From: ejh@khonshu.colorado.edu (Edward J. Hartnett)
Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts
Subject: Re: Bruce Lee on Classical Karate
Date: 11 Apr 92 16:33:48 GMT
Article-I.D.: colorado.1992Apr11.163348.14635
Organization: Cooperative Institute for Research in the Environmental Sciences

In article <kuc4o3INN8td@aludra.usc.edu> pauljone@aludra.usc.edu (Michael Jones) writes:
>
>Spontenaity is very important in the MA.  If you focus on techniques,
>you learn a series of learned counters to a (possibly very comprehensive)
>set of anticipated attacks.  If you focus on the flow of energy, you 
>learn to avoid attacks, and enter openings, not because you've seen
>this technique before and responded with this counter, but because, in
>terms of the generation of force, there are very few variations.
>Because many people focus on the physiscal technique, the placement of
>the hands and feet, it difficult for them to learn to let the flow
>of force, between you and your opponent, to guide your actions.
>
     ... other stuff deleted...
>
>
>JMNSHO,
>Mike Jones
>

	This brings up a topic I've been wondering about. I have
trained in several schools, and in two styles (Kempo and TKD). My
first instructor (Kempo), when he taught self-defense (as opposed to
kata, sparring, etc. - I mean when you stood with another student and
practiced a defense against a lapel grab, for example), he would show
us a few ways to do it, and we would practice them, but mostly he
would try and get us to spontaniously invent (or piece together might
be a better way to put it) a response. For beginners, before you get
used to it, it's very difficult. He would come over and stand there,
and ask "what weapons can you bring to bear?" and "What targets are
open on your opponent?" After lots of practice, you can get pretty
good at this, and get over the problem everyone starts with, which is
just stopping in the middle of something, trying to think of what you
should do next. When tests came around, you might be required to
defend (for example) against 3 random attacks from the front, and 2
from behind. Anything you did that looked like it would work was good.
	Contrasting this teaching method, in all of the TKD schools
I've trained at, there are preset defenses for a bunch of standard
attacks. Sometimes this is done via one-step sparring, sometimes more
informally (i.e. the teacher says: "Give me the first lapel grap
defense," then "Give me the second one," etc.) and everyone in the
school will do the exact same thing - it's formalized, like kata.
	I far prefer the first method for two reasons. Firstly, it
seems to me that it is more geared towards actual self-defense
situations - it seems a more thoughtful (is that the word? - maybe I
mean flexible) approach towards self-defense. The other reason, which
ties into the first, is that it allows you to take into account
physical differences between you and the attacker. For example, I'm
much taller than most people. For me to use an upper-block (or rising
block - whatever you want to call it) against a front punch from a
short person is ridiculous. A parry to the side is much more
appropriate. 
	When I do these one-step sparring things, I'm very often
putting myuself through weird contortions to get all the techniques on
target. Why would I want to lean down and do an uppercut to someone's
ribs, when their face is right at my shoulder level? 
	Another thing that really bothers me a lot about these
one-step things is that you know the exact attack and the exact
defense. That is so far from what would actually happen in a fight as
to make me wonder what value these one-step things have, regardless of
the other things I've already learned. 
	If they want me to learn these things in TWD (and they do)
then I'll learn them. But it seems a little silly. Does anyone else
feel this way? I am uncomfortable memorizing things (both in and out
of the MAs), simply for the sake of memorizing them. Of course, I see
the value in learning seveal defences for a lapel grab, but why does
everyone have to learn the same few? Why not let people pick what
works best for them, and learn them in whatever order they please?
	Frankly, I dislike one-step sparring, and I love freestyle
sparring. The one-step should not even be called sparring!
	I hope someone there can shed some light on this for me. I
usually don't think of the MAs as drudge work, but learning 15 or 20
one-step sparring deals just to be able to do them on request, like a
trained monkey, is something that really depresses me.
				Ed Hartnett
Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts