible with Alex whenever he was around (he was still based in Canada back then). Those hours contributed to our building a great relationship and ultimately into years spent training and researching together. 

Be as it may, at one point during the above program, the host asked the question that I had sent, whether if we take the look at the training time through the lens of hours, does it matter how far apart those hours are? While the answers were good, I may not have formulated the question adequately. Although, Mr. Steve Grody had already brought up what seems to me to be the central point - consistency.

So, here is my attempt to be a bit more specific. Let's say a person has 50 hours per year available for training. Would it be more effective then to train for one hour every week, or attend five seminars of 10 hours each throughout that year (thus, 10-12 weeks between training sessions)? Essentially, if there is absolutely no other training done outside those hours, it only makes sense that weekly hour-long sessions would be preferable, primarily for the sake of regular feedback regarding one's performance. Regardless of what kind of performance we're talking about here - forms, techniques, drills, sparring - consistent shorter sessions will take the cake over occasional longer ones.

 On the other hand, if we talk about 50 hours of INSTRUCTION, not all training, then the seminars with regular practice sessions between them may be the right way to go, particularly of otherwise we have limited access to the qualified instructors. After all, this how many arts and systems were able to spread around the world. Still, if regular instruction is available, weekly learning slots with reinforcing practice sessions on other days of the week would win, for the reasons mentioned above. 

It bear saying, nonetheless, that certain situations will naturally gravitate to one of the two vantage points. Say, a fight camp 6-8 weeks prior to a competition clearly goes towards the emphasis on hours spent over the period. Alternatively, in some systems require age limits for certain ranks, so the hours on those years may not be decisive. 

The bottom line is that it is how learning works - effort over time. The intensity and regularity are the fundamental factors here, and if those an be balanced, it is really an optimal situation. And again, if the commitment and discipline are there - the hours will definitely turn into years. 

Hard AND Smart

 This one goes hand in hand with the previous post. That said, you do not need to read the last month's installment, but if you do, it will give you a bigger picture of the subject.

A typical student of a typical martial art is typically driven (early on at least) by achieving the next belt/degree, which is why after the 3-6 month mark, probably the biggest drop off point in the number of students is a year or so after they get their black belt. That is characteristic of extrinsically motivated people, i.e. a lot of them in today's consumer societies. Also a common feature of such practitioners is incessant hunt for new techniques and tricks. It is baffling, really, that to this day there are so many people believing the "secret" to greatness of success lies in the material itself, rather than in the person using it. After all, how do we explain the fact that some exponents can successfully pull off techniques others can't make work? As master Rey Galang says during his classes (albeit in the way I paraphrased it, to make it more memorable):

So, yeah, it boils down to elbow grease and dedicated work on the stuff one's instructors are teaching. And then, ask yourself, how much time during the day (if aiming at real competence, you can't allow yourself to think in terms of 2-3 times per week) you can invest in training? Well, how much material do you think one can cover efficiently and meaningfully? Hmmm...does it make sense to collect dozens upon dozens of techniques in that case? 

That brings us to the need and desire for cross training. I belong to the camp that argues for the necessity of such approach, if one is motivated by combative effectiveness in their martial training. The above considerations could be used here as a filter to help you decide which systems/instructors to work with in order to make your skill set compact and functional. Namely, their methods should be complementary, both in terms of fighting ability and training economy. When you can work on things that fit well together, it is easier to approach them in a single act, thus making every minute of practice count. Otherwise, you might be struggling in vain.

Be honest with yourself and it will be easier to be true to your quest. 

Challenges in training - commitment

 

So far, all the installments of the Challenges In Training “series” discussed the topics that mostly belonged the to the domain of responsibility for the instructors and coaches. Overall, this whole blog is sort of aimed that way, talking about the training methods, progressions, tools, approaches etc. And all those are important. However, the absolute key factor in any student’s progress is actually is or her own dedication and determination in training.

Naturally, when first getting into a martial art class, many potential students may not be fully aware of what is it they are looking for, due to a slew of various ideas about training. And that is fine. At some point, though, some of them will find some reason to choose one system/school or the other and stay with it. From that moment on, the instructor and the trainee have a kind of pact (maybe even a written contract) that binds them in the joint effort of making the latter better at that skillset. Now, contrary to the common initial view, at the early stages of training, the main burden of making that progress is ON the STUDENT! It is up to them to provide the foundation by being consistent and earnest in their work. Most importantly, having made your choice, give both yourself and your instructor some time to get things going. Make sure you are not in this category:

While it is certainly easy to find yourself nodding and agreeing with what Mr. Marsalis says (as an instructor), or be intimidated (as a student), it doesn’t mean the only good way to undergo effective training is what some people would call “old school” – absolute obedience and silence from the trainees, whereas the teacher or instructor is held on a pedestal, with dictator-like mandate to do whatever they feel like. The commitment on students’ part is also reflected in their curiosity and desire to know more/better, especially if what they have to ask and say helps the teacher understand how to prepare the classes and material for the best results.

