We’ve been going round and round on this topic on other threads. So I thought I would try to make it clear what I’m talking about to clarify, and also present the topic for those who haven’t been following the other threads.
A basic premise in modern sports science is that you need to isolate a physical movement to develop and perfect it. An example is a tennis player that is having trouble with his or her backhand. A good coach will take that player aside, feed them the ball over and over and make them focus on and work on their backhand until it improves. Then the player takes it back into his or her game in a more random fashion. Our colleagues in combat sports do this all the time as well. Boxers work on drills to develop their jab…everything from practicing against a stationary heavy bag, to practicing against a moving partner using a focus mitt, to practicing against a partner actively trying to hit them. I’m sure we can all think of similar examples from BJJ, MMA, and Thai boxing. The idea is to isolate a skill or technique you want to work on in a 1:1 drill format so you can really concentrate on it. Of course the danger of taking this too far is that you can get “motorset.” In other words, you have memorized a specific response to a specific attack. Then in application the opponent doesn’t do exactly what you expect and you “freeze” momentarily because you don’t have a response for it. So you have to mix up the training, start specific and then make it more and more random. And then you have to go back and put it into a “live” situation like sparring or Chi Sau. It is part of progressive development. I’m wondering how many people train their Wing Chun this way? Here are some examples of people that do:
Before anyone gets all excited, keep in mind that these are drills meant to develop specific techniques and attributes. This is not fighting. But this is how fighters train.
[QUOTE=k gledhill;1250461]Pass , starter for 10 please. : )[/QUOTE]
That’s right. You PB guys don’t believe in Isolation Drills. Not sure why. Was hoping you’d elaborate. But you didn’t even watch the video examples. I know, because your response came much too soon after I made the original post.
[QUOTE=KPM;1250466]That’s right. You PB guys don’t believe in Isolation Drills. Not sure why. Was hoping you’d elaborate. But you didn’t even watch the video examples. I know, because your response came much too soon after I made the original post.[/QUOTE]
Again you’re missing the point. You’re case is that you can train anything in isolation and hey presto it’s vt because it has a tan and a bong in there. And if a guy does a jab we can spend two hours responding with ? Until its memorized then move onto version 4467 , 4468 , etc…
There is another way. : )
If you ‘only’ train isolation drills, you’re screwed if you face something that doesn’t relate to the drills you learned (so here I fully agree with Kevin).
But equally, incorporating isolation drills into your training (in addition to Chi Sau, Lap Sau, Lat Sau and Sparring), can help you work on the specifics found in relation to how we make the system’s concepts something real (i.e. Physical) - so here I’m on the same page as Keith.
Being fed punches so you can work on, say, Pak Sau is not just isolating the Pak Sau - the specifics you’re working on are the Pak motion, intercepting, closing distance, timing, angling, closing lines of attack, etc. You could also use it to maintain focus on elbow position, facing and re-facing, footwork, etc.
If you train punching a heavy bag (I saw a clip of PB training like this), this too is an isolation drill. The cycle seen in the Lap Sau exercise is an isolation drill too - only one where variables are inserted.
[QUOTE=KPM;1250459]We’ve been going round and round on this topic on other threads. So I thought I would try to make it clear what I’m talking about to clarify, and also present the topic for those who haven’t been following the other threads.
[/QUOTE]
Sure, man. Everybody isolates a movement or series of movements and trains them. Most people refer to this as “drilling”. I haven’t heard a lot out there naming this “isolation drills”, although that is what “drilling” does. In HFY there is a whole learning track based on a “san sau” format, which is basically training up a fighter through a series of drills. We even distinguish unique names for the first form (either SLT or SNT) based upon whether you are training the system concepts or san sau concepts (training fighting).
On of the keys in “drilling” is to isolate a portion of a fight (free sparring exchange) and train from that a specific pathway. This is quite different from the myriad of “one-step response” videos out there where some unsuspecting fool throws a fake haymaker then gets 8 techniques as a response.
So I don’t think it’s the concept of “drilling” that’s getting argued here, as you would have to be an idiot to never do any drilling at all. It’s WHAT you are drilling. Meaning it has to have applicability in a real exchange.
