I obviously stepped on a few toes and hurt some feelings, for that I apologise.
Printable View
I obviously stepped on a few toes and hurt some feelings, for that I apologise.
I thought Martial Arts taught control of emotions?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot Rodimus
Does it? Can anyone answer? To what degree? What Martial Arts are the best for controlling emotions?
Gok would probably be the best person to answer this.
Emotional control is a traditional element of martial arts training. From a practical POV it's an important part of training because one needs to keep one's head relatively cool under extreme fear and pressure during a real fight. Without emotional training it's becomes very difficult for someone to put their training into practice.
There have been studies into this - one particular interesting study was conducted by Darren Laur in his article "The Anatomy of Fear and How It Relates to Survival Skills Training." Laur himself is a serving law enforcement professional and some of his research was conducted with riot police training.
Anyway, you can follow that link and read it in more detail for yourself, but to put it simply:
+ You WILL experience fear in a fight. Your metabolic rate increases under fear, which Laur measures according to heartrate (beats per minute - bpm) - in a fight a person's heartrate can change from 70bpm to 220bpm in less than half a second.
+ At 115bpm fine motor skills are diminished, but your gross motor skills are heightened. Thus the optimum performance range for fighting is between 115-145bpm.
+ Once you exceed 145bpm most people will lose complex motor skills and may suffer things like diminished hearing, peripheral narrowing (tunnel vision), memory loss, disassociation (a sense of detachment from reality), intrusive distracting thoughts, memory distortion -- and in some individuals, even temporary paralysis. Beyond this level some individuals may even urinate and/or defecate themselves as the body automatically engages in "losing ballist" to make your body lighter for a faster escape.
+ At 185-220bpm most people go into a state of "hypervigilance" or "deer in the headlights" mode where they simply freeze up or engage in irrational behaviour like going into danger (this is because the brain goes into some kind of feedback loop).
Thus emotional training is important to teach students to remain focused and optimised in order to use their skills in self defence. You cannot ignore your fear - you have to accept the fact that you WILL be frightened like all bugger in a fight. But emotional training teaches you how to work with your fear - not against it; after all, fear has some advantages in a fight, like the optimisation of gross motor skills. Some people experience heightened visual clarity and "slow motion" time (ever fallen off your bicycle and felt like time was slowing down? It's because your brain is actually thinking faster, hence why time seems to go slower - again a natural defensive reaction).
There are lots of training techniques that can be employed to ensure that self defence skills can work in a frightening survival situation, and the article explains them in detail. One time-honoured practice is autogenic breathing. Studies have shown that autogenic breathing can decrease one's heart rate up to 30% for up to 40 seconds. So if a person's heartrate was sitting at 175-220bpm, autogenic breathing can reduce it to 115-145bpm, which is the optimum range for combat effectiveness. So as you can see, all that Zen meditation stuff that martial artists practice actually do serve a practical purpose.
Anyway, check out Laur's article as it does document the research in thorough detail. :)
has this helped you in the fights you have been in Gok?
I've already repeatedly told you about my policy regarding discussing personal fight experience on a public open thread. (-_-)
Click on the link. There's thorough evidence from research conducted by Laur as well as others that he references, and a lot of that research was conducted thoroughly too (e.g. as with scientific experiments, they had test groups and control groups).
Proper studies into survival stress reaction and its relation to combat performance dates back to the 1930s;
e.g.
+ Soldiers experienced immense difficulty transmitting Morse code during combat compared to during training. Transmitting Morse is a fine motor skill and research shows that fine motor skills are the first thing that most people lose under combat stress.
+ During the Vietnam War the location of buttons and switches in fighter cockpits were reconfigured according to survival stress reaction research results in order to make them more intuitively accessible during combat
The majority of survival stress reaction research was conducted by the military up until the mid 1960s. Since then there's been a lot more research from non-military researchers as well from sports sciences (seeing how extreme stress reaction relates to athletic performance). If you'd like to learn more check out Laur's bibliography at the end of the article.
A "fight" is also encompassing training and sparring.
