Announcement

**sikal** · 11-01-2000, 05:31 PM

Originally posted by quietanswer
mike: yeah, that's a little odd. I have a stick in my office that I practice with..I develop as well..a 4th generation language called MAGIC. I also do web design and 3d rendering stuff. We're a consulting firm (small, small company) as well. CPA firm and we do networking and accounting software mods. I'm the developer.

Cool. Yeah, I'm not much of a graphics man. I've programmed in a lot of different languages. My primary focus these days is web development using tools like ColdFusion and PHP. I've dabbled a little with ASP and (due to several years as a VB programmer) could pick it up very quickly ... but haven't needed it yet. The stuff I've been getting paid for has mostly been ColdFusion. My personal stuff, I use PHP for.

It's a strange thing, though. I was at a seminar working with a group of people. There were 6 of us in the group and on lunch we got to talking ... all 6 of us were in the computer field. One guy was a mainframe guy, a couple of us were in web development, one guy was an analyst, one was a desktop app developer, and the last guy worked a PC help desk.

Later, Mike

**spiderchoke** · 11-05-2000, 09:21 PM

I was going to say exactly what the Kuntawman said. I mean word for word. Digging holes and water and oil. Except for in the second paragraph he used the word "if" and I would have said "when".

*(place laughter here)*

So I guess I will have to say what someone else has already said...

... Cross-training [is] an aid [to] an individual in developing his or her personal style in the arts....Many people say that you will spread yourself too thin by training in more than one art. But when you were in school, you managed to learn reading, writing, and arithmatic without completely confusing yourself, didn't you? You may have learned to drive and ride a bike. Do you look for the clutch or gas pedal if you are on the bike path pedaling along? The human brain has a tremendous capacity for assimilating, sorting and learning. The human spirit has a tremendous capacity to persevere against all odds and continue in the face of danger and adversity....
----Dan Inosanto ("What do I Teach") 1997:5-7

I do believe that it is good to have a base to start with. A good understanding of the basic techniques of any art will give a good reference point for all new information to be assimilated. Body positioning and movement will also need good reference points. However there is always an exception to every rule and you could be that exception. You must do what works best for you--individually.

Good Luck!

One Spider's Opinion

[Edited by spiderchoke on 11-05-2000 at 04:25 PM]

**Kevin** · 11-06-2000, 03:01 AM

xtraining

Hi,

I don't know if I can put this in the proper words, but....

Whenever I hear someone question whether they can add to their original system, I have to think that the only reason the "original system" system didn't contain the additional content was thru the ommision of the founder of their original system. If student A trained a pure kicking style, student B studied western boxing, and student C studied kickboxing, would A & B be better able to assimilate their material than student C?

OK, OK.... that's the over-simplistic version!

Alot of other factors come into play.... any style can over complicate the material (i.e.- a kicking style that has 1753 responses to 1753 types of attacks!), but with a properly laid out training progression, it's doable.
Granted somethings may be omitted just from a practical point of view(540 degree spinning kicks, chambered punches, etc...)

What I refer to above falls more in the line of cross training under one roof. Hopefully you can find an instructor who has already compiled a comprehensive, well-laid out program. Otherwise, you have to do your own leg work.... find and train in different disciplines, become proficient and design a system which makes sense to you.

There it is... cut and dried,
~Kev

[Edited by Kevin on 11-05-2000 at 10:03 PM]

**sikal** · 11-06-2000, 05:14 PM

Originally posted by quietanswer
right on, guys..

I agree that a style can have 7450 techniques for defense against a kick, but how many _concepts_ are present within all of those techniques? Probably not more than 10, and I think that's being liberal...

And that's exacty why I don't think a person even needs a foundation martial art (personally). Because there are only so many concepts you must learn to apply in fighting, in any style.. the difference is having the creativity/flexibility/training etc to spot them when they are available.

For example: there are many disarms, but most all of them are based on the twisting wristlock: the fact that either their wrist breaks or they drop the weapon.

show each disarm to a novice, and everyone of them is a different technique. he grows overwhelmed. he thinks "my god, I have so much to learn..every move is a world in itself"..

a good teacher (imo), however, shows the student the interconnecting string through all the pearls. he says "there is only one disarm, really, the wristlock"..though that's a simplification..

So I don't think a student needs a foundation in one _style_ so long as he has a teacher that can explain what the foundational concepts are..and then when he teaches something from a different style, still relate it to a foundational concept that has already been learned in a previous technique..

for instance. I taught my fight partner how to throw his hips when he strikes with a stick (foot, hip, shoulder, arm) ...he got pretty good at that, so when I taught him with a boxing jab, I related it to the stick, and he had very little left to learn to be throwing a decent jab. Then when I had to teach him some throws, we kept right in with that hip movement, and taught some throws revolving around that...he only learned one technique, but he learned at least 3 applications..

another example: if you guys know largo mano/siniwali with sticks, and then had someone show you how to use it with reverse grip knives, then had someone show you how it relates to throwing boxing style hooks..well you already know what I mean.

So, with that, a person doesn't need a foundation in a style..he needs a foundation in understanding certain fighting concepts, and to be shown how they intermix to form myriad techniques. then all techniques are reduced to few techniques. and eventually the few become one..

of course, I'm just reciting the tao of jeet kune do at you, really..in my own words. any JKD guy probably knows this stuff..

[Edited by quietanswer on 11-06-2000 at 11:11 AM]

I agree ... but, the easiest and quickest way (for most people) to gain an understanding of the foundational principles is by digging deep into a single system. Is it necessary? No ... but I think it's the best way for the majority of people. Once they have the foundational understanding, then they can pick up anything very quickly.

I agree completely with you (and, in fact, what you describe is how I was raised in MA) ... but when I look at it objectively, I say that building your foundation in one system is the easiest for most people.

What I don't mean by this, though, is that one should study one system to the exclusion of everything else while building the foundation ... not at all. I feel it is best to *focus* one a core system while still getting exposed to other systems. And, while being exposed to other systems, constantly look for similarities between the core and the other.

The bottom line, though, is that an understanding of the underlying principles must be gained. How one gains this is, in my opinion, up to personal preference :-)

------------------------------------------------
Shifting gears, here and taking a tangent.
Now, to your comment on disarms:
I see what you're saying ... but I don't think your description covers all the disarms that I've seen.

Your wrist lock analogy can be used to describe the majority of the disarms I've seen ... but not all. For instance, the leverage and vine disarms don't ... nor do some of the peeling disarms.

In my mind, though, there are 3 basic fundamentals when affecting a disarm. You affect the thumb directly, you affect the thumb indirectly, or you pull the stick straight out (i.e.: like a peg out of a hole) while preventing the hand from following.

Thumb based disarms directly affect the thumb (and cover your wrist lock methodology).

Snake, harness, vine, leverage, and peeling disarms indirectly affect the thumb (snakes, some of the harnesses, and some of the peels also fall into your wrist lock).

Pull out disarms don't affect the thumb and aren't a wrist lock.

Here again, though, I run into the problem of not being able to "show" what I mean by these different terms.

Regards, Mike

**double ouch** · 11-09-2000, 07:07 PM

Thanks for all of the thoughtful responses. It is amazing what a wealth of knowledge and experience is out there!

Announcement

question about crosstraining

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment