Good Technique leads to comprehension of the principles. For example - in throwing arts, you learn the technical aspects of the various throws, and then after you internalize the proper way - you then modify the throw based on it’s principles to work for you.
So how do you train pure “principle”?
- solo form?
- solo drill?
- sparring?
It seems to me that the moment you do 2 men drill, since your move is defined, you are not training principle. “Run your opponent down” is a principle. You can use many techniques to achieve that principle. No matter which technique that you use, when you train it (single leg for example), you are trining “technique” and “principle” at the same time. In other words, a pure “principle” training method does not exist. Do people agree with me on this?
Someone said in another thread that Bagua circle walking is “principle” training because it can “prepare” your body to do many tasks. By using that definition, a “horse stance” traing can also be called “principle” training, and it may apply on “push up” and “sit up” as well.
[QUOTE=YouKnowWho;1076952]In other words, a pure “principle” training method does not exist. Do people agree with me on this?
[/QUOTE]
You’re probably right in saying Principle can’t exist without technique. I’m sure even Yi Quan teaches techniques and that’s about as “Principle over technique Based” as you can get.
[QUOTE=YouKnowWho;1076885]We may talk about different level of “principle” here.
- If you lose, run like hell (high level principle).
- push your opponent’s head down, and sweep his feet off, he will fall (middle level principle).
- A punch on the face hurt (low level principle).
Does “principle base” training = free sparring? I’m all for free sparring, but can a boxer suddently develop his “hip throw” by using the free sparring format?
IMO, the free sparring is to “test” your skill and not to “develop” your skill.[/QUOTE]
That is how I look at it, and I agree 100%. Free sparring is just another aspect/stage of learning to fight and it is not the beginning and the end of MA training, like some people try to sell it in this forum.
YouKnowWho;
When practicing your hip throw or knee seizing throw are you not able to get your technique off using a principle or theory? When you are drilling with a partner, do you feel that it is difficult to follow principle? Looking at any throw, from any system has a theory about how to apply their way.
Look at the knee seizing clip you put up. No matter how hard or how easy it is to get your technique off, you are still using the principle behind the move. Let me explain:
Knee Seizing = Uses Yin and Yang to unbalance the opponent. Your upper hand is driving the face / head downward and backward (Yin). You lower hand is taking his leg forward and upward (Yang). No matter what happens, whether you get the technique off or not… you still used Shuai Chiao principle to attempt this move.
Almost every system around the world has a hip throw. Each system may or may not use different theory to apply this move. The only other way you can express a hip throw is thru brawling… yes even a bar room brawler can hip throw anyone without any training. To pull someone over your hip is a natural / instinctual movement that can just feel “natural” to do. However, without theory or principle behind the movement it still is only brawling.
John… you’ve been doing SC so long that principles / theorys are so natural, you may not know you’re doing them cause they come off without you thinking about it. I’m not sure why you feel that principle goes out the door when you drill with a partner?
ginosifu
[QUOTE=YouKnowWho;1076847]Many people believe that the “principle base” traing is superior than the “technique base” training. [/QUOTE]
So who are these people, and what are they calling “principle based” training?
[QUOTE=-N-;1077032]So who are these people, and what are they calling “principle based” training?[/QUOTE]
Quote from someone’s post, “Being Principle based the actual applications are infinite”.
I think we do have to learn some technques first.
as long as you are good at what you do or skillful
principles or no principles are not important.
principles are just guides to help us understand what we do.
principles are also requirements that need to be addressed when we practice.
I gotta disagree with you, SPJ. There is a benefit to being based in sound principles. You might have 100 techniques down pat, but there’s no guaranteeing that an assailant will knowthe right ways to strike at you so that you can pull them off correctly.
In fact, you can pretty much bank on it. This is one thing I don’t like about Kempo’s eight million ways to deal with a step-through punch.
Principles need to be trained in a dynamic and changing environment. That way, in a fight, you will fall back on them.
[QUOTE=Josh Oakley;1077315]I gotta disagree with you, SPJ. There is a benefit to being based in sound principles. You might have 100 techniques down pat, but there’s no guaranteeing that an assailant will knowthe right ways to strike at you so that you can pull them off correctly. [/quote]
I lean techniques based, and I think the main thing is that a system that is well designed has certain integral things that set up much of the situation needed for the more specific moves. Using bjj as an example, the guards are simple, but remove them, and I would imagine a number of the other techniques will not find much chance to occur against a skilled opponent.
