Teaching exercise

Discussion in 'Internal Martial Arts' started by jkzorya, Feb 8, 2007.

  1. jkzorya

    jkzorya Moved on by request

    Sometimes I find that students can have problems relating form to martial function and vice versa, so here's a little exercise I came up with last night. Some of you may have already thought of doing this, but I thought I'd share it anyway.

    We were going through a Bagua Single Palm Change (short fundamental form) step by step as a class - everyone together. I wanted the students to relate it specifically to the application sequence we'd just been working on. So I got them to take it in turns calling out the movements. But instead of describing the various stages in introspective terms - kou bu (hook step) to the right, bai bu to the left, etc. they had to call out the movements extrospectively - as they related to that specific combat scenario - step to evade the oncoming punch and parry, turn to face the attacker and palm strike to the head, twist the head, hook their lead leg with your right foot and perform a shearing elbow to the head etc. etc.

    It worked well, so I thought I'd share it.
     
  2. Nylen

    Nylen Valued Member

    I don't teach but If I ever do sounds like a great idea to me

    stay safe
     
  3. jkzorya

    jkzorya Moved on by request

    Thanks. :)
    I thought students could still employ the same thinking during their solo training. The famous Chen style teacher (he wasn't a "Master" because he refused the title, thinking of himself and his students as "school-mates") Hong Junsheng said you should always have real applications in mind when doing forms. Chen Xiaowang has also stated that you should "practice form as if facing an enemy." I think the approach is more beneficial than doing the form in an abstract way. It gradually becomes a bit more abstract as you develop deeper knowledge of all the martial possibilites within the movements and you can focus on the movement principles in a more generic way, but it should always stay real to maximise the benefits of your practice.
     
  4. haikksum

    haikksum Banned Banned

    I'm fairly new to this forum but JZ seems to have a great deal of knowledge, although somewhat controversal regarding Qi.
    Would you JZ, mind telling me whom you learned your taijiquan and bagua and xingyi from.

    I looked at your site and it doesn't mention who your shifu is.
     
  5. jkzorya

    jkzorya Moved on by request

    I don't talk about lineage much because I prefer to be judged on my own merits. Some of my knowledge has come via mutual exchange with other teachers and a lot has come from testing everything to see what works best.

    I also don't wish to recommend, even by implication, any teacher who teaches qigong or is prepared to teach the arts for non-martial purposes. So, I've pretty much branched out on my own. I'm a maverick ;)
     
  6. El Medico

    El Medico Valued Member

    Good thing I didn't teach my mom (80 yrs) any TC to limber her up after she was riding shotgun in a one car accident. ;)

    h-she's no more controversial than anyone who discusses ch'i in the martial context,--100 practitioners, 100 interpretations.(J does come from an authentic TC lineage,incidentally).

    Nice training exercise,j, having the students descrbe the what and the why while doing.(Probably controversial,tho' :D )
     
  7. haikksum

    haikksum Banned Banned

    Thank you for your honesty.
    You could just as easily have reeled off a string of names to impress people.
    I have interests in xingyi as it is often described as the wing chun of the north and that is my main style. I recently started to study hopei style.
     
  8. cloudz

    cloudz Valued Member

    Nooooo :eek:
     
  9. jkzorya

    jkzorya Moved on by request

    It's the centre line theory.
     
  10. Qi Fu

    Qi Fu New Member

    Hi!
    For thought; a maverick is a way of saying your always open to improvement, or adding to what you already know. Who knows where you might just end-up. Good Luck! from another maverick
     
  11. El Medico

    El Medico Valued Member

    from Webster's Dictionary---noun[after Samuel Maverick,Texas rancher who did not brand his cattle] 1.unbranded animal,especially a lost calf,formerly the legitimate property of the first person who branded it;hence 2.[colloq.], a person not labeled as belonging to any one party,faction,etc., who acts independently.

    Now somebody brand that gal afore the whole TC world falls apart!
     
