Good news!

Hey! I know things have been a little slow here lately, but there was good reason for it. Namely, as you may have noticed, one of the articles I had done earlier (see Move that body) was removed. Well, it has been slightly brushed up but also accompanied with a much better video illustration of the subject covered.
However, the best part is that as part of my new/official association of the excellent portal complementarytraining.net, run by my friend and brilliant coach Mladen Jovanovic, that article is now available at
http://complementarytraining.net/movement-training-in-the-mma-and-combat-sports/

While over there, make sure to check out their other stuff, since there is plenty of very interesting material to see. And of course, hopefully, there should be more of my contributions in the future. 

Coaching polyglot

How many languages do you speak as a coach/instructor? Seriously, are you able to approach your trainees in more than one way when it comes to conveying some information or trying to teach them something?

If you are still confused about my question, let me put it in another way, not necessarily related to martial arts. Have you ever been frustrated by someone who attempted to explain something to you, but if you didn't get it they kept repeating the exact same (unclear) thing they had been saying, only maybe louder or slower? There you have it...so, don't allow yourself to be that person.

After all, no teaching ever, regardless of the subject, should be some sort of mechanical process. The art of teaching is not the same thing as packaging some product, even if it is intangible in nature, such as information or knowledge (even those two are not the same).

As instructors, we must be aware that different people learn in different manners, having different cognitive setups, learning habits, attention spans, motivation levels etc.Therefore, if we are sincere in our desire to really instill something valuable in them, having more than one tool on your disposal comes in handy. Essentially, it boils down to your teaching methodology and philosophy. Having a well defined curriculum is one thing, but being able to pass it on is another.

Without going too much in depth (there are whole tomes dedicated to the matter at hand), make sure to understand that in learning a physical skill some trainees have better odds of accomplishing better results when seeing it demonstrated. Others may learn better by feel, maybe being used as a demo dummy (myself included). There are those who need a lot of verbal explanation. Some need to be touched, i.e. literally put into positions and guided through motions in a hands on manner. I have met students who respond better to stick, while others really craved the carrot... Not to mention that all those may change within a same person from one session to another.

The tip of the iceberg

Good coaches should be aware of and handy with the cuing methods, constraints and affordances, adding or removing pressure etc. To me, it equals to talking many different languages, i.e. being a good communicator, more than just having a huge toolbox. Why do I say that? Because being a good interpreter means really talking a language, not just a few phrases. On the other hand, you can have a shed full of equipment and be clueless about how to use it. strive to know what to say (and what NOT to say), how to say it and when. Those are all relevant aspects of the craft of teaching and coaching, along with so much more.

So, how do we achieve that competence? The answer is simple even if not easy - always be a student yourself! Study the "meta" level of your art, how to teach it. Being an insatiable reader is always a plus, curiosity for the field is a must, passion for what you do an essential prerequisite. And just accept the fact that it never ends :-) 

What's your type?

Since the previous post I have had some interesting learning opportunities and one of the best was a few days spent in training Skobar (more on skobar itself at a later date) with Dima Khakimov from St. Petersburg in Russia. While it was not my first time attending Dima’s seminars, this particular was organized differently so we had much more time to discuss all things martial and other subjects. One of those conversations touched upon a certain video, and that in turn raised a question within me.

How do you prevent good models of thinking and training from yielding bad results? It dovetails with something I wrote about before, but I would say on more of a meta-level of sorts. Namely, Dima mentioned an episode of a TV show he watched back home, in which one of the hosts is an experienced Thai and kickboxing coach asked to spar a bit with an instructor of a traditional style, white crane karate more specifically. Instead of telling about it, take a look for yourself, starting at 16:58, and see how it ends.

Again, the question that came up was how do we deal with stereotypes in martial arts? It is easy (and often correct) criticizing many of the traditional schools and systems for being dogmatic and hermetic in what they do, thus failing to grow with and adapt to the times. Yet, it is not an inclination endemic to the traditional styles. Do you remember the time when high kicks were deemed undoable and downright harmful for the kicker in MMA? And them Maurice Smith appeared… How about spinning backfists before Shonie Carter? Or spinning back kicks before GSP…you get the point.

