Classical classic!

 If my previous post sounded like a call to action, maybe this one will help point to the right direction.

You already should know that I support any motive to learn martial arts, as long as it is congruent with one’s needs and with a clear vision of what the person is training for. In that regard, it is obvious that learning traditional martial systems as a form of cultural study is beyond doubt valuable, but...can it also be effective as a practical fighting method?

Well, again, those of you who have read through this blog are aware that I firmly believe the effectiveness of a combative system is predicated more on training methodology than its history or the „real deal skills“ of the old masters. So, there is a way to approach the traditional arts in order to make them usable in actual fighting? The question „why does it have to be traditional?“ aside, the answer is – yes! And if you are wondering how to achieve it, I have a brilliant book to recommend, where the whole path is superbly explained.

If you happen to belong to the category of practitioners who seek to go beyond mere repetition of your chosen art’s techniques, drills and forms, in an attempt to actually understand the WHYs behind the WHAT and HOW, you cannot afford to skip The Principle-Driven Skill Development in Traditional Martial Arts, written by Russ Smith. The title may seem a bit long, but it tells you exactly what the book is about. Still, let me try to give you a somewhat closer insight into the material covered. Let me say right here that subject matter is not limited to a single system – Mr. Smith has background in Chinese (southern kung fu styles) and Okinawan (goju-ryu) arts, so the book cleverly shows how the conceptual framework of the former can be used in the latter. But properly understood, the principles described can be integrated into the training of any style or system.

The book is very nicely divided into half a dozen chapters which outline the conceptual tools one needs to adopt on their way to functionalization in traditional arts. In the introduction the author aptly addresses the typical problem of disconnect in the traditional arts, i.e. the lack of adequate synergy among the main training modes in that environment. He then proceeds to make a significant point that many instructors, sadly, ignore – teaching is communication, which is why the instructors need to grasp the basic steps in improving the skill of their students. Those are presented as the identification of actionable principles, development and/or modification of the curriculum etc. Sifu Smith concludes by explaining how to use the book for the best results, and I urge the readers not to skip this section!

On the premise of teaching being communication, the next chapter deals with terminology and fundamental assumptions that serve as the guidelines in the further treatment of the material. By being aware of the need to accurately describe these pillars of communicative exchange, the author shows some of the traits of great instructors. As such, it is important to pay attention to what he has to say about what martial art is and is not; what is the foundational aim of self-defense; the distinction between techniques and applications; and key success factors in one’s training, described as principles, applications¸ and attributes. This section alone will make a lightbulb blink many times and lead to numerous a-ha! moments in finally understanding what has been hindering your or your students’ progress.

With the foundation set, the author takes us on the tour of general methods (FA), whose understanding ought to serve as the launch pad for the improvement of the overall functional skills. He starts with the discussion of three types of timing in dealing with and opponent (different terminology than mine, but close in meaning); next is the need for technique stretching to meet the demands of purpose, physical context and starting point; then the strategic (dis)advantages of various positions between the participants etc. Excellent stuff, applicable across the board in any kind of combative endeavor, be it in in the real world or in the sport arena.

Now we move to the treatment of tools (XING) that we need to command when striving to bring the previous principles out. Some of the highlighted ones are the three gates, three sections, eights bridging principles and so on. They are not all numerical, LOL, but everything is explained in a concise and understandable manner, in line with the previously noted need for better communication. This is probably the chapter where you will gain deeper understanding of the technical arsenal of your art.

Sifu Smith’s analysis of power (GONG) as it realities to the improvement and effective use of a person’s technical skill is second to none! Namely, he manages to explain the principles of power, leverage and body structure without sinking into the depths of overly technical engineering or scientific jargon, but also successfully avoiding to dumb it down to the point of being meaningless. Hitting the right balance is the trap that too many other writers have fallen into. He demonstrated similar ability when discussing the four movements concepts of Chinese systems (sink, float, spit, swallow) – presents practical understanding without reaching for pseudo-metaphysical terminology that might make it all sound more advanced, but also potentially confusing.

In wishing to give his readers an actual working plan of action, the author concludes with a chapter that delineates a teaching model for skill development. Here, he points that the functional skill is the result of going through the stages of knowledge development, understanding and transference/application. It means the progression from the isolated skills and rills, through the next step of selecting proper actions via the drills of the constraint and affordance type, to the experimental testing of application of in the progressively non-cooperative drills with wider boundaries, such as classical push hands, chi sao and other more or less free-form exchange approaches.

