What exactly is aliveness in tkma? How can aliveness be practised safely in techniques that could be detrimental to somebody with a career that demands full usage of all of their limbs? I read in a judo book by Kano Jigoro that by altering traditional yusul techniques he was able to practise them more often in a manner that was different then traditional schools at the time: sparring. the problem that comes to my mind though is that if his students learned this way, they missed out on much of the pressure point and "deadly" material taught at the time. But apparently his students faired quite favorably in no rules sparring matches against most of the schools around japan/ilbon at the time. aliveness in tjma just changed. this was like a hundred years ago... so where does that leave tkma? from what i hear (yes, hearsay), punch and kick punch hoshinsul are taught to bbelts in judo/yudo.
Anyone feel like tackling this one? I haven't got the energy, its a big bundle of wrong, about an 8.4 I'd say
I need to upload some proper stuff as this was done mainly for comedy value, but here's a 15 year old taekwondoin doing some basic training. There is some bad language here, plus me laughing a lot. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilLahtKrzx0"]Link[/ame] The point is that anyone can train alive. This boy had to be at school the next day. We use foam baseball bats, assorted armour, MMA gloves, kudo helmets, whatever works. I have to say we don't work on pressure points a lot, because apart from those you tend to find in MMA they tend not to work for full on self defence. I do believe there is another level of SD where they may come in useful, such as inebriated colleagues becoming overly familiar in the pub or whatever, and these can be trained in a more compliant manner, but they should not be mistaken for real self defence where you are in fear of GBH or worse. Mitch
I don't think alot of the techniques on the kuk sool won syllabus can be practiced alive(jointlocks) but some can: KBS 9,14,15 SMS 6 but not 5 because of the grip breakTK15 others can be trained alive if you modifiy them but i'm sure this won't go over well with the won. It's hard enough to learn the techniques the right way without having to learn a modified version after all.
I think you'd be better off trying to land a solid kick or punch on a non compliant opponent. Get gloves, headgear, shinpads, hogu, a cup, and a mouthguard and anything else you might need. then start slowly: you and a partner stand i front of each other and throw a predetermined kick or punch at one another(roundhouse) block, counter or dodge as well as you can. This drill is not alive but just a stepping stone to the next drill. semi-free sparring: Both participants move around freely. Attacker and defender are designated. Attacker performs a single attack(predetremined and agreed upon), defender evades/blocks and counters. add attacks to the attackers "list"as you progress: jab jab and front kick jab,cross, front kick, RH all attacks when your feel ready move onto free sparring. Free sparring: hit him, don't let him hit you. There will be some pain but as moi said your not made of glass. At all stages the attacker should be TRYING to hit his training partner HARD or the whole thing goes down the drain. This [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=932XUCWlelQ"]YouTube- Why Aliveness - Matt Thornton[/ame] this: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_ts8hRKBW0"]YouTube- the ART? - Matt Thornton[/ame] and these: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TL05Es8LVAQ"]YouTube- Words of Wisdom PT 1[/ame] Should be more than helpful. good luck.
I don't know the syllabus, could you explain why not please The_Beak? I think that's an excellent point. Strike first then throw/lock. I don't think any of this is revolutionary, proves TMAs wrong in some way or means anyone should abandon TMAs - TKD has knees in it, my students kneed his opponent in that drill in the groin, what he did was TKD. I do think it means we should sometimes re-appraise how we teach and learn TMAs. Mitch
UNDERSTOOD, The_Beak! I think what Matt Thornton preaches is all well & good, but the "aliveness" mantra is just the latest catchphrase IMO. Maybe there are TKMAists out there who are comfortable with static drills that won't condition the right kind of responses one needs in order to be better at handling a real SD situation. Personally, I don't associate with such folks, as one of the reasons I started MA in the first place was to learn how to NOT get beaten up, regardless of whether the opponent is a thug or hoodlum out to do you some serious harm or just a bully who wants to intimidate you but not really injure you with lasting consequences. So I tend to recognize any training which is mostly BS and a good waste of time, for the folly it is and avoid it as much as possible. It's good to realize, however, that even Thornton advocates the practice of drills to help improve your fighting skills, as we all need a platform from which to launch. As long as the direction is toward *functional* skills that can be readily applied in real situations, then there's nothing wrong with doing something that isn't *all-out fighting*. It's when any such drills or training practices get twisted in a particular fashion over time, to where unrealistic expectations are anticipated for the resulting benefits, that the practice of them needs to be reevaluated. Many of the joint-locks taught in kuk-sool ARE functional, but if they're never practiced other than in the *standard* technique fashion (i.e. face 2 face, partner grabbing or attacking in the *appropriate* manner) and only with a compliant partner, then there's no way such training will EVER prepare someone for a real SD encounter. That's a given. Anyone who disagrees with this is obviously delusional, and probably has never had any physical altercations in their life, outside of organized MA tournaments (at least this has been my experience with folks who underestimate the validity of certain training drills). Depending on WHY you practice MA, will determine whether aliveness is important to incorporate into your training. But if the idea of SD ever pops into your head (and why wouldn't it, it's always right at the top of the list of benefits touted by all the MA systems out there), then you had better make sure to cut out any unnecessary BS. Just my 2¢, thanks for listening (er, reading).
