I cannot agree with these catagories. The dualism may be useful in making a point, but it does not exist in real life.
Some instructors who compete and train hard cannot teach. Some who only talk may be old and bring valuable experience to the training, although I have never seen the extreme as mentioned here. Young people who only talk theory are usually trying to prove how smart they are and will probably be bad teachers.
Everyone who teaches will have his prejudices and blind spots. If they also have good skills or experience, learn from them.
Do not try to emulate your teachers. Try to rediscover what they found.
I am not challenging anyone’s freedom. When it comes to learning, either you have it or you don’t. I am talking about the learner’s ability and intelligence.
I am not challenging anyone’s freedom. When it comes to learning, either you have it or you don’t. I am talking about the learner’s ability, intelligence, and initiative.
[QUOTE=RWilson;1178902]Vital points is not the same as hundreds of acupuncture points. You do not have to know acu to know that hitting a guy in the throat will screw him up. Hitting places that are more sensitive than others falls into this too. But spefic acupoints is not for fighting.
Where are these supposed dim mak masters?[/QUOTE]
Actually, there are vital points and then there are incapacitating points so yes, they do have something to do with each other.
You need to realize that not all points are for strikes and not all are for empty hands.
The issue it seems is that you have been exposed to some pretty bad (unqualified) teachers.
[QUOTE=RWilson;1178824]I have come across two different kinds of teachers.
One teaches how to do skills. He teaches you how to throw and lets you throw him. He teaches you how to hit and then sends you to the bag. When teaching throws he teaches you how to create momentum and shows how momentary body mechanics help. This teacher emphasizes conditioning and makes it part of his class. This is how student learn how to do it on their own. This teacher is good.
Here is the other kind of teacher I have come across. This teacher sucks. He talks about what magic acu points to press on before throwing the guy, he has you strike him slow and then super speed counters, you have to fall for him because he is too old to throw you but still believes he can, he extracts techniques from forms and demos on arm hangers. He talks about static positions when “trapping” in striking and says, “if he moves here I move here. It is so easy”. He does not freestyle with you. This teacher may or may not believe in conditioning but says you should do it on your own but the truth is he stopped years ago. He talks about how this helps a smaller person beat the bigger stronger person.
Have you guys come across these kinds? Which did you prefer?
The biggest reason for the two teachers is that the first teacher still competes. He is with it. The second teacher either never competed/fought or he did so in his youth. He allowed his actual training to stagnate and sat around thinking all day about how to apply instead of actually applying.[/QUOTE]
Agreed.
The first teacher is a good teacher.
The second teacher is “too deadly for the ring.” He’s probably also fat and out of shape and all his techniques involve your opponenet leaving their arm outstretched after throwing a punch.