All in all, we have before us a comprehensive treatise of what is frequently neglected, yet remarkably important aspects of training in the traditional martial arts. Too often is the notion of tradition limited to the superficial imitation of costumes and rituals, while failing to identify and respect the intent that was the driving force behind those arts.

In the end, as well as the material in the book is explained, Mr. Smith also offers a video instructional where it is shown in motion, for an even better learning experience. There is nothing else left but to conclude that this is a phenomenal work, which sets the new standard to the coverage of traditional martial arts beyond historical and ethnological approach.

Fake it...or make it?

You know the saying, sure, but I don't think it holds in martial training. Well, at least not as an attitude. Although many times have I pointed that different folks train for different reasons, hence varying motivational drive, and all of them legitimate, there is still good reason to approach training seriously. Just what it means to be serious can, again, differ from one practitioner to the next.

Naturally, for the people who engage in the martial arts and combatives training for the purposes of actual self protection, professional work (security, law enforcement, military) or sport/competition proper focus and commitment are sort of taken for granted. But the other two main niches - cultural/traditional students and recreational trainees - would also benefit from a deeper dive into understanding the underlying principles and applications of the chosen art/system. 

Specifically, it can frequently be the case with those whose main reason for the study of martial arts is the research of cultural tradition to get lost in the minutia of historical accuracy of costumes, armory, lineage, stances, postures done in solo formal exercises etc, while neglecting the deliberate drilling of actual combative applications. The thing is, when one attempts to recreate or understand the technical details of a system of movement without taking into account the actual purpose of that movement, the outcome of such a study will be an empty shell at best. In other words, all the attempts to attain some accuracy in practice and reenactment will boil down to guesswork. At worst, it will be mere LARPing. 

While for the recreational exercisers it might be all about workout - breaking sweat and burning calories - the authentic intent that stems from the actual understanding of the underlying strategies and principles will actually help to move with purpose, which in turn stimulates the higher expenditure of energy in training. 

To keep this short, what I want to say is: don't let yourself slip into a mere imitation of the chosen activity. Yes, it can be frustrating to deal with the mistakes on the road to actual improvement, but at least it will be an opportunity to really learn and truly raise the level of your performance, instead of mindlessly and carelessly repeating the mistakes...if nothing else, then to avoid self-inflicted injury. 

Ultimately, the choice is yours, and I'm not judging anyway, but the road to true enjoyment leads through true self-investment. 

Kung Fu - virtual yet authentic!

 As some of you may remember, some time ago I mentioned on this very blog that I was taking a step back to a beginner student process of learning a new, traditional-type art. It was not mentioned back then what it was, but now it has been a little bit over half a year, and this might be a nice opportunity to share some of my impressions.

First of all, although from my input here it is clear that my main areas of coverage are essentially FMA and RMA, along with a few other weapon based methods, as well as western fighting methods, including MMA, in the past, I have had a particular kind of interest for a long time when it comes to traditional Chinese arts. As an example, back in the second half of the 1990’s I spent a couple of years training in Uechi-ryu, which is normally perceived as a school of Okinawan karate, but in essence is a slightly modified southern Chinese martial system. That said, the teacher of that school, the late Mario Topolsek, also taught taijiquan and a little bit of baguazhang, of which the latter later become my favorite kung fu system. However, it too quite a number of years before I found a competent instructor to point me in the right direction of exploring baguazhang…but that is not my topic today.

Somehow, about a year ago I first learned about Baji Quan, one of the so-called northern schools of Chinese martial arts, coming of the Hui nationality, i.e. a Muslim minority from the Hebei province of China. This article will not deal with the historical background of the art, because that is not what attracted me to it. It was the quality of movement and overall attributed displayed by some of the exponents on the internet that drew my attention. 

As it often happens, there are several lineages of bajiquan out there, and my initial criterion for picking one was simple – availability! In this case, it means an online school, which then met other criteria of quality instruction and well presented material. I found that in the BaJiShu online program of sifu Vincent Mei.

So, what is it that makes his program good? First of all, it really is a program, which reflects the lineage from which sifu Mei comes, that of the renowned Wu Tan school of founder Liu Yunqiao in Taiwan. Basically, it is a curriculum of material that follows a well thought out progression, aimed at teaching the practitioners not just the moves, but also the underlining principles and physical attributes required for the proper execution. 