The KS Syllabus is very wristlock heavy which are illegal in Judo, MMA,the UFC, and in some cases BJJ. Why? because they work which is also the problem. They cannot safely be practiced in against a resisting opponent and therefore cannot be trusted to work in a SD situation. *Disclaimer*I understand not everyone practices KSW for butt kicking Here is some video of Grandmaster IHS doing the first set of techniques taught in KS:[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wT8K459yzp4"]YouTube- Kuk Sool Won Ki Bon Su - Gene Gause #19[/ame] I hope this helps Mitch. thats not excatly what i meant but i agree that hitting someone can be a good way to setup a joint lock or throw (bonus) your already on your feet for the run like hell. What I meant was that I feel he would be better served learning how to DELIVER kicks and punches to a moving, resisting, attacking opponent, As opposed to reinventing kuk sool to allow for alive training. While I don't doubt he can throw a skillful kick or punch I think he might need to work on DELIVERING those attacks. After all we need more practice. amirite..eh eh ^^^^^^^^^^^ we need more this.
You see....that's not a problem. It's actually a bonus. It's solves the central dichotomy of martial arts. You need to train something against resistance in order to be able to (semi) rely on it for real. You've honed that skill against the energy that will be used to stop its completion. You can't drill certain techniques against full resistance because they are too damaging or dangerous when they do work (although it's actually more than many TMA people would have us believe). So do you train the deadly techniques without aliveness or the safer techniques with? That is the dichotomy. As Kano (and the Gracies thereafter) found out...it's better to train the safer stuff with aliveness because that's how you truly build reliable combative skill. Training the deadly stuff IN THEORY would make you a better fighter but in reality it doesn't because you never get the correct "flight time" in applying it for real (or semi-real even). The real niche for TMA I believe is to take the alive training paradigm and apply it to as many of their techniques as possible while still retaining their unique character. Hammer fists, knife hands, headbutts, palm strikes etc. Use them in MMA "style" sparring so they can be applied in a broad spectrum of situations rather than just compliant drills. And as for wrist locks...when I did BJJ I was given the nickname "king of the wrist locks" for a couple of weeks after tapping a couple of people with them in training. They just weren't the compliant long range standing ones you see in KSW.
Well first of all, you have to realise as Moi pointed out, you are not made of glass. You can be kicked, punched, swept and joint locked without breaking a thing. The key word is control, you can do it and should do it with most of your techniques. Just maybe no 100%, on particularly nasty ones in may be appropriate for that particular moment (starting from when you put the lock on to when you take the lock off) go at a percentage which you feel more comfortable executing against someone. From the two years I spent doing Kuk sool won, I have to say that, aliveness training would definatly change KSW sylabus as it becomes plainly obvious that some of the techniques are just too far flung. Which although embarresing for some instructors would over-all be a great asset to kuk sool won as an art. You are a martial artist, and there is a chance of injury, whenever you are sparring there is by definition always a chance that someone could get hurt. That's what you are studying as a martial artist right? How to hurt people. How likely that is to happen in training is up to you. It's risk reward basically.
I started Kuk Sool with a Korean master in 1991. We never had much contact with other Kuk Sool schools, so I was disappointed when I found that some other schools didn’t train with any realism. We always included joint-locking sweeps and throws during sparring. We sparred with controlled strikes, no gear, and any with locking technique allowed. Yeah, it's a little dangerous, but we never had a serious injury. That's why I'll only do it with people I trust. The person executing the technique was responsible for control. Sure there are some techniques that are too dangerous to be used in sparring, but lots of them can. We had a whole training progression of drills to take students to this level while minimizing risk (That, BTW, I’ve never seen any other schools do). Openings for locks and throws present themselves when partners/opponents are moving and off-balanced. I also learned (by getting punched in the face) how to properly angle away from an opponent’s free hand. What I also realized is that, just as a Judoka will only use a couple of favorite throws, you only need a few Kuk Sool techs in sparring. There other bazillion techniques in the Kuk Sool syllabus are there to tech body mechanics and concept. And no, this did look at all like Jiu-jitsu but that’s good training as well . The fact the not many schools in my previous Kuk Sool org did things this is one reason I left. I am constantly amazed by people who think that they will somehow magically be able to actually use Kuk Sool or Hapkido Locks just by practicing "grab my wrist" stuff on compliant and stationary partners. That would be kind of like a Taekwondo guy thinking he could learn to spar by doing one steps.
at about 2:45 he starts explaining the i-method. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-g6JTQDWNc"]YouTube - Training & the i-Method - Matt Thornton[/ame] Ok, he has a chip on his shoulder and he may say things you don't agree with but he makes ALOT of good points. Hey, Ssang Kall how has the aliveness training gone so far? Are you a unstoppable,blood thirsty, kill-bot yet? My own training has been going pretty well. Yesterday I pulled off the slip counter TWICE. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ui-7QZLuDD0"]YouTube - Battle of Lefts: Pacquiao Straight vs. Cotto Jab (Half-speed)[/ame] slip-counter^^^^^ My improvement has been slow but steady. It's amazing to me how such a simple move can take so much time to develop(for me at least). I'm not saying I hadn't done the before but yesterday they felt better smoother more on target.
This has some very good points, but what I don't understand about this argument is that he seems to think that all supplementary exercises are not sport specific. By that rational, boxers should not jump rope because the movements associated with jumping rope is not exactly like the footwork you would use in a fight. Anyone one who has been in a real old fashioned boxing gym knows that good boxing coaches have a specific way they will want you to jump rope that, for most people has to be learned. Also, for what it's worth, my GJJ coach insists that a combination of compliant and non-compliant training is essential, as well. You'll also see this in other drills for other sports like baseball and football. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_vNdMInfjY"]YouTube - Catchers foot work drill- Pro Teach Baseball[/ame] -cz
This is addressed at the beginning of the video. I probably shouldn't have suggested we all start at 2:45 compliant= Introduction compliant/non-compliant=Isolation non-compliant=Integration I don't agree with his 5 min. Introduction stage time limit. I can't imagine how long it would have taken me to learn a Sidekick this way to but I don't have to agree with everything he says to admit he has a lot of good ideas.
