JKD-Training Progression-Teaching Changes?

[Chad W. Getz]

This has been on my mind for the past year specifically as more and more people are expressing interest in stickfighting-DB style, basically, and it got me thinking to post this reading on another thread about JFJKD and JKD, etc..

When we first started training in closing the gap, we developed some drills that were veryt simple and utilized basic principles. When the guys got better, the drills changed to suit the skill levels. When the guys got better, the drills changed again, becoming harder contact oriented, etc.

The question is, since most of the fighters started with drill #1 and progressed into drill 2, than 3, 4, so forth, should the new students come in and learn this way, or go straight into drill 4, current training method. The current closing drills can be done slowly, than progressed to wearing gear, so it's not like the guys just jump in and start swinging at each other from day one. In my experience, I notice that guys do pick up the old drills and are ready to progress much faster than us first timers did.



Just testing this picture function.
...cool, now I've got it.

[Kevin]

Hi Chad,

Good topic!

I have given this some of thought too...
How to train the new guy while still pushing the more experienced athlete?

Have everyone start off at the basic level and progress as far as their experience dictates. The newer guys will stop at a lower level than the more experienced athlete. Some drills allow for the trainees to do the same drill while working at different levels. For example if you have two guys(newbie & vet) moving around defending random strikes... the newbie might only work on blocking the strikes, while the "vet" will block, block & counter, evade, evade & counter, intercept, etc... Even if the drills don't allow for different experince levels, the "vet" can always work his basics, focusing on detail. Not a totally bad thing... basics are paramount! We can all benefit by polishing them... and sometimes the less experienced can jump up a level.... won't kill them, and they will enjoy working the new material.

Oh well.... that's what comes to mind immediately. I reserve the right to totally revamp my thinking at any given moment!

Later...
~Kev

[Chad W. Getz]

Kev,

I had something different in mind. Meaning that I think the original closing drills that we started with are now obsolete. It started with a very static stance that worked only the timing factor with no distance or energy. While all drills can be done from light to hard and at different levels, the early and current drills are both under this category, but I feel the old ones may not be worth even doing for beginners because the lessons and attributes trained with the current drills encompass the few lessons or attributes that would be gained from doing the early drills.

Logic would tell me to start with the first one and let them graduate to the more current ones as their skill increases and they are ready, BUT I can also say that my observation and personal experience TELLS me that actually sparring will get anyone better, faster, so possibly harder drills broken down could be the answer from the start. I have had people train with me with no MA experience and start with the progression of:

1. Throw light strikes at each other
2. No wind sparring
3. Sparring with gloves, elbow pads, mask, and one knee pad against each other.

They had poor technical skill with closing, but experience showed them that they didn't need much skill to succesfully close on each other. this made them good fighters against each other, but when fighting against those of us that actually train, their whole game went out the window. I know both ways are effective, but which way is more efficient? I think I just spoke back to my own mind there. Anyway, any thoughts?

[HungryWolf21]

I kinda know what you are saying. I started to coach one of my friends in boxing. I started him out slowly, but it did not take long for me to progress him to more advanced drills and concepts. It seemed that he learned better when we moved around a lot and did light contact than when we were doing no contact and limited movement. He became more relaxed and more focused.

I think that new students can be exposed to more advanced drills early in their training. I feel that the progression in learning lies in the amount of contact and speed rather than the drills.

[Kevin]

Hi Chad...

I'm still not exactly sure what your question is?

>>BUT I can also say that my observation and personal experience TELLS me that actually sparring will get anyone better, faster...<<

So... is your question "Should sparring completely replace drills?"

I think that there is definitely a place for drills, but don't over emphasize them IMO. If you want to get good at drills.... drill alot. If you want to get good at fighting.... fight alot!

I like to start off the basics (footwork, strokes, hitting the bag, defense), work a couple drills (evade & counter, block & counter) and then go right into light sparring. This gives the trainee the basic idea of what he is trying to do, and then he gets a chance to apply it. When weaknesses appear... I go back to drilling that weakness and return to sparring. I also will drill new concepts (interception, etc...) to introduce them, and then return to sparring.

>>possibly harder drills broken down could be the answer from the start.<<

Or are you wondering if your drills should evolve?

Hard to comment on your selection of drills, since I don't know what your old drills, and your new drills consist of. Do I think that your drills should evolve. Indubitably!

I wholeheartedly agree that sparring will make someone better.... faster.

As Matt Thornton said (to paraphrase).... take one guy and have him hit the pads and do all kinds of drills for three months, and take another guy and have him spar for three months.... have the two guys fight at the end of those three months and I'll put my money on the sparring guy every time!

~Kev

[Chad W. Getz]

>>>>BUT I can also say that my observation and
>>personal experience TELLS me that actually sparring
>>will get anyone better, faster...<<

>>So... is your question "Should sparring completely replace drills?"

Not by a long shot. That's why I wrote the last paragraph about the three guys that could fight each other well, but lost their game when fought those of us that train 7 days a week, while listening to the wifes and girlfriends complaining about watching "that stupid fight tape" again. They could fight good against each other and would handle new guys impressively with the experience alone, but of course, the guys that train hard drills gain the experience of a hundred power shot backhands during the at particular drill, while the fighters might only experience 3 out of every 5 fights that he has. I would like to say that drilling makes a fighter better. If you don't train realistically (realistcally doesn't have to mean real rattan and no glove or no gear, it can also mean padded sticks with gloves AND the right mindset).

Here's an example of the progression in closing drills:

First drill started with two guys facingeach other doing three stick meets stick strikes as high forehand, low backhand, high backhand (as a #3 in some siniwalli sets), but done only with one hand(your right) because you are training single stick. You do this and try to enter into the high backhand (#2 angle) with a palis palis movement. The closing game holds alot of deflections and blocks and charging with it against the strikes to enter. They would train this slowly and learn the principles of palis palis as a charging close.

(Threre are a few more drills in between this one andthe next one, but eventually it becomes:

Both guys wearing gear and one person feeds two angles, one enters.

Again there are a few more drills in between and then.

Eventually the drills became where more precision was used to link long range and closing drills together, and also including working stick clinching.

Etc., etc.

>>>>possibly harder drills broken down could be the
>>answer from the start.<<

>Or are you wondering if your drills should evolve?

My drills change like every week. LOL. That's why it's so hard for me to teach. This week, it's this, next week it's that. The students will get too confused by me.

What I meant was should I show them the first drill, have them work that one, than moe to the second one that I did, than the third, fourth, etc. or should I just keep them working the same drills that everyone else is working, at possibly a lower level of speed and power or targets. Some of the early drills, I would discard as obslete now. But, they were a part of my building. I know some of the older drills. The drills I do, don't involve patterns, but involve working counters or entrys against real strikes at various levels or speeds. For example, A leg shot counter drill would have an attacker with a mask, thick hockey gloves, forearm pads, elbow pads, and heavy mask trying to attack a man with a hard knee pad and a shin guard. The only attack the attacker can use is a horizontal of diagnol hit to the leg, and the only "counter" that the defender can do is to strike the stick, arm, hand, or head. This drill would include faking, distance, timing, power shots, and jabs, etc. There's a vid of this drill on the site.