As you all probably know, one of my closest friends and biggest influences in the field of martial arts (and beyond) is Alex Kostic. Today is his round number birthday, and to celebrate it, I decided to share an instructional video we did a few years ago. Although his teaching methodology is always improving, this still represents a fairly good introduction to the way Alex dissects certain topics in training.
Hope you will enjoy it!
Sometimes I can't help noticing that we live in a world where everything is quantified, so the notions of success and achievement are based on measurements, typically in an attempt to be (quasi)scientific in one's approach to training. While such a view has some value in certain domains, particularly in a professional sport field, I believe that in some other practices it might be (at least occasionally) harmful.
Even in a very streamlined sport of weight lifting, for example, there are so many factors involved (sleep, mood, state of health etc.) that it would be ill-advised to focus on the numbers as the sole indicator of progress. More than once have I seen a lifter miserable after a good session, because they failed to reach a goal that was a number on the paper (or the screen). How do you quantify quality or pleasure?
Things get even more complex in an oppositional skill based arena that is martial arts and combat sports. For a lot of people involved in these, there is this idea of making progress by "getting to the next level", which entails learning advanced techniques and/or more new maneuvers. You see it everywhere, from the modern BJJ and MMA gyms and their new tricks of the trade, to the traditional schools, where the new belt means new forms and techniques. We always strive to get to a new step and climb higher on the chosen ladder of success.
But what if that is a wrong viewpoint? After all, they say that advanced techniques are the basics done really well, right? Wouldn't that mean we ought to get deeper, not higher? Hey, even the Earth's structure prefers depths to heights!
"...but often better than the master of one!", however! Wait, what? Aren't I contradicting myself? Well, not really. See, IMHO, one needs to be a comprehensivist in terms of areas of competence, but then a deep diver in each of them. Naturally, the number of those areas of competence will depend on your purpose in training - sport, cultural study, recreation etc. Let's say you are a MMA practitioner with competitive inclination: you would need to develop some functional skillset in standup/striking range, clinch/wrestling and the ground/grappling game. Now, if you have previous background in one of the disciplines that are typically perceived as "main ingredients" of MMA (i.e. (kick/Thai)boxing, wrestling, judo, sambo, BJJ), it could be possible and maybe even recommended to build a strategic approach of taking the fight to your area of expertise, with solid defense in all the others.
Let's see what the deep dive consist of, then. The first thing would be to identify a finite set of techniques and tactics that make the functional foundation within that area and then work on truly internalizing and integrating them, to a degree that we could improvise and play with them at will. For example: in the standup game - jab, cross, front hook, low kick and (maybe) front kick, corresponding parries and defenses; in the clinch game - a couple of controls and takedown from wrestling (underhook, weezer, single leg), head/neck control and a couple of elbow and knee strikes from Thai-boxing, takedown defense/sprawl; on the ground - essential positional control, 2-3 escapes for each position, 2-3 submissions from each position, a couple of fundamental sweeps/reversals, and fundamental ground and pound options.
Huh, it is still quite a bit... But, if you get deeply skilled in those, there will almost certainly be no need for jumping or spinning kicks and backfists, scissor throws and suplexes, berimbolos and lasso guard or calf slicers. Leave those to the folks specializing (i.e. deep diving) in those singular disciplines.
If your aim is on the pavement arena of self-protection, you will also want to address hand held weapons (impact and edged...firearms if it fits your legal environment), with emphasis on access and deployment, along with a couple of low-risk and effective techniques/strikes, while discarding the twirling and flipping stuff. (There are quite a few reviews of the applicable instructional volumes on this blog). When it comes to defense, focus on control over disarming. While on the subject of street self-defense, if you try running a couple of scenarios that involve multiple attackers, it will quickly become obvious which physical techniques and tactics are to be prioritized (footwork, standing wrestling, straight punches, low line kicking).
Thanks to the easy access to video footage of all kinds of physical situations, it is relatively easy to figure out what are the technical and tactical tools that should be prioritized, so-called high percentage ones, in order to avoid straying away from your training mission.
After that, all you need is to dig in...deep!
A while ago, in a Facebook group about MA books and magazines, I posted about a few of my favorite sword/fencing books and referred to the sword as "the king of bladed weapons", just to be quickly reminded that such title traditionally belong to spear. There was a short and friendly debate about my emphasizing bladed and whether that changes anything...but that's not the point.