While this certainly is not the case of dogmatic blindness, it certainly qualifies as stereotype. My readers know that to me the training methodology is more important than individual techniques practiced within a school, but it is possible that sometimes we don’t even consider putting certain techniques through whatever the adopted methodology, due to our stereotypical views of what will or won’t work in a fight. I guess it is the occurrence of semantic shift from “low percentage” to “impossible”. Yet, those two are not the same, are they? Plus, as good as the training methodology of most MMA schools is, some techniques are never practiced simply because they are banned in an MMA fight by the rules of such encounters.

Granted, there is a lot of moves and techniques in the traditional systems that cannot work against a resisting opponent THE WAY they are done in those schools – but, take those same techniques and train them THE WAY it is done in MMA and you might be surprised with the outcome. I experienced it first hand, too. Once I grappled an advanced aikido practitioner and basically toyed with him, so he gave me the rant about eye gouging and biting etc. We then went through another round, but with all those allowed for him. Again, the result was pretty much the same, as he had neither the attributes nor the understanding of fight dynamics (positioning, distance and so on) to apply those tools. On the other hand, in sparring other guys, experienced in modern sport training methods, there was more than one instance when I was able to take them by surprise because I used some of those “dirty” or “street” tactics.

So, where does it put us? I guess some moves will never be “high percentage”, but could come in handy in some of the more specific situations. Just like in the daily life, hammer and screwdriver are used frequently, but sometimes you just have to use the soldiering iron. This why the Pareto principle talks about 80/20 and not 100% solutions. Take those most reliable tactics and work on them most of the time, but do allocate some of the training time and effort to at least get acquainted with those “other” tools…

Who knows when they may come in handy? 

Infoknowledge

We live in the information age, for better or for worse. Those of us born and raised before the whole Internet thing still remember how seeking any information related to martial arts pretty much boiled down to magazines and books, while some of the claims presented in those were pretty much impossible to verify. Most of us dreamed about the universe where the information would be at your fingertips…

And it arrived! And very little has changed! It took me a couple of years to figure out – how is it possible that same old myths and misconceptions are still perpetuated to this day…we are only aware of even more of them. First, the world wide web is loaded with misinformation just as much as it is with good information; but second, even more important, it is now evident more than ever that information is not the same thing as knowledge.

On the most basic level, the information is intellectual, while the knowledge is experiential; the former gained by reading, listening, watching…the latter by doing. These two domains are not exclusive, but not necessarily inclusive either. And there is certain hierarchy here, in the sense that knowledge takes precedence over mere information.

Why? Well, because having true, deep knowledge of something means you already have the necessary information about it, and it has been fully integrated, processed and filtered. In fighting, it means you fully understand the value of certain techniques, tactics, concepts etc, and you can apply them with confidence when called for.

Now, while knowledge entails having information as well, the other way around is not necessarily true. How many times have you met a guy who could be spitting the technical specs about sport cars all days long, and yet utterly unable of driving one? Or, to be “closer to home” here, a fellow harping on who are the best boxers/MMA fighters of the day, without having ever spared for even a minute? Granted, they will gladly support their argument with a lot of information and facts, but we all know it is irrelevant in the end. Ask yourself – would you rather be someone who knows five methods and can use them in a fight, or know about fifty methods but can’t use any? Want to be an artist or an art collector?

Finally, knowledge provides the essential filters and criteria for taking a pool of new information and then separating wheat from the chaff, distinguishing the valuable information from junk, thus further expanding the knowledge. This is why we have the widespread phenomenon of keyboard warriors engaged in the heated debates over nonsense…because they don’t know any better. It is also why the experienced people will keep out of such debates, because they know better.

In the end, it is possible that two persons be experienced, have actual knowledge, and yet be in disagreement. However, there’s a world of difference between disagreeing and missing the boat altogether, i.e. learning from a debate or wasting time on senseless arguments. Be sure to know where things are heading at times…

Digging for nuggets

Every fighting system out there has a certain pool of techniques, some specific, some very similar to those in other systems. Sometimes, the entire difference between two such martial schools is not even the mechanics of their techniques, but rather their application. That said, even within the system there could be more than one possible expressions of a chosen move, hence the emergence of individual practitioners' personal styles.

How does one learn about various possibilities with a particular movement? Obviously, the easiest way is to be shown, by the instructor or a fellow practitioner. The problem with such an approach is that quite frequently those shown applications tend to become the accepted "only true" ones, while other options, even if stumbled upon, are discarded as "not right". That happens to be a common occurrence with interpreting the individual techniques from karate kata. Sometimes two or more practitioners will learn differing bunkai of the same kata, end then sink into the heated debate about whose is the proper one.