I do believe there is a difference myself to calmly writing an essay on the subject and then being in the situation... You don't count your heatbeats, rather you are more aware of the state the adrenaline rush is doing to you. ;) BUT, also it is good to be able to categorise different states of being and stresses into examples and groups so further understandings can be had after the event.
I agree with this.Quote:
Originally Posted by MV75
I am also very aware of people such as Laur, Geoff Thompson and Richard Dimitri who all teach this stuff albeit with their own personal spins. None of this is new stuff and has been around for years.
Why would you be reluctant to discuss fights you have had if you were acting in self defense.......or did you kill someone Gok lol.
Badgering someone who has declined to publically comment on matters (that may or may not be incriminating - not to mention, discussions of personal violence is innapropriate for this forum) is best avoided.
I wouldn't have called it badgering, i asked a question and attempted to use a bit of humour to close it. fair enough my comedic stylings may be lacking but as someone brought up the topic of emotional control it does make me wonder if ppl are being a bit sensitive.
It is obviously time for me to hit the showers once again.
So I'm looking at getting back into martial arts training after taking a god-knows-how-long hiatus. Today I Googled for martial arts schools around my local area and tonight I went and had a free trial lesson at a nearby Hapkido school. They've offered me a 2nd trial lesson too. Yay - love free stuff. :)
One actual question I have is to do with the pricing. This school charges $140 for registration which covers uniform, insurance, membership, a DVD showing the white belt syllabus, and some other pieces of merchandising. On top of this they charge a minimum of $50 a month if I attend lessons once a week, so the initial start up cost would be $190!!! :o And on top of that, they have gradings which cost $50!!
Sweet mother of Primus... now... I've come from a school that has no belts, no federation fees, no uniforms, no gradings. I just paid for an annual fee to cover insurance and then paid for lessons. The $50 for a month's worth of once-a-week lessons I think is okay, but what about the join-up fee and grading cost? Is this a reasonable price to pay or would I be ripped off?? :confused: The instructor told me that I seemed able to perform at red belt level (I don't know if I'd rate myself that highly, but it was a nice compliment :)). But at any rate, I don't think they'd let me skip through the lower belts and I'd probably have to start at white belt and work (and pay) my way up to black belt level.
I asked them what would happen if I failed a grading, and I was told that there was no refund for a fail and that in event of failure I'd have to pay $50 again for another grading (it's like the bloody RTA!). But, I was told by both a black belt student and the instructor that virtually nobody fails... which made me kinda wonder what the point of grading is if everyone can pass.
My knowledge of how Hapkido schools work is like, zero... so I just wanna know, is this normal pricing and practice?
Thank you.
Which Hapkido school was it Gok? Can I suggest you contact Geoff Scully - he runs a few classes around Sydney and is the best person to learn from.
I know nothing about Hapkido but when I studied Taekwando in Singapore, I remembered having to buy a gi and pay for lessons.
Paid grading as well but nowhere near 50 AUD. And it included the new belt... if you passed of course.
My annual fee is around $90 and includes my grading fees. I'm entitled to two gradings a year (if I'm good enough) also I have to $30 a month for lessons going once a week or if you can make two lessons a week you pay $38.
5FDP: Thanks for the feedback. I'd like to discuss this with you in further detail next time we meet up IRL if you don't mind. :)
-----------------------------------
Some concerning things I experienced at the Hapkido class:
+ At one stage we were kicking at pads. One student I was training with unleashed a volley of high kicks. His posture had absolutely bugger all stability - it was like watching someone do leg swings as part of a warm-up routine. He had no grounding in his stance at all (and as such his kicking form was rather sloppy). Not surprisingly he also had little power behind his kicks. He was kicking at the pad (and even then he was barely tapping the pad's surface) rather than smashing through it. When it was my turn to kick I managed to kick the pad right off his hand several times and he had trouble holding on. After most kicks I also held my leg in the air for a while to practice my balance and correct posturing (rather than simply wildly swinging my leg to get power, in which case my kicking leg would immediately drop to the floor after contact).