After giving it a bit of thought, it became obvious (well, to me) that there are a couple of reasons why both may be true. First, we are really talking about two different periods. Namely, the spear got its reputation of royalty through antiquity and medieval times, while my perception of the sword as the high aristocracy was related to the later periods - from renaissance to the late 18th/early 19th century, which is when the management of swords developed into a revered art and science. Second, the surrounding in which the spear shone was the battlefield, i.e. war theater with armies clashing in massive numbers of combatants. Sword, on the other hand, took over the primacy as a dueling weapon in urban areas, with either one-on-one scenario or smaller number of participants.
Not to mention the geographical, social and cultural influences that could be taken into account...so let's keep it simplified!
That said, while it is easy to think of swords as an EDC (every day carry) weapon of choice in its time, I have hard time imagining anyone carrying a spear around other than a very specific purpose, either for hunting or military assignment. Speaking of the military context, it bears saying that if a soldier/warrior had both of those on them, the spear probably did have a primary role, while the sword was sort of a side arm. Something like rifle and pistol as a modern day equivalence.
With that in mind, it occurred to me that the battlefield of the days of yore most probably offered ample opportunity for asymmetrical engagement where different weapons were pitted against each other, thus possibly giving us the answer about the question of one weapon's superiority? Lo and behold, other have already dealt with it!
And this is but one example...you can find quite a few others out there. Mind you, it is sort of a rabbit hole, so be warned! One thing that becomes conspicuous rather soon is that there are VERY few attempts at grabbing the shaft of the spear and then closing the distance. Besides the fact that there are many different types of spears (and other polearms) out there, once you try it out, it becomes obvious that such a tactic is actually harder to pull off that it may seem, especially if there is a lot of maneuvering space for the person wielding the the spear.
So, where do you start with learning a few basics, in case you are interested at all? Again, there are many options available, depending on the preferred approach in terms of historical period, geographical area of origin etc. Still, probably two prevailing avenues are HEMA sources and those of Asian background.
With regards to the former, even a cursory search will yield a huge number of results. Those will either be written - articles and translations/interpretations of period manuals - or videos that cover similar material. Here is a nice one for fundamental basics:
In the latter case, it may be difficult to get down to the practical stuff (provided that is what you are looking for), as so many Chinese and Japanese systems of use may rely on forms as the means of teaching, and those are often hard to decode if you do not have some background in that approach. So, let's turn to a more simplistic and modern version:
Of course, since I brought up the matter of practicality, one might wonder what is the point of learning to use spear at all nowadays? Well, for one thing, in the domain of personal protection, the mechanical and technical principles of the weapon itself could be implemented with some sort of improvised tools (broom handles, spades...). However, even more important is the development of other, higher level, attributes such as distance management and footwork, space awareness, tactical adaptability etc. In the military domain...well, as much as the bayonet plays a role (if at all), the methods of its use will be well grounded in the use of spear. As a side note, but related to that, in the Soviet Russia bayonet fencing was part of the national fencing competition circuit alongside foil, epee and saber for quite some time, probably into the 1970's, if not longer.
Maybe we could use what is left of nice weather to do some outdoors training and reap some of those abovementioned benefits...
For the last few weeks I've had a huge amount of work to deal with, which, of course, severely limits my options in terms of choosing when and how much to train. Still, daily training is non-negotionable, and that requires some adaptations. So, how do I deal with it?
Basically, so far my approach has been the scattered practice. I guess it could be seen as a variation of the Pomodoro method, but with a different aim. Namely, the Pomodoro technique is typically used when one needs to learn a new piece of information (or skill, in our case), thus emphasizing focus and deliberate study.
However, in times of limited time availability, I prefer to emphasize the "maintenance" work, i.e. practice the stuff that is already somewhat within my grasp. The reason is that my "episodes" are normally much further apart than 5 minutes, scattered throughout the day, and also shorter (10-15 minutes sometimes), which means the lack of continuity that serious study of a new skill would require. And that brings us to the question of material selection.
This will, naturally, depend on your needs in training and whether you are doing it solo or with a partner. In the former case, some may choose to work on their forms, others on reps of the individual techniques/maneuvers, still others on footwork etc. All fair choices... Personally, I strive to get the "biggest bang for my buck" through a compound approach - take a technical element (maybe a combo) and then work it with dynamic footwork and in mid to high intensity, optimally also with strong mental imagery. That way, it feels I am getting some technical material done along with a certain amount of conditioning, and possibly even some tactical practice. If nothing else, it always makes sense to do some physical preparation work - strength, endurance, flexibility...it's up to you. In the end, even if you mange to squeeze in just 15-20 minutes of such daily action, by the end of the week you'll end up 105-140 minutes of training! Hey, it is practically two full sessions!
How about partnered work? Well, my take would include 5 minutes of some sort of light dynamic drilling, just to set the pace in order to avoid injuries due to overzealous attitude and omission of warm up; then proceed to do some kind of sparring - either free or with tactical constraints - as long as you are able to not let it get out of hand in terms of intensity. I mean, sometimes these micro-sessions are conducted in the workplace...
There you have it! Don't let the little lazy excuse-maker, which we all have inside our brains, take over. Cumulative effort will make a difference and bring good results, if you are diligent and smart in your training.
They say good things come in threes. Also, it seems that all the great bands tend to have a triumvirate of great albums among others...less stellar. A similar thing may be said about book authors. It is a rare occurrence, though, when someone hits three brilliant pieces out of three! Well, today we have a shining example of that rare breed - Maija Soderholm.
Maija is a phenomenal exponent of blade arts, mainly of the Filipino provenance, and an excellent instructor, too. While it might be customary to introduce a person in this field by means of her teachers etc, she stands so firmly on her own expertise that even the fact that she comes from the lineage of legendary Sonny Umpad doesn't diminish her own contribution to the development and advancement of the arts. Fortunately, she happens to be as mighty with a proverbial pen as she is with a sword, thus writing a string of books hinted at in the introduction.
The thing that really made me love those is the common theme of all her products, i.e. higher-level, strategic dimension of dueling with sharp (and pointy) steel. In other words, Soderholm tackles the tricky topic of thinking process behind the seemingly "magical" performance by all the greatest exponents of this art/science. So, let me offer a brief review of her books, in the chronological order of their publication.
In the debut volume the author sets the standard for the whole "series" in several regards. First of all, I love the visual theme/design of the cover, which has been kept for the later volumes as well. Next, the title - The Liar, The Cheat and The Thief - is nothing short of brilliant! It very aptly represents the overall "mood" of the material contained within the book. Namely, Maija does not deal with philosophy and ethics of martial arts as they are typically presented nowadays, in terms of self perfection as part of a wider social environment. Instead, her focus is on the self preservation in the situations where life and limb are at stake. Even so, however, there are higher dimensions in this kind of endeavor, beyond the mechanics of technical performance, as important as they are.
To start with, the author describes a set of hypothetical circumstances that very well paint the kind of mindset required for thriving in the sort of situation that the material is aimed at. again - dueling with bladed implements. She then proceeds to explain why deception is the key word/idea in the foundation of advanced combative practice, in her view. The main section of the book, in Part 2, is dedicated to a number of drills designed to develop in the practitioner a constellation of skills that would help them in being successfully deceptive. The drills are divided into several categories, such as timing, footwork, faking, mirroring etc, depending on their primary developmental goal. This part is also where the only possible shortcoming of these books is found...all exercises and activities are described verbally, with no pictorial illustrations whatsoever. Now, this is not necessarily such a bad thing, as it means the inbuilt guidance to personalization and creativity in practice. Still, if you are adamant about seeing the "original" way of doing them, there is a set of corresponding videos available through Soderholm's website. The third and final section of the book offers several clarifications regarding the author's path leading to the lessons presented and several other tidbits that help put things together.
Her second title is The Hustler. While the previous one was mostly a hands-on instructional, this volume is more...theoretical in nature. More specifically, it will require that you put your thinking hat on and approach the material from the personal interpretation of the presented information. See, it still deals with deception, but goes a step further in treating the subject as a course in managing attention. Both the opponent's and your own. That said, it could be said that Soderholm is seeking to bring to the forefront certain facets of human nature that are relevant to the task at hand, which should help us understand the bigger picture of the activity (Remember? Yes, sword dueling!). And why is it important? Well, because it is easier to put the pieces of the puzzle in the right place if you have the picture before you, and it means the reciprocal endeavor of trying to figure out how to overcome the opponent, while simultaneously preventing them from overcoming you. Possibly most illuminating is the description and analysis of the Arc of Action, as she calls it, with its phases of before, during and after, because so many people seem not have the grasp of that continuum. The thing is, understanding that part will help immensely with the applicability of the rest of material, including time and targets, methods of control, and the art of reading the opponent. Obviously, the kind of knowledge that could be gained from understanding and working with this material is precious when you need to analyze other people's styles and overall strategies that run their approach to fighting. Whether that is for the purpose of countering or emulating them...I leave that up to you.
Finally, the last book (only for now, hopefully) is The Spy and the Rodeo Clown. This one also has the intriguing subtitle Swordplay and the Third Game, which is another way of pointing to the progression that these volumes present in terms of personal "game" development: the first book teaches us how to be unreadable for the opponent; the second is about reading their intention; while the this particular strives to reach the ability of "writing the opponent". In other words, guiding their actions to where you want them to be. In more other word, if in the first book you set the traps and waited (hoped) for the prey to fall into them, this time you are actively luring them to walk into that trap. It is possibly a more proactive approach, but in a rather subtle manner, since the trick is in making the opposition believe they are doing it of their own volition, i.e. in their best interest. Do you now get the references to magic and sorcery?
