OneKickWonder

I followed the link to the special training bit. It reminded me of the cobra kai sensei from original Karate Kid. But seriously, the most intense physical and mental exercise the students have ever faced? And to be allowed on it your sensei gets to decided if you're physically fit for it. That probably works for people in their 20s in peak condition. As a mid 40s chap there's no way on God's earth I'd be allowing anyone else to judge my readiness to embark upon any intensive physical training, unless that person was a highly qualified doctor or medical consultant and had carried out at least a basic physical assessment involving blood pressure and heart rhythm checks. Of course your sensei will have protected himself. He'll no doubt have got all students to sign a medical declaration for the records, where you all say you're fine to train, so that's all OK.

This worries me if it's true, because it means that masters of bygone times were as useless in a fight as any of modern times. I'm afraid I've missed your point. Why exactly would they be useless in a fight? The founders applications (Tichiki) are what created the Kata. The Kata is made from individual or sequenced applications that had been perfected and battle proven. If you are speaking of what we call literal translations of the Kata this is not the true applications. This is merely to teach the student proper timing, body mechanics, balance and how to utilize the basic foundation that every art teaches. Maybe I confused you in telling you that we teach this after the founders applications. Most teach basic first so I could understand if this is the source of confusion. We actually teach them the founders first so that their foundation is in the true meaning so as not to create bad habits or misinformation of what the Kata contains and represents. Please clarify your statement so I can answer it if I have not already done so. No it does not. Each (founders) movement or sequence of movements may have 1 or 20 (just to use a round average) applications that it represents. This harkens back to the argument that all you need is Kumite. The point is within each Kata (keep in mind that one Kata was literally an art and all the arts techniques and applications were contained within) there are 100's or even 1000's of techniques and applications. Kumite comes from Kata because Kata is the art itself. You are limited by what you can learn in Kumite and will only accumulate so many techniques were as the Kata teaches you to look outside of the box of punch, kick, block and give you an understanding of all of the other elements that make up your art. These elements are efficient and battle tested. Again you are speaking of the most generic and basic understanding of the Kata, the whole punch, block and kick understanding. Having said that if you understand the Kata and what it is telling you, the most basic techniques can end the fight. Lets take a simple strike in the Kata (Any strike, it really doesn't matter). The Kata tells us where to strike and how to strike correctly, as long as your teacher or his did not change or alter it. The study of Kata goes well beyond the foundational basics that beginners are taught. If you understand the elements that make up your art and understand how to extract them from the Kata so that you can study them you would realize that the Kata is vast with knowledge of combat effectiveness. This is why you can study a single Kata for 10 years and not have scratched the surface. Again I'm not totally sure of where you are coming from but I believe I have addressed this. If not please clarify. To further clarify my statements above; I spoke of the elements of your art. In my art the elements are as follows; 1. Atemi (percussive impact) - these are strikes, punches and kicks. Tuidi (Qin Na) - This is locks, chokes, traps, joint locks, breaks, submissive hold, grappling or laymens terms controlling the opponents body by manipulating it to induce pain and discomfort. Chibudi (Kyusho or Dim Mak) - vital area targeting. Muto (Tegumi) - this is throws, takedowns, sweeps and off balancing techniques. Chi'gwa (ground fighting) - fighting from the ground in order to get back to your feet. Not to be mistaken with MMA or Jujutsu. These come from various sources such as Ti (Di, Ti'gwa), Jiao Li, Qin Na, Dim Mak, Muay Boran, etc. Some Kata were passed down to the founders and others were created from lessons learned studying under different arts. The key to it is if you look to old (ancient) arts you will find that the art was housed in one or two Kata (Hsing). If this is true, and I believe it to be based on my experiences, then you can understand how the Kata is anything but limiting. Its vast in its secrets and the knowledge contained within. If you have never had an instructor teach you the true applications it's hard to imagine but it goes far, far beyond just basic punches, strikes, kicks and blocks. Oh and you find out there is no such thing as a block in terms of the definition used today. Hope that helps. I have a feeling that you and I actually agree. Except what you are calling applications, I'm calling principles. What I mean by that is principles of moment, principles of body mechanics, principles of balance and the shifting of weight etc. In this sense, I'd agree, that the application is literal. Where we'd disagree is if you were saying that each move is literally what we see in the form. A high block against an unrealistic straight punch, a really awkward block from a terribly awkward and unstable cross stance etc. On that one, I was once told that the awful sideways block from a cross stance in passai is a backfist strike. If that's the case, I don't want it. It can't work. You'd never choose a weak position over many stronger ones. Yer that same awkward position happens naturally when you receive a certain takedown, and if you catch that takedown early enough, you can save and counter it using the very awkward move that appears in passai. Perhaps there are other applications. But the principles taught serve to resist the takedown just long enough to regain a strong stance from a weak off balance one you'd be in at the moment your opponent gets the lock on for throw.

