Teaching/learning

Yesterday I had planned to work on punching. It steamed form the thought that even if your working with self-defense, you sometimes might have to be the aggressor. Situations were you can't run when necessary, but have to ensure that you or your loved ones are not in danger, until you can get away.

So, I teach how to punch. I categorize punching into three primary categories  1) Straight punch like wing chun, 2) Straight punch like Karate and 3) Punching like a boxer, which is more curved. These types are fundamental movements playing into how the body moves and how you try to get maximal energy on impact with the punch, compared to protection, speed and possibility of next movement. But ultimately a question of getting most power from the punch under impact.

What I wanted to write about was how to teach somebody how to punch, when their primary focus(and ultimately a time issue) is to learn self defense. How much time and resource can you use on this aspect? Most situations will have the possibility to "run", so why not use your time to get better at this. And the question of time/resource comes to light again when talking about what is important to learn when punching. How much focus on the correct hand placement, the wrists, part of which you hit with, and so on.

But as teaching is a great way to learning, so is learning to "punch". Learning the mechanics of a "punch" will make you more conscious of the pre-contact ques and possibilities.

Time is the issue. Having a person learn self defense, and only have 1 hour. I wouldn't teach him how to "punch". But when a person has a fundamental understanding of self defense  it's time to teach how to"punch". Because now they correlate that information with what they've learned on self defense. This being   a higher level on the Bloom taxonomy - being able to process and make new connections with the information given - thus deepening the understanding. Students now have the possibility to understand how they themselves improve their own self defense techniques and situations.

This is the basics, and from this scenario training is done - it's bringing the chaos to the structure and learning how to use the learned structure to navigate in real life. But more on that in a later blog.

One technique - one defense

I can't count the amount of times I'm asked to provide the one technique that can solve a physical confrontation. Everything from a semi-innocent wrist grab to some insane ninja attack. Not looking at the probability of the attack it's nearly 100% that every person that has asked me that question wanted one single answer. And looking at at many schools/dojos and such many of them try and provide at single answer.

It's not that I'm not a fan of simplicity, it's more the focus on it. It tends to forget the opposite of the answer.... the what if what you did didn't work or isn't working. How do you get back into "the game".

What if you are mentally and physically out of balance (hit and maybe hit hard), how do you get back? Since we can't pratice being hit hard ie. the head, how do you really know how to get back in "the game". If you've never been "out there", how are you sure your learning how to do it?

The only way is to practice the "it didn't" work scenario; allowing yourself to be pushed hard in areas you don't want to be. Most people will in advance, since they know the scenario, already before the they start have mentally and physically prepared themselves to "do it right".

Knowing that what you do works is good, but remember that isn't the real mindset the day the bells ring. So your really not working the scenario and getting better. Your setting yourself up for a bigger surprise than expected.

I believe that when somebody asks for one technique for one attack it's always at least two things you have to practice  the wanted response and "a failed one" were you have to work to get into place. So when somebody asks for the one technique, tell them you have to at least practice 2......