  12. gungfujoe

    gungfujoe Please, call me Erik. :)

    This is generally how I teach and how I was taught, but it's not without its limitations. I find that, especially with beginners, focusing extrospectively causes them to overdo the movements, and not learn the specifics of the movement as well. Usually, for beginners, I'll separate form and application to an extent (moreso with beginners who come from a really "hard external" background like Shotokan that has a style of movement that's essentially incompatible with ours). I'll show them how the movement is applied, so they know what they're doing, but try to have them focus more introspectively when practicing it. Otherwise, I see jerky, forced actions.

    I guess I'm just saying that I like to see a balance of both kinds of practice (and certainly don't mean to imply that you don't use both). Focusing on either without the other tends to result in fairly ineffective training, IMHO.
     
  13. jkzorya

    jkzorya Moved on by request

    Thanks gungfujoe,
    Yes we do do both and it is necessary to work a bit extra on more generic movement principles with students that have strong habits from previous styles, I agree.

    On the other hand, I think it is necessary to build some kind of martial repertoire fairly quickly in the martially inexperienced. I have found that too much of a focus on abstract movement leaves martially inexperienced students very weak. In such cases, I prefer to develop some kind of dynamic ability in the student and then refine it. I am as strict as I can be without stifling their movements completely, but sometimes I get them to "just do it" and work from there.

    In this sense it is about balancing yin and yang. Some students need more yin (those who are keen to fight as soon as possible) and some need more yang (those who are more reluctant or underconfident.) It isn't about hard fast rules, but about seeing what is working with an individual student and what is not.

    :)
     
  14. gungfujoe

    gungfujoe Please, call me Erik. :)

    Absolutely. When I said that I tend to "separate" from from technique for beginners to an extent, I didn't mean to say that I teach one and then the other. Both are taught to beginners, and the connections between the two are generally shown, but I try to have them mentally separate them a bit in their practice. For example, when you're trying to teach a beginner to throw a relaxed punch, telling him to "think about hitting the guy in the solar plexus" is going to be counterproductive, as the "instinctual" way (and "proper way" in some systems) to punch is to be very tense. When working techniques with a partner, beginners will generally forget all about the relaxation they're working on in their solo training, but at least they're getting the useful interaction. Eventually, the two intersect, as not only their mind, but their body, realizes that what they drill on their own is actually done that way to teach them to move correctly. :)

    BTW, gungfujoe is just a login name. I put my name in my signature in hopes that if people address me by a name, they'll use my name.
     
  15. jkzorya

    jkzorya Moved on by request

    Sorry Erik. Hi Erik.

    I actually sometimes get students to do the punch on a fellow student but very soft - as if doing a form. I constantly try to get students to do form as if facing an enemy and face an enemy as if doing form and find controlled, light partner work useful. Sometimes others say they can't see the point, but surely if there is a place for slow, considered and gentle shadow boxing, there can be a place for slow, considered and gentle contact practise too.

    Students might also get to whack it in a bit and whack it in very hard with body armour in place. What differences can they feel in their body? Reality I say is somewhere between very slow, considered movement and wild flailing. The quality generally needs to be smoother for defensive manouvres and more abrupt, whippy and explosive for strikes. I just teach whatever I find works.
     
  16. gungfujoe

    gungfujoe Please, call me Erik. :)

    I use this quite a bit, too. I find it's good for working positioning and technique without inserting the urgency or fear of getting hit. I've found that people who go right from slow solo training to fast partner training without ever mixing and matching (both fast solo and slow partner training) tend to spar/fight in a way that doesn't remotely resemble their training.
    We use some of the exact same descriptors. :) Our offense and defense tend to blur together, though, so I'm not sure I'd pose this dichotomy and say that they move differently, but a lot of that may have to do with the different nature of our arts. There's a strong "Taiji-ish" aspect to our art, but I don't consider myself a Taiji practitioner. My teacher uses that word specifically, but I'm not sure that our "Taiji-ish" component traces itself back to "Taiji-proper" (Chenjiagou) historically. There's probably been some cross-pollination, but I think it may be more along the lines of semiparallel evolution.
     
  17. jkzorya

    jkzorya Moved on by request

    Thanks for your input Erik. I'm glad I'm not the only person who thinks it is useful this way. :)
     

Share This Page