+ At another stage of this exercise I was being shown how to do a hooking kick (I think that's what they called it). At first both my partner and I finished the kick in a perfectly side-on position, which I thought was fine. Then a black belt came and corrected us and told us that the correct way of doing it was to land with the leg slightly out. The black belt admitted that this position did open the groin up and exposed it... but did NOT follow up with a justification for why this was done! Wha?! I looked at my partner and told him that I thought his way made more sense than the prescribed correction given to us from the black belt. I can't imagine why one would intentionally leave one's groin (or any vulnerable body part) exposed unnecessarily... the only possible explanation I can come up with is baiting - but this wasn't explained, and there certainly wasn't a follow up move shown to us that demonstrated it as a baiting manoeuvre. Odd.
+ There was a sparring session but with two main rules: absolute non-contact and only 3 moves allowed. I have 2 issues with this - first of all, while I completely understand that the instructor is being diligent in his legal duty of care by enforcing non-contact, the problem is that students have no idea if their moves actually worked or not without any kind of tactile contact. I prefer light-contact sparring where the force of the touch is like playing Tips in the school playground (e.g. you "tip" each other with fingertips and feet etc. instead of full force punches and kicks). That way when you feel that you've been "tipped" you immediately know that you've taken a hit. Another problem for me is that my fighting style is half striking half grappling, so I rely on doing a lot of sticking and grabbing... not possible if I have absolutely no contact at all. I used light contact myself, not because I was intentionally trying to disobey instructions, but because that's just how I automatically operate in a sparring situation. Nobody got hurt though and nobody made any complaints. <shrug> The problem with only allowing 3 moves I think is quite evident... the exercise becomes more of a game. What would often happen is that everyone would move three times then STOP and reset. I'm not used to this - usually I just keep going until the fight's over. So my partner moved three times and stopped and lowered his guard while I just moved in -- he quickly picked his guard up again, but that momentary lapse in vigilance put my opponent at a serious disadvantage.
+ Another issue: and I experienced this both during the drill exercises and sparring - students liked to keep a massively long distance. For example, during one kicking-pad exercise my partner told me stand 2 metres away from him. And during sparring my partner just kept back-pedalling to avoid getting anywhere near me. It was like they were fighting with fingertips and toes and didn't want to get in any closer than that. So during the exercise I had to put an extra hop in my step to try to close the gap between me and the pad. During sparring I eventually just used 'crushing' steps to effectively pounce in and invade my opponent's personal space. Cos really, if your personal space isn't being invaded then there's no need to fight (you might as well run away). IMO the point of self defence is that your personal space is being invaded and you have little choice but to fight to protect yourself.
+ This is something that 5FDP, myself and others have griped about -- over-compliance in training. During a self-defence exercise, the attacker had to grab the defender, then the defender executed the defence, but when this happened the attacker was expected NOT to either continue attacking or attempt to counter the defence. For example, I'd grab my partner's wrist, then he'd break free of the grab and follow up with an elbow which I'd instinctively blocked. I was then told not to block the elbow. Huh?!
+ Another time I grabbed my partner's wrist, then he stuck onto my grabbing hand and turned me around to put me in a restraining hold, but I easily turned around to reposition myself so that he couldn't execute the submission hold. My partner told me that in a real fight this move would be executed so quickly that the force would dislocate my shoulder (and thus suggesting that I would never be able to outmanoeuvre him and prevent the dislocation). My partner was making the rather dangerous assumption that he's faster and more manoeuvreable than me -- which may be true, but it shouldn't be an assumption that one makes in a fight nor during training. I was taught to always assume that your opponent is your superior.
...so, I came across a lot of issues which I've seen before. Now I must say that this experience was only with 3 students at the school and their attitude may not reflect the overall attitude of the instructor or the school itself. But it was disappointing to come across the common problems of:
* poor posture/stances
* poor ability to issue power in strikes (i.e. hitting at targets instead of through them - although having poor stances contributes to this too)
* unnecessarily exposing oneself
* fighting in predictable rhythms
* over-compliance with training partners
* assuming that one's opponent is inferior
And new issues that I haven't come across before were:
* keeping too great a distance (why fight if you're in immediate danger?)