There are certain specific aspects of this online school that make it stand out. Namely, you can’t just sign in any time you want and then access the material at your own pace. No, you can enroll when a new group (cohort as it is called) is formed, thus starting the journey with several other people at the same time. Why is this important? For a very important reason – every week you get access to a video with material to be worked on, and then you have to submit homework for review. The neat aspect is that all of the classmates in a cohort submit their homework to the same online folder, so everyone is able to watch everyone else’s progress. Once a week, sifu Mei posts a review with commentary, critique, corrections and additional instruction, so you are able to learn from the common mistakes and general feedback, as well as the specific, individual comments. And let me tell you – the instructor has a sharp eye for catching even the smallest details of students’ performance. It also helps that he uses frame-by-frame video analysis to bring his point across.

The teaching approach is quite interesting. One of the forms from the school’s curriculum is taken as a lesson plan (which reminds me of FMA master Rey Galang!), and then dissected into components that make it. In practice, it typically means one of the maneuvers from the form is taught each week, presented as contained within the form, then analyzed in detail; next, the application is shown, so that the understanding of it gives a better feel for the moves; finally, a drill is derived from the technical elements, in order to really focus on the underlying principles of the material covered. 

By the way, the weekly lessons are not presented in isolation, but rather in each one the sifu leads an actual training session – warmup, basic exercises and foundational stances, followed by reps of essential punches and kicks. That way, it reminds you to put in your daily work before tackling new material. Trust me, with the attention to detail and weekly homework deadlines, you will never be complaining about not having enough to work on, despite the seemingly bite sized instruction.

The whole package is expanded by membership in a BaJiShu members only group on Facebook, where you can exchange opinions and experiences related to lessons and other material of interest, thus reinforcing the sense of belonging, as in a non-virtual class or club/school.

Yet, if you are not a person who can commit to this approach, you can order standalone weapon programs or recordings of Bajiquan seminars held every year.

For those who would like to have a peek into where the training leads to over long-term practice, sifu Mei has a Youtube channel with ample additional input for those who need the motivation from a wider context of what the program has to offer in the later stages of instruction. Honestly, while I am perfectly happy with working on whatever happens to be the ongoing lesson at the time, it is nice to see some partner drills to complement the functional understanding or absorption of the information.

All in all, with his BaJiShu project, sifu Vincent Mei has been doing great things for bringing the traditional Chinese martial arts into the 21^st century. So much so, that he was able to generate enough interest and support for the expansion of the concept, so now the Tsang Wu Ge Academy project he started is offering other Shu classrooms – Chang Chuan and Hung Ga, with top-tier instructors…and hopefully even more systems coming in the future.

In conclusion, BaJiShu is a prime example of how modern communication technologies and media can be used to adequately propagate traditional martial arts as best as possible, short of in-person instruction. And in order to bridge that shortcoming, sifu Mei goes on annual seminar tours of North America, Asia and Europe, thus creating possibility for members of his online academy to also experience the dimension of live instruction and cross hands with other practitioners. What better way to deepen the feeling of belonging and commitment?

To this practitioner – the whole package is clearly the winning combination!

Celebration!

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!

Wrong direction?

 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!

So, let me try and provide some answers to the above questions. I happen to be a proponent of the basics done well school of thought, because the concept of deep skill is the foundation for the execution of advanced tactics and strategies. In other words, with an excellent command of a finite set of skills/techniques, one has the confidence and cognitive resources to use them in solving the changing demands of a dynamic combative situation. A classic example may be the legendary Bill "Superfoot" Wallace, who decided to train his kicking techniques only with the left foot, but make it so good that his opponents had difficulties dealing with it, despite knowing what to expect. Or Rickson Gracie rolling each participant in a seminar and submitting them all with the same technique! 

Therefore, with a proper learning and training process it is possible to develop required attributes, thus being able to overcome most challenges faced in the process of training and/or application. I know, we are constantly exposed to so much novelties in training and bombarded with all kinds of (dis)information, so it can be really hard to keep it at bay while maintaining focus. Yet, we are often reminded that "Jack of all trades is a master of none..."

"...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! 

Spear sphere

 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... 

Quick job

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.