So long as you’re working hard, meeting your teacher’s expectations, and being respectful (ie not saying “this would never work), I hate to say it but I don’t see a problem. Not everyone in the dojo is there to be the next ultimate fighter. Everyone’s got their reasons for joining and staying, and none of them are inherently wrong. I look around the dojo I train at, and I can tell who’s there for the exercise, who’s there to socialize, who’s drinking the Kool-Aid, and who’s there to fight (in a good way). None of that makes any of those people not worthy of being there. That said, there’s no where else to train that better fits your expectations? I watched my teacher the other day, set the class off doing a form, then turn his back on the class while he spoke to another instructor about something completely unrelated. I notice these things more than ever because I'm currently sidelined due to injury. This might go some way to explaining why I don't get corrected as much as I did in other styles, despite me knowing there is a lot of correcting to be done. I know I'm a very long way from perfect, do if I'm not being corrected it means one of two things. Either it's not perfect but it's on the right track, which is what I used to think, or its not perfect but nobody is watching. As for somewhere else to train, I'm sure there is. There's plenty of clubs in the area. But right now I feel disillusioned with martial arts in general. I have yet to find one that isn't fundamentally flawed. They all seem to assume that you have a fully working body free of faults. The flaw there of course is its about combat at the end of the day. Advice like 'keep moving all the time, stay light on your feet' etc is great. Until you consider that in a real fight, your enemy is going to try very hard to make you physically defective, and he only needs one half decent leg kick and all your footwork and agility and solid structure goes out of the window. Or there's BJJ which seems to be the only one that considers that. However while they're considering the ground game, they seem to ignore the multiple attacker scenario or the possibility of weapons being used.

I've done a lot of soul searching lately. I currently practice a style that is not real world practical, and has such ridiculous sparring rules that it's just cardio. I've decided I'm either too old or grown too disinterested to pursue more real styles, such as the wado I miss so much ( do I miss wado? Or do I miss being young and athletic, I don't know). But I love the club and the people in it. Would I be in some way insulting my instructor if I train just for the fitness and fun?

This worries me if it's true, because it means that masters of bygone times were as useless in a fight as any of modern times. Why? If the applications are meant to be taken at face value, then this suggests that the person that made it up expects us to believe that genuine violence follows a nice predictable pattern. It does not. It assumes that you can tell someone that 'when your attacker throws a straight punch with his right hand towards your head from arms length away at this angle while his other hand does nothing and there are no weapons involved and you see it coming, then you can easily block it like this then punch him in the torso and end the fight instantly'. I really, really hope that wasn't what the creators of kata / forms really were trying to tell us.

I have mixed views on this. On one hand, I totally get what you mean. Forms without understanding what you're doing is just a rather boring weird dance. There's not even any music. But here's the thing. If your instructor tells you The application, you will be biased towards that interpretation. That might stop you from exploring and finding your own applications. Another thing to consider is this. Too often we put our instructors on a pedestal. We assume they know everything. I can tell you they don't. Well some might I guess, I can't say I know every instructor. But my point is, your instructor might not know The application. He might know An application, but he might not want to share it too soon because he might want to see what you come up with all by yourself. Also, what if there is no application? Martial arts is not about techniques. Techniques can't be relied upon. Techniques carry far too many prerequisites. Techniques are just an application of principles, a shift of weight here, a rotation there. What if a form/kata was created to train these principles, rather than specific applications? Then The application simply doesn't exist, but there will be many applications of the principles conveyed.