* complete lack of tactile contact
...I've heard of these issues from other people before, but this was my first time to experience it first hand.
And to be fair to this school, the non-contact sparring is only enforced with junior students. I was told that senior students had contact sparring but had to wear protective equipment - which is fair enough (again I greatly respect the fact that the instructor is diligently observing his legal duty of care).
Just PM'd ya :)Quote:
Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime
The local paper finally got around to posting an article about the last karate grading. Their is also a picture of the adult karate class with myself included. Now unfortunately Ulladulla has an extremely high ratio of tall poppies and as such I've copped alot of flak of locals in the last 48 hrs.
Why can't these people be supportive:mad:
Just kick their ass :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Bartrim
"How dare you achieve success!" :p
As long as you're enjoying what you're doing and it works for you (e.g. you are able to competently defend yourself) then who gives a hoot what others think. If I were self-conscious about what others thought about me I probably wouldn't be wearing Transformer clothes 24/7 and carrying toys with me in public. :D I've still got those Transformer tatts on me from Sunday... some of the people at my work (both colleagues and clients) have noticed... heh. ;)
But isn't Martial arts supposed to be defensive? so I'd have to get them to attack me before I kick their asses:pQuote:
Originally Posted by 5FDP
There is nothing more I can teach you. You are ready my student :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartrim
You could teach me how to provoke them so I can kick their asses:pQuote:
Originally Posted by 5FDP
Generally speaking, no. Most martial arts can be easily used quite aggressively and for attack. Remember that most martial arts evolved from ancient battlefields and were used by warriors and soldiers in war. Punching, kicking, elbowing, kneeing, headbutting etc. -- every time you're practising a form of attack, it's not defensive (strictly speaking).Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartrim
There are some martial arts styles that are more passive and defensive, like Tai Chi, Aikido, Jujutsu etc., but any style that uses striking/attacking is not purely defensive. Now in this day and age, most of us learn martial arts as a means of defence, and lawfully we can use attacks to defend ourselves if we are provoked, so long as we use a reasonable amount of force. But you'll notice that people like bouncers and police officers are often taugh passive techniques like holds, grabs and submissions over actually striking. It allows them to adequately defend themselves and neutralise opponents without actually hitting them. The same goes for teachers, we are allowed to restrain students for their own safety (e.g. if they're trying to harm themselves or others), but of course, we're not allowed to strike them. I've seen the instructional handbook for teachers aides (who often deal with kids with severe intellectual handicaps that they can lash out violently and these aides need to know how to safely restrain them) - and all the techniques were basically the same holds, grapples and submission techniques that I've seen in passive internal martial arts.
Ask me this next time we meet IRL. I'm not talking about anything illegal or unlawful, but I think it would be best if we discussed this further off the board. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartrim
if a fight is going to happen (usually there are signs before it does such as verbal, posturing etc) then in all honesty you are better off getting the first one in.
I know all the legal buffs here are going to say "oh but you will get done for assualt etc" which may be the case depending on if there are any witnesses at the time etc but you greatly improve your chances of walking away in good condition.
Action is always faster than reaction, it is a fact that can't be argued. remember back to the school yard when you used to play games like 'slap hands etc'. It always sucked being the person getting slapped didn't it?
You can still act in self defense and throw the first punch.
Sorry my skin was getting all wrinkly in the shower....
Really? Oh ok. Well we are taught from a strickly defensive point of view. Every move/sequences of moves we are taught begin with us countering an opponents attack. We are never taught to be the aggressor... although make sparring interesting especially with us rookies as we just bounce around waiting for the other to strike:DQuote:
Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime
Oh and that last comment about provoking was stricly tongue in cheek Gok.
Actually, I think the law would be in support - providing that you use reasonable force in self defence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot Rodimus
Remember that the law defines assault as "to cause another to apprehend (perceive) immediate harmful contact." Someone does not need to touch you in order to assault you - once they do make contact, then that's battery (thus once you're attacked you're a victim of assault and battery). So if someone gives you the honest perception that they're going to harm you, then they are assaulting you, and you are allowed to defend yourself using a reasonable amount of force.