Maija has an interesting mode of presenting this material - she first gives you a set of tasks/assignments to do, and only after teaches how to solve the riddles and/or problems that might emerge along in the process. In my experience it is an excellent approach, because it starts with acquainting oneself with the context, so that everything learned afterwards makes much more sense and is easier to retain and further develop. Very few people in the contact weapons world offer that sort of instruction, and I have yet to see more of them getting so deep into it while staying practical.
The author is known for her championing the training method of random flow as the best way to instill this range of skills, but in order to make things easier to grasp, she first points to an important distinction between the interview and conversation, to better understand the scope of application and appreciate the spheres of influence in the contact range and edge of range (both while entering and exiting the contact range) etc. There is a lot of ground covered here, and it is not something that can be quickly absorbed into one's personal combative expression. It will take time and effort for sure, but in the long term it is not something that should be neglected or dismissed. On the contrary - at the advanced age you need advanced skill to compensate for deteriorating physical attributes, especially in working with weapons, where the margin of error is much narrower.
Before the end, I'd like to suggest a reading order different to chronology of publishing. Even though you can certainly go through the progression as already described, but from the standpoint of understanding the context first you may want to start with the Hustler, then carry on with LCT, and finally work on the Spy and the Rodeo Clown. Whatever the preferred order, you won't regret diving into the material.
In conclusion, for everyone who takes a serious approach to martial arts, training hard and smart, these books not only belong to their library, but ought to be read and referenced often and lot.
I have always loved new beginnings! The excitement, challenges, joy of discovery...I've always had the feeling that it brings out the best in me. And over the last few weeks, it has been sort of a double treat for me!
First, as an instructor, I have finally put together a small training group in the new country that I moved to a few months ago. And it is great to have serious guys to work with - putting in time and effort, smart and athletic to begin with, listening carefully and following the instructions to continue with. Sheer joy!
As a student, decided to join an online training program in a system that I had never dealt with before, thus stepping out of my comfort zone. Not wanting to reveal too many details just yet, let me tell you that so far it has been inspiring and joyous to work hard as a beginner and having that sense of accomplishment that comes with daily training. Expect more insights in the future, when I feel confident enough, and with the necessary minimum of experience, so that my comments will make some sense.
Sure, the biggest overall challenge is time management, but at this point it is doable. The second in line, considering my tender age of 50 is energy management. Specifically, it primarily means sufficient recuperation from daily sessions, but with some discipline and commitment (nothing new there) regarding nutrition and lifestyle, there haven't been any real problems.
No big lessons here, but again - do not fear new beginnings, because, as the saying goes: there is no growth in the comfort zone!
But whose fault is it?
What I mean here is an interesting phenomenon that occurs as a result of experience gap in a given filed, which in our case is martial arts and combative training. Specifically, with years or decades of training and practice certain things become kind of obvious, or at least they seem that way...to us.
 |
| art by Karl Addison |
However, the level of perception for the phenomena that make one's field of study can become quite high due to an equally high degree of kinesthetic perception, i.e. inner feel for the movement and general body behavior, stemming from countless hours of working on and with our bodies. And, after long period of such experience it is easy to forget how it all looked and felt in the beginning.
If you are an instructor, you should not allow obviousness to become a part of your training plan. OK, if you are a coach who spends most of the time working with fighters and competitive athletes, who follow a continual training regime, the understanding of all the important things will indeed unfold over time. Yet, if you are working with who cannot or will not engage in that sort of work, for whatever reason, and particularly in a group format, it is important to regularly repeat even the most basic (and seemingly obvious) lessons/instructions. There are at least two strong reasons for this: one, there is always someone in the group who "doesn't get it", and subsequently may hinder others as a training partner; two, even for those who did get it (or think they did), such instruction may gain new/deeper meaning when reiterated over time.
This is especially case when you have in your class a person who shows the potential and/or desire to also be an instructor at some point. Namely, for them it is not just the process of learning the subject matter, but also learning how to present that material and helping others understand it. And if the art/system you happen teaching is important enough that you'd like to see it grow in the future - this is an important element of contributing to it.
Finally, regularly repeating even the mundanely "self-evident" axioms of your teaching will make you seek new ways of doing it, thus improving, expanding and deepening your own understanding of the material, not to mention the benefits for your teaching skill.
Obviously, it is a win-win proposition, so what's not to like?