That said, it does not mean total liberty for the students to just spout the first thing that comes to their mind. There has to be some discipline and self-control involved in the process. Essentially, you should be looking to have as meaningful relationship and communication between the two sides as possible. Remember, it is a pact, with the common goal in mind.

Probably the main hindrance nowadays is the exposure to too much information. I have to say, with the spread of free (quasi)instructional media on Youtube and similar services, it can be rather difficult for students to separate the wheat from the chaff and set up good filters before selecting adequate material to ask about or consult. My advice is, ask your instructor which sources are acceptable from his perspective, and from which phase of your training.

But, most importantly, the students need to understand that training is a process! As such it takes time and it is not linear. There will be ups and downs, plateaus and growth, frustration and inspiration…it is all part and parcel of doing it. But you must be doing it in the first place, and keep at it. Sure, there will be times when you don’t feel inspired or at your best, or when it is the case with your instructor…this is where your discipline and commitment have to carry you. Otherwise, haphazard training will only yield haphazard results.

Rocky road to ranking

 Over the past few months I have attended a couple of ranking exams in martial arts, performed online. Back in the 1990's, when I first became aware of various long-distance learning/training programs, done via VHS, I was wondering how much sense did it make. On the one hand, it seemed to me that the logistics were a serious challenge, but on the other - there were plenty of embarrassing tests conducted and ranks awarded in the direct, face to face situations. 

Over time, I came to the conclusion that it boils down to the seriousness of the system/organization and integrity of the instructors who do the testing. I remember deliberately postponing my black belt test in Taekwondo, so that I could take it under a Korean instructor known for strict standards. After spending almost an hour doing the required techniques, forms, breaking and sparring, the whole experience had much more meaning, especially having in mind that he actually failed three candidates out of dozen or so that day. 

Later, when I got involved with different, less formal systems, the entire notion of belts and ranks seemed redundant and needless. But is it so?

Means to an end, or goal itself?

Obviously, when a person is into training for the passion and for the joy of the activity itself, the rank is something of a side-effect, if considered at all. I liked the practice of some instructors I trained under, who would occasionally award ranks, completely announced, on unsuspecting students, based on their regular effort, performance and achievement, without extrinsic motivation. 

However, it took some time for me to understand that there are people who start in martial arts with what I would consider "laughable" aims of chasing belts, but actually grow into training and develop more of intrinsic goals, be it the level of performance, technical performance, discipline and character building, competitive success etc. 

Having children in training is particularly susceptible to this kind of approach, in the terms of valid strategy, although it is certainly not the only one proven to be available. Still, training kids also tends to be the environment where the rank can be rendered meaningless. I mean, with all due respect, what exactly is the rationale behind 6-year-old black belts?

???

Naturally, there will always be schools and instructors reputed as diploma mills, but let's not get bogged in that discussion. Instead, here are some reasons I see as relevant for conducting actual testing for rank. 

First, there are some fighting arts (iai-do, kenjutsu, many kung fu styles...) that simply do not include any kind of external pressure on the practitioners, aside from the possible tough instructor, and preparing for the test could provide that extra edge in their training. 

Next, sometimes the school or training group is affiliated with an instructor that is only able to visit periodically, and testing (usually attached to a seminar) is the only way to gain pertinent insight into someone's level, hence the rank actually serving as feedback for them to evaluate their effort thus far.

Finally, in case of rank tests that are open for public, it can be a good opportunity for the school to show and/or confirm its standards and legitimacy their trainees' work in the world where there is too much marketing and advertising, with scarcity of tangible evidence of quality. Typically, BJJ schools are a good example of how ranking and belts can be meaningful and worthy of respect. 

In the end, let's go back to the beginning. The online tests that I attended were well done - the instructors were demanding and helpful at the same time, while the candidates had taken it seriously and were well prepared to go through almost two-hour event, in order to demonstrate being worthy of the rank. Again, it boils down to the integrity of the entity presenting the ranks, and when that criterion is up to level, the quality of its representatives is almost guaranteed.