[QUOTE=Wayfaring;1250480]Sure, man. Everybody isolates a movement or series of movements and trains them. Most people refer to this as “drilling”. I haven’t heard a lot out there naming this “isolation drills”, although that is what “drilling” does. In HFY there is a whole learning track based on a “san sau” format, which is basically training up a fighter through a series of drills. We even distinguish unique names for the first form (either SLT or SNT) based upon whether you are training the system concepts or san sau concepts (training fighting).
On of the keys in “drilling” is to isolate a portion of a fight (free sparring exchange) and train from that a specific pathway. This is quite different from the myriad of “one-step response” videos out there where some unsuspecting fool throws a fake haymaker then gets 8 techniques as a response.
So I don’t think it’s the concept of “drilling” that’s getting argued here, as you would have to be an idiot to never do any drilling at all. It’s WHAT you are drilling. Meaning it has to have applicability in a real exchange.[/QUOTE]
Yes, our ID encompass our conceptual approach. I can then go and fight anyone using this approach and not be style bound expecting a punch a certain way or everyone throw a jab the same way.
There are varying skill levels in all fighters-humans.
[QUOTE=KPM;1250459]A basic premise in modern sports science is that you need to isolate a physical movement to develop and perfect it. An example is a tennis player that is having trouble with his or her backhand. A good coach will take that player aside, feed them the ball over and over and make them focus on and work on their backhand until it improves. Then the player takes it back into his or her game in a more random fashion.[/quote]
The main problem with this analogy is that the tennis player is not put into danger by isolating a backhand and then working it into their game as a conditioned response to a specific situation. There is only one ball on the court.
Whereas, for the VT practitioner a conditioned response can lead to miscalculations and injury, as can just thinking about applying certain techniques for certain situations without having conditioned them. There is simply no time to be thinking about what you want to or should apply.
If you have to think, it’s too late. If you plan ahead, things likely won’t work out the way you envision. If you condition a response, you may miscalculate or be caught with a feint. That’s the main problem with the approach of trying to apply ‘Wing Chun techniques’. On the other hand, these risks are not present with a conceptual, instinctive approach.
This is less the case within other martial arts you mention because they are using techniques designed to do what they do, and they do it well. It is a problem in the Wing Chun world because people turn ‘techniques’ into ‘applications’ that are actually misinterpretations and misuses of the actions to begin with. So you usually end up with a mess of hypothetical ‘techniques’ that only work with other likeminded, equally ignorant training partners and are guaranteed to fail at speed.
Boxers and Muay Thai fighters do what they do well, and that’s fine. VT just has a different approach to fighting. Those who don’t know any better look at it incorrectly and use training methods from other arts that don’t mix. As a result you have an application-based system with actions that are not meant to be used that way. How effective do you expect that to be?
From what I have read on this form so far, some people just don’t want to go beyond the boundary of their WC forms. Since all the principles and techniques in the forms can be trained by sticky hand. They may feel that’s all they need.
For example, since the “foot sweep” is not in the WC forms, they don’t want to train it, and they don’t need that partner training drill.
If you live in San Francisco, you my not need a car. Since you don’t need a car, you don’t need to learn how to drive. If you stay in San Francisco for the rest of your life, there will be no problem. The day that you have to live outside of San Francisco, you may feel handicap.
[quote=youknowwho;1250497]from what i have read on this form so far, some people just don’t want to go beyond the boundary of their wc forms. Since all the principles and techniques in the forms can be trained by sticky hand. They may feel that’s all they need.
For example, since the “foot sweep” is not in the wc forms, they don’t want to train it, and they don’t need that partner training drill.[/quote]
If you don’t mind to go beyond the boundary of your forms, and if you want to train “foot sweep”, how will you train it? From sparring? Since the foot sweep will require:
timing,
opportunity,
angle,
force,
balance.
It’s impossible for anyone to be able to “develop” his “foot sweep” skill from sparring only.