The other angle is to do your on research, investigation and experimentation. The advantage of this approach is that the discoveries could be more authentic for the practitioner and better accommodating their personal physical attributes and mental aptitude etc. Also, these are usually better remembered and understood in the long term. The disadvantage, however, is that some people may get lost in the quest for the sheer quantity, thus losing sight of the need to seek the functionally best applications. Well,,,if one is training for the functional goals in the first place.

Namely, a lot of things are possible, but in our training we should do enough drilling and testing to figure out which of those are also more likely and probable.

Take a look at an exercise I did with my friend Daniel from Germany. You'll see that the first move this two-piece combo is treated in the following order:

- as an elbow strike;

- as a punch defense;

- as a grab defense/release. 

Naturally, the effectiveness of each particular application will depend on the proper distance and timing, as those elements are the key factors. Unfortunately, they are often forgotten about, and the problem is sought in improving the mechanics. Sometimes, the mechanics will turn out to be fine, and the technique/application will be discarded undeservedly. 

Certain martial systems have this sort of research as an integral part of their methodology, Such is the example of pecahan in pencak silat, where the sequence of moves is take apart in order to thoroughly analyze its elements, and then put back together with new understanding and new views on what could be done with it. This is the simplified explanation, but you get the gist of it. The following clip of Rita Suwanda offers a nice example. 

To conclude - if you seek a deeper and broader understanding of you chosen discipline, then don;t just take things at their face value. Do your work and be critical about the results, and over time it will bring ripe fruits of your labor. 

Move that body baby...

Hey, good news! The article that used to be here can now be found over at my friend (and brilliant coach) Mladen's site  http://complementarytraining.net/category/free-content/
The text is pretty much the same, but the video attached as illustration is a bit better, so I hope you will enjoy it. 

In the meantime, also feel free to search Youtube for the clips titled pelokinetic fitness in order to see more material of the same nature, as well the page of the same name on Facebook.

Enigmatic issues

Every once in a while, you are in a situation to say or think “he (or she) just beat me to the punch”, and in a good way…no bleeding noses or anything. You know, when it feels great to find out that there is someone else out there who happens to be on the same page as you are in certain regards. I have had that sort of experience recently.

A lot of people over the years have asked when I am going to write a book on martial arts. Admittedly, I did entertain the idea but could not pin down the exact topic to approach, so this blog was an attempt to somehow compensate for that. Well, someone else wrote that book!

I first heard of Chad McBroom a few years back, as one of the regional representatives for the Libre Fighting System, one of the most dynamic and popular modern fighting systems, especially focusing on the use of knives. Regardless of that, McBroom is a practitioner of high level in a vast variety of other martial and combative methods as well, and his book Solving the Enigma: Insights into Fighting Models offers excellent insights into the fundamental principles that that will make or break any particular fighting style.

Get it, read it!

In the days when pretty much everybody is involved in some kind of cross-training, reading this book should be almost mandatory, depending on your goals in training. But even if you are into it just for fun, having this information could be invaluable in shedding light on some important aspects of training that may not even cross your mind. If you have read this blog previously, you probably have noted that, as opposed to some many people concerned with WHAT and HOW of martial arts, I am almost always pondering the WHY of many training approaches. So, if you are wondering about the latter question, Solving the Enigma will do just that – provide solid answers to help the readers and practitioners understand the inner working of their chosen system, no matter which one it could be.

The book dissects all the relevant factors that dictate the functioning of any martial art, from the geographical origin, through designated effect, to impact of garments/armor etc. Once you have understood those (and other) aspects, it is much easier to figure out what is the right fighting school for you, or which ones would mix and match well or not at all. Now, we are not looking at a huge elaboration here, there is about 80 pages of text and pictures, but the material is really in line with the goal of McBroom's work – distill the fundamentals and make them work.

If you are wondering whether it works, just take a look at the different martial methods that the author has managed to fuse and teach under his banner of Comprehensive Fighting Systems. Of course, the mere list of systems he trained in would be meaningless if it weren’t for the fact that McBroom happens to teach his stuff successfully to the number of professionals who rely on it in their line of work.

Whatever your motives for being involved with any sort of fighting training, do yourself a favor and read this book. It will make the pieces of the puzzle fit much faster, thus making your training that much enjoyable and meaningful.