"A conditional threat, such as 'Don't move or I'll kill you' is still an assault. This is even though, technically, if the victim does not move they will not be killed and have nothing to fear. This is because the basis of the offence is the creation of fear, and someone will always be scared with a knife in their back." (M. Parker, B. Derwent, "Justice, Law & Society 1", Longman Cheshire, 1991)
So there's no need for people to necessarily assume that they're powerless to defend themselves if a potential attacker is merely making threats. Threats can be verbal and non-verbal. For example, adopting a fighting stance (e.g. raising your fists in an aggressive and hostile manner) is a non-verbal way of threatening someone - and thus could be argued to be assault and you would use this as your justification to enact self defence. If a person raises a fist as if they're going to punch you, then it would not be unreasonable for you to punch them first. You don't have to wait for the punch to being as the threat has already been established (and thus you are _already_ under assault). Meeting the threat of a punch with a punch should be perceived as a reasonable amount of force in self defence. The law states "reasonable" force, but most people go by the rule of using "equal or lesser force" compared to the attacker.
Waiting for someone to throw a hit before defending yourself isn't necessary and it can be dangerous - cos after all a single good king hit can be fatal (e.g. David Hookes).
It's really good that you guys are being taught martial arts from a strictly defensive perspective, but to be frankly honest we have to admit that the martial arts were originally designed to hurt, maime and even kill people. They're not called "defensive arts," but martial arts and the word "martial" means "inclined or disposed to war" -- to practice the martial arts is to practice the art of war itself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartrim
I completely agree with learning it as a means of self defence, but at the same time I also acknowledge that most of these techniques were designed for warfare. But that's okay - because it helps to understand how brutal attacks work in order to learn how to adequately defend yourself from them. It doesn't mean you have to or want to use them yourself, but it helps to learn how to defend yourself against them. For example, I can't imagine myself breaking someone's arm, leg, neck or spine (unless they threatened me with lethal force, but even then it wouldn't be my preferred option) - but it doesn't mean I don't learn to defend myself against such brutal attacks.
One thing that I see some martial arts school do - and the school I've recently started training in is guilty of this too - is practice against attacks that are too "gentle" or "kind" (as 5FDP also discussed before, the problem of over-compliant partners in training). It doesn't mean that you should go ape on your training partner, but at the same time I think it's a disservice to let them continue training with the belief that they're successfully countering your attacks when you can see various massive flaws in their technique. e.g. If a throw a punch and a person steps across me while blocking it with their groin exposed, I'm not going to kick them in the nads, but I'll tell them that they're groin is exposed and maybe lift my leg to do a half kick just to illustrate my point, but not make any actual contact.
I agree with this. I had this problem at the start as no one in the class was of similar size to me so I had to chop and change partners all the time and as such we were too gentle with each other. Now Mitchell has started class and we are of the same size (actually he is a bit bigger then me) we always partner up together. As such we have gotten a feel for how each other moves and what each other can tolerate as far as how hard we can hit each other we now carry out the exercises with alot more speed and intensity. I feel that sincethis has happened I have improved quicker then what I would of without a regular partner.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime
Training with different partners has its advantages too though. It prevents you from getting too used to one person's particular fighting form - it can be useful to train against various opponents of differing shapes, sizes, strengths, speeds/tempos etc. Even if the person you're training against may feel inferior to you, then that perosn you're training against should be benefitting from training with a superior opponent.
I've seen some schools which only allow their students to train with students of equal status (or as close to as possible), but I think there's a lot to gain by allowing people of different levels to mix and train with each other. A well-trained novice should be able to hold off against an experienced fighter - they may be unlikely to get a hit in or 'win', but they should at very least be able to avoid getting hit themselves, which from a self defence POV is pretty much what you want to fundamentally achieve anyway.