[QUOTE=YouKnowWho;1250497]
For example, since the “foot sweep” is not in the WC forms, they don’t want to train it, and they don’t need that partner training drill..[/QUOTE]
Some come off as if they can spontaneously pull magical techniques and applications from the cosmos and apply them perfectly without ever having trained or learned them. Some say that they don’t use the movements from the form, so they must be using a san shi method. But those san shi are based on the forms, so in short they are using movement from the forms, no?. If not how can they say they are doing a WC system that has forms? If the forms are not used are they just decoration, if so why have them? Some don’t drill but use the techs. in application, which is drilling. Some seem to think isolation is stationary and drilling is not, both require movement. Is this not contradictory? Too many labels and compartmentalizing, IMO. No other way to train than to drill single movement and combos IMO. In training mindset is key, if you don’t have the correct mindset why bother. Mindset and drilling go hand in hand. This is true of any practice whether tennis or fighting, to each player the stakes are the same, no less critical/important than the other. Violence is not a factor as with a correct mindset a speeding tennis ball and speeding fist can represent the same thing to their respective parties, nothing more than an obstacle. Serious injury can occur with both (tennis, fighting) without proper focus, execution and mindset, can it not?
I’m not criticizing anyone here, just trying to comprehend.
[QUOTE=k gledhill;1250471]Again you’re missing the point. You’re case is that you can train anything in isolation and hey presto it’s vt because it has a tan and a bong in there. And if a guy does a jab we can spend two hours responding with ? Until its memorized then move onto version 4467 , 4468 , etc…
There is another way. : )[/QUOTE]
If you actually watched the video examples you’d see that that isn’t at all what they are doing. But…Whatever Dude! :rolleyes:
If you ‘only’ train isolation drills, you’re screwed if you face something that doesn’t relate to the drills you learned (so here I fully agree with Kevin).
.[/QUOTE]
But I clearly outlined in my original post that that is NOT what I meant.
[QUOTE=k gledhill;1250487]Yes, our ID encompass our conceptual approach. I can then go and fight anyone using this approach and not be style bound expecting a punch a certain way or everyone throw a jab the same way.
There are varying skill levels in all fighters-humans.[/QUOTE]
That’s funny. Because on the other thread you guys were vehemently arguing that you DON’T do isolation drills, or 1:1 techniques, or applications…which are all essentially the same thing.
Sure, man. Everybody isolates a movement or series of movements and trains them. Most people refer to this as “drilling”.
Well, maybe not everybody.
I haven’t heard a lot out there naming this “isolation drilling”, although that is what “drilling” does.
Yeah, I made up the term “isolation trianing” myself to try to make it clearer what I was talking about on the other thread.
In HFY there is a whole learning track based on a “san sau” format, which is basically training up a fighter through a series of drills.
Cool! I’m assuming these are progressive drills that take one through an increasingly realistic application of the technique, concept or attribute?
On of the keys in “drilling” is to isolate a portion of a fight (free sparring exchange) and train from that a specific pathway. This is quite different from the myriad of “one-step response” videos out there where some unsuspecting fool throws a fake haymaker then gets 8 techniques as a response.
Yes, I agree. Any isolation training needs to keep realistic application in mind. I think the videos I posted mostly support that idea.
[QUOTE=KPM;1250516]That’s funny. Because on the other thread you guys were vehemently arguing that you DON’T do isolation drills, or 1:1 techniques, or applications…which are all essentially the same thing.[/QUOTE]
Look you keep going with that idea and knock yourself out. Happy drilling.
[B]Whereas, for the VT practitioner a conditioned response can lead to miscalculations and injury, as can just thinking about applying certain techniques for certain situations without having conditioned them. There is simply no time to be thinking about what you want to or should apply.
If you have to think, it’s too late. If you plan ahead, things likely won’t work out the way you envision. If you condition a response, you may miscalculate or be caught with a feint. That’s the main problem with the approach of trying to apply ‘Wing Chun techniques’. On the other hand, these risks are not present with a conceptual, instinctive approach.[/B]
Wow. You really don’t get it, do you? I addressed that very issue in my original post. Boxers don’t have problems with that. MMA fighters don’t have problems with that. Why should Wing Chun fighters have problems with that?
This is less the case within other martial arts you mention because they are using techniques designed to do what they do, and they do it well.
So you don’t use Wing Chun techniques the way they are designed to be used?
Boxers and Muay Thai fighters do what they do well, and that’s fine. VT just has a different approach to fighting. Those who don’t know any better look at it incorrectly and use training methods from other arts that don’t mix
Seems the Wing Chun guys in the vids I posted have a similar approach to fighting as Boxers and Muay Thai fighters…at least as far as some of their training methods. And it seems that they are mixing these “training methods from other arts” into their routine quite well! Are you saying that Duncan Leung, Alan Orr, and Ernie Barrios “don’t know any better” and “look at it incorrectly”???
