Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Wizard]

Hey all, been awhile since I formally logged in.  I've been doing some reading and thinking the concept of resistance in training, as a methodology to learn practical skill.  Not a new issue, I realize. 

One reason I admire MMA fighters is that their training allows them to really see if their technique will work.  Same with training sport BJJ--you can go pretty hard at it and test the waters.  I don't want "sport leakage" too much, but we also have to push it.  sometimes our combat scenarios might be too easy, and we still leave that arm hang out there (or whatever) so the opponent can do his technique.  While I don't prefer to get my bell rung too many times, too hard, as I'm just plain getting older, the stuff has to be tested!  So...

I was wondering what folks are currently using to ramp-up the resistance, so students can see if there "wonder technique" actually works with someone who's at least semi-fighting back.  What drills or strategies do you most like/use for this?

Anyone game?

Wizard

[Wizard]

This is from an old thread:

Consentual Training V.S. Resistance
« on: December 06, 2006, 05:00:54 PM »

I'm talking less theory and more actual drills you do to up the intensity for those ready and willing.  An article I saw by a Burton Richardson talked about "performance games" or something along those lines to describe some drills used to get more resisting engagement (gradually).

Nuff said.

[Karl]

Total Commitment @ intent makes you realize wether a technique works or not.

[JimH]

To me,There is No DRILL for ramping up resistance you just do it.
A student is shown a technique,movement or gross skill and they do it against a minimally resistant attack, as the student grasps the concept of the movement the attacker comes with more intent and more force as the student is able to handle a certain level then the level is increase to where the attack and response are at full speed with control.
One point,the closer you get to a realistic attack and defense the more likely things are to cause varying levels of injuries,so students/trainers should know this and expect it or do not go to that level.
My opinion

[whitewolf]

Ill go along with  JimH  on this -As instructors get  closer and closer to a  actual real technique injuries can  and  do  occur-I personally  have  been knocked out when the training gets "Too Real"-it is up to the instructor to insure that students  do no go  over board and try to hurt the other when they do the tchnique. i also  would add that as the students get more  and more closer to a  real technique some go into
really doing the technique for real -we as insructors have to be aware
as we teach. (Hope i am not rambling)-WW

[TLE]

Very simply, most people don't want this kind of training being discussed and most intructors want to make a living so they give their students what they want. The fear is injuries and alienating students. So everything is made"safe"and enjoyable. And thats  OK Truthfully, that kind of training is for a select few-young and full of piss and vinegar and the ability to heal fast!

[whitewolf]

Ha i  still am full of it---Lol   WW

[JimH]

Everyone is capable of stepping up the resistance and working closer to reality,they just must find at what level they are comfortable.
Those who are interested in usable Self Defense over just theoretical movements of self defense should step up their game to as close to actual as possible.

The school I train and teach at tries to make the students see the difference between just doing techniques on fully compliant partners as opposed to doing techniques on slightly resistant to fully resistant attackers.
They then decide where to stop.

Unlike combative sport,Realistic self defense is not just for the young but is trainable for all who are looking for how to protect themselves in the streets of NY .Realistic training does not allow a conflict to last long,as these are encounters with threat over agreed to challenge fights as found in bars and clubs.

When most instructors say they teach street self defense and then have students grab each other or punch and kick at each other and they exchange rather than end it,they are teaching sport theory over self protection.
If students train and do not pull ,push,shove their opponents and do not yell and act crazy then training is not based on any realistic attack scenario but a pretense of an attack.

See,to me, this giving students what they want and saying we go easy because student do not want to get hurt is understandable,and thus the rise of Reality type training has returned over watered down Traditional/Untraditional,as the potential for injury was expected years ago and is not expected now,but when attacked on the street injury will be a factor and never being hit or having hit a person without layers of gear the realization of being hit with a minor strike will be an eye opener and maybe a game ender.

Our school tells students they will train not for competition but for survival in the street so to sell them less is not fair to them.They should leave class knowing what to expect in  a real street altercation and how to REALLY defend themselves,they choose the level and if they happen to get into an altercation hopefully they come into class and tell how what we do works and not how it failed and cost them with some level of pain and or injury.
(We have LEO's,Security Officers,Bouncers and so on who have come in and said what we do works in real confrontations,so  we feel we are doing the job right and giving students what they paid for)

Again though ,all participants must decide the level they want to go to.
But drills to increase to deal with increased resistance in training are not needed ,just gradually up the intensity.

My opinion.

If I may ask TLE,since the training to up the intensity of resistance does not fit what most students want,supposedly,and the fear of injuries by instructors is a factor,then how do you work on increasing
The resistance for pratical application in regard to street usable self defense ??