At the same time the more experienced fighter ought to be mentoring the less experienced student as they train - i.e. specifically point out weaknesses and help teach the student how to improve. Or if they don't know how to advise, then do some problem solving and try to work it out. Sometimes when I'm training against a superior opponent, say for example they might put me in a hold that I can't get out of... usually they'll say sorry and offer to restart the exercise again with an easier hold, but I'll ask them to please try the difficult hold again and let me work out how to counter it myself. Cos in a real fight you're not gonna be able to ask the attacker to take it easy on you. ;)
Gok I think your last two posts were very informative and spot on.
Thanks :)
Looks like my English slipped a bit here...
What I meant to say was, "You don't have to wait for the punch to be thrown as the threat has already been established..." ;) My English is the gooderest. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime
Last night we practiced parrying for a while then had to partner up with someone of similar size and play forehead slaps. Due to bad weather hardly anyone was there which meant I got partnered with the Sempai...Needless to say I got my brains scrambled pretty bad. The Sensei got a good laugh out of it. Although I did imoress both of them when we had a grappling session after that and I made a purple belt tap with a wishbone leg lock (I did have a little bit of a size advantage but he won bronze for grappling at the KRMAS nationals so I think it was even).
I'm getting graded again this weekend. Been going for 2 terms and have been graded twice. The Sensei told me last night he was impressed with my determination and commitment.
Got my orange belt... very sore but happy:)
Also got to see a brown belt get graded. Apart from the 3 seperate katas he performed he had 10x 2 minute sparring rounds. Geez it was brutal
Congrats Bartrim :) It's a great feeling getting to the next level isn't it because you have something to show for all your efforts.
Good work Bartrim :)
This morning we had a special outdoor training session. It started drizzling about halfway through, but we persevered. Then it started sprinkling as we went through the last form and the instructor sped things up (haha) and just as we finished it started downpouring. So we camped under a nearby pergola having tea and munchies and a social chat... but still getting saturated from the stupid gravity-defying upward rain!! Joy... (;-_-)
Thanks guys. This grading was held in the middle of the day instead of in the night because one of the head guys from Sydney was down our way so the heat made it even more gruelling but the reward or the more worthwhile.:)
From here
In my experience/observation, if you're primarily interested in learning martial arts for practical self defence, I would recommend BJJ out of that lot. :) But that's just in my personal experience/observation -- if you happen to find those other styles work for you for self defence, then by all means keep training in them.Quote:
Originally Posted by ITZTRU
Nah it's not actually about self defense for me. It's to maintain my fitness regime. The place I used to train at offered all of these styles (except TKD), plus Karate and Boxing as part of the membership so I just trained in all of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime
Having said that, BJJ is probably by far the art that I was most keen on learning :)
Fairy 'nuff. :) BJJ certainly is a very... 'intimate' fighting style. ;) As are all forms of grappling and wrestling really, but it's funny watching people who've never done anything like it get freaked out by the extremely-close personal contact :D
It's also a rather boring (IMO) style to watch in competition. But you blink sometimes and the next thing you know, one opponent taps out and you're left wondering "Wait...what? What just happened?"
It can happen so fast. But I've always been into submission maneuvers. Ever since watching WCW/WWF/WWE since I was a kid :P Which is why it interests me so much.
Can anyone suggest good places to train in Muay Thai between Melb CBD and South East suburbs?
Which, from a self-defence POV, is a good thing. Most of the more effectual fighting styles are actually really boring and dull to watch - that's because they're not designed to entertain an audience, but just to finish a fight as soon as possible. Bushido has a famous saying of "One hit one kill" -- the ideal dream scenario where you can finish a fight in just a single move (highly unlikely, but one should still definitely aim to end the fight in as few moves as possible). This is why I see learning martial arts for self defence and learning it as a competitive sport as two entirely different things.Quote:
Originally Posted by ITZTRU
I dunno about sport fighting, but one good thing about learning submissions, holds, grapples etc. from a self-defence POV is that it's a more passive means of defending yourself (whereas striking/hitting is more aggressive and can potentially put the defender into legal strife if s/he uses excessive force in self defence). That's why police are well trained in submissions and holds - so they can subdue and control an opponent but without actually hitting them. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by ITZTRU
Can't help you with recommending any schools in Melbourne I'm afraid. :(