So the principles are defined in the techniques, with certain techniques holding specific roles that enable or play off of other techniques, you can know the principles but not the role of each major technique in fulfilling the principles, but if you know what the major techniques fulfill, then you know the principles
In fact, you can pretty much bank on it. This is one thing I don’t like about Kempo’s eight million ways to deal with a step-through punch.
Making everything an infinite number of defenses to step through punch gets the same end effect. Some techniques are not defenses to step through punch, but if the principle is all that is concerned, and there are no concrete applications, they can potentially all be defenses to step through punches, but they cannot all be equally useful ones.
If you charted all the possible applications for each step in a principle based assessment of a form, you would have an insane number of applications, but if you only included which applications that step was best at exemplifying frequently, it seems likely you’d end up with one list with points that were used in varying ways, and points that were specific.
Principles need to be trained in a dynamic and changing environment. That way, in a fight, you will fall back on them.
A portion of what has worked will be your techniques, all fighters bring their bread and butter techniques with them, They should be flexible and do their best when unforeseen circumstances arise, but where they have time and again entrained a working technique that brings good effect, they will use it.
I’m not arguing against principles, just that they are encased in the techniques, and past a certain level, a serious practitioner must entrain them to really understand them.
Assuming you can map one principle into infinite number of techniques can only be true in theory. In reality, your body can only do certain thing that you have done over and over in your past. If you have never train your left side kick (technique), even your principle may map into your left side kick, you still won’t be able to do it.
[QUOTE=YouKnowWho;1077423]If you have never train your left side kick (technique), even your principle may map into your left side kick, you still won’t be able to do it.[/QUOTE]
But you can become a master at arguing on the internet
I think there are high and low principles…
I think every art has principles, just some are more unique than others, some are more common.
I’d hazard to suggest Pak Mei is a principle based art, at the ultimate level.
principles live or become alive with good techniques
if you suck at your techniques, principles will not save your arse.
we may talk about principles all day long.
or we may just practice techniques over and over and gain proficiency in them.
you may read and recite all principles
or you may just move your hands and steps and practice away your techniques
once you are good at your techniques
principles just bring out your understanding of your techniques more
My breakdown in my class goes in pretty much three phases:
-
Basics-Punches, Kicks, Knees, Elbows, Animal Techs, all forms of strikes are thrown in the air, with a breakdown of how, what, and why these are done.
-
Circuit Training-Bag work, mitt work, kick shield, ect so the student can hit an actual target with full power and mobility.
-
Sparring- Working and executing the technique on a resisting opponent that is trying to hit them back.
Also, I consider two man drills, and one and two step sparring in the third phase as it is sparring, just at a lighter, more controlled pace. For thows, takedowns, and submissions, I use a similiar breakdown with rolling and randori being the final phase.
Techniques teach the principals.
Ultimately, they are one and the same.
techniques are like the body
principles are like the souls
or something like that.
Greetings,
There was this old master who was observing a fighter’s techniques. the old master asked if the fighter would try his best techniques on him. The fighter complied and whacked the old master with a picture perfect left hook, knocking the old master out. The old master came to and said, “Your punch was good, but lacking in principles.” The fighter asked for guidance and the old master proceeded to provide the fighter with principles. The fighter listened astutely. When the old master finished his discourse, he asked the student to show his understanding of the principles he shared. The student went over to the master and whacked him with a picture perfect left hook, identical to the previous one, knocking the old master out. When the old master came to, he said, “You are my BEST student!!”
mickey
yes. doing is one thing
knowing is another
so know what you do
or do what you know
etc etc.
[QUOTE=mickey;1078797]Greetings,
There was this old master who was observing a fighter’s techniques. the old master asked if the fighter would try his best techniques on him. The fighter complied and whacked the old master with a picture perfect left hook, knocking the old master out. The old master came to and said, “Your punch was good, but lacking in principles.” The fighter asked for guidance and the old master proceeded to provide the fighter with principles. The fighter listened astutely. When the old master finished his discourse, he asked the student to show his understanding of the principles he shared. The student went over to the master and whacked him with a picture perfect left hook, identical to the previous one, knocking the old master out. When the old master came to, he said, “You are my BEST student!!”
mickey[/QUOTE]
That’s a good story. I had never met a single person in my life who claimed principle this and principle that and had combat skill at the same time.
Someone swings his sword and chop your head off, while your head is flying off your body, your head can’t care less what “principle” that your opponent used to send you to heaven.