[TLE]

Jim H  - I was speaking primarily to the mma style and bjj style of training. And to be honest, I don't know what the best way  for the average person , one not "in the life", to train for  street sd  is. that's why I have come full circle back to traditional ma the way I was taught many years ago.

[Hock]

In my small world?

I just let people in attendance train as hard as they want to with their partners. Usually the two friends in their 20s are killing each other over in one corner and the 60 year-olds are doing the best they can in another corner.

Often in seminars and classes there is a local rule of thumb about changing partners to experience different shapes and sizes. Makes sense, sure, but I am not a big fan of this because of the aforementioned reasons. Suddenly the firebrand 20 year-old is with the 60 year-old with a bad knee. And we have a slow-down and a problem or two.

I have come to realize that I cannot change the world, nor be a Yoda to every person I meet (about 2,000 people a year). I do what I do and move on. Their actual destiny is in the hands of their own personal drive and perhaps the local instructor who will hopefully see them for years.

Hock

[arnold]

Good thing I took it easy all of these years!

[JimH]

TLE,
I agree ,MMA/BJJ does seem to attract the younger piss and vinegar group,lol.
But
Even in training traditional MA we must increase the resistance/the threat level in small degrees if we seek to truly show and train students what street altercations are truly like.

Hock,
I agree with the not forcing participants to change partners during a day of seminar training.
As many times ,(as you pointed out),the wrong mixes happen between young and old,men and women,even people of the same age with different mind sets
People familiar with each other,training partners and students from the same school should stay together and work together as they are used to each other and know each others training intensity and style.
I think you hit it on the head when you wrote
"Their actual destiny is in the hands of their own personal drive",
what it all comes down to is this statement .
Everyone must train to what they feel is their desired level of acceptance of action and reaction to situational threats.

[Karl]

Hi, just copied this.
If I may ask TLE,since the training to up the intensity of resistance does not fit what most students want,supposedly,and the fear of injuries by instructors is a factor,then how do you work on increasing
The resistance for pratical application in regard to street usable self defense ??
In my Opinion Most See [the intensity of resistance) = Ferocity of attack @ Response.
If the Attacker  A uses Mindset @ Intention he can walk up to the Victim-Defender B in a slow walk @ B will feel the intend of  A @ can then Use a technique to defend himself. I hope that makes sense.
in the last seminar i attended we had A walk up with full intent, most B reacted to that mirroing the intent thereby giving A control over B. Hope that makes sense.

[Jumonkan]

All good points and great things to think about. In opening my own Dojo almost three ago now, wow time flies, I was confronted with this problem. What I found was in the beginning I teach a more traditional way, then  as the studentage (is that a word?) progresses I slowly take away restraints. We go full free style like BJJ for ground work, put on pads and have it out for striking and at least twice a week I throw three guys in pads at one student in a, bull in the ring kind of exercise. I find there are people who don't come on certain days because there not interested in "getting more real" they just want to train and learn an art form. That's how I dealt with this question.

James

[Wizard]

There have been some good thoughts here.  Many discussed what I think Burton Richarson describes as  using "progressive resistance" in training--easy resistance to start, increasing based on student desire and abilty.  It really does make sense.  Some won't push as hard, and that's ok, but they need to realize that their technique application is somewhat more untested (read: don't be too confident yet). 

Yet I still think there are certain interactive drills that allow for increased aggression and intensity, and I've been trying to make a list of them for myself and students to utilize.  I suppose you can do this with most techniques, with strong intent, but some allow us to cut loose a bit more and test the waters.

Example:  "Get up fast."  Student lays on ground, eyes closed.  Other student mounts or lays on to hold down.  As soon as student A feels touched, the student scrambles hard to get up ASAP.  With some pads, strikes can be added at varying percentages.  An eye gouge, groin strike, etc. means aggressive has to pause 2 -3 seconds as if stunned while student A keeps working.  Resisting attacker, practical skill, aids in focused aggression toward defensive end.  It's now a good drill for practical skill.

Example:  Wall drill:  Student defends punches while back to the wall (Hock shows this in Level 5 UC).  First with distance, later with gear and actual blows coming in.  Instructor yells "hit it" (whatever) and the defender becomes aggressor with rapid entry, strikes, and takedown.  Rinse, lather, repeat, switch. 

Yes, one can do this with lots of drills.  But do we think it out and have some good ones to throw at our students, with progressive resistance for those willing and able?  Are there fun and more interesting ways we can do it?  That's what I was getting at, that's what I'm trying to brainstorm.  Thanks for the thoughts! 

Hock, should see you at the Battlebarn in August if I'm back from a trip, looking forward to it!!!