This puts things in perspective a lot, thanks very much. My art right now is as effective and realistic as my karate was when I was doing karate. Truth be told I have some issues on how effective I think traditional martial arts are in general (e.g. who punches in zenkutsku dachi? Who chambers their other fist while punching? Isn't punching in and waiting to get counter attacked a terrible reflex to have when it comes to fighting?) , but I have a huge appreciation for their personal development and health benefits, with an added bonus of self defense/fighting on the side How effective the stances, chambered fist, and anything else like that are really depends on how it’s taught, or better yet, if it’s explained properly. This can be a really long conversation with a lot of people expressing differing opinions, so I’ll be pretty brief... Stance is your foundation. The stronger it is, the stronger your techniques are. But IMO people focus way too much on the end of the stance, or better yet the pose. During kata, a teacher counts and the students complete the step. What’s focused on and gets corrected? The end pose; stuff like “deeper stance” “the block ends here” and so on. IMO where it ends up is irrelevant; it’s how you got there. Take a 180 degree turn from and into zenkutsu dachi while performing a low block. If you’re familiar with Pinan 1 or Taikyoku 1, you know exactly what I mean here. If you interpret the low block as a joint lock, and the strong step backwards and twist/pivot into zenkutsu dachi as spinning/throwing/unbalancing your attacker, it all makes sense to use that stance. If you’re interpreting that move in that kata as turning around and blocking a kick from a guy behind you, that move is just dumb. If you look at kiba dachi/horse stance, it’s all about dropping your weight, especially when you’ve got someone all joint locked up. What I’m getting at is the emphasis of stances should be while they’re in motion and not at the end pose. If the teacher is focusing on the end pose, the stances are not worth much more than aesthetics. You're 100% right. Who's going to chamber a punch (pulling your other hand to your waist or ribs), or move using zenkutsudachi transitions in a real fight though? Even in karate sparring we adopt a more natural stance and keep our hands up... That's the thing with 'traditional martial arts'. The training is full of lies. But the lies are there for a reason (an outdated reason in my opinion but the intention is well meaning). Stances are not meant to be used in combat. Stances train muscles to be strong and flexible, and teach principles that support good balance and agility. The classic front stance with all its variants for example. It's not very natural. But what does it teach? It teaches us that a bent front knee for example is harder to break, and a locked out back leg makes you harder to knock backwards. And it teaches us to lower our centre of gravity. That makes us more stable and agile, and is important because it goes against the natural instinct to make ourselves big, like you see drunken idiots do when they have a stand off and they stretch their chest out and practically go on tip toes and basically do everything to look big while in fact making themselves very vulnerable. Probably why do many drunken fights end after a single untrained punch. Chambering after a punch has many purposes. One of which becomes immediately obvious if you look at a grappling style like aikido, or even tai chi. The chambered hand is not about to do something. It is there because it has just done something. Imagine intercepting a punch with an in to out block, trapping it, pulling it down to the hip, which takes advantage of the momentum already in the punch, while putting you on the outside of the line of attack, where you are now in a position to go for an arm bar, or simply strike the side of the head.

Martial arts is big business now. Even the name Shaolin has come to mean corporate circus. Does that mean it's not a real martial art? Do they teach principles that could work in combat? And do you come away fitter, faster, stronger, and more coordinated than you started?

My family. I want to remain fit enough to be a fun dad to my young kids. I don't like sport, and I can't get into solo exercise or the gym, and there are no decent dance classes in my area. Martial arts interest me, it's social and it's a fairly comprehensive workout.

MatsuShinshii, I agree with your distinction between the two. Some people are predisposed from birth to be braver than others. It is a character trait, much like some are born faster, or stronger, or more intelligent, etc. However, courage is something you can build in yourself and train to make yourself better. The best way to do this is to constantly put yourself out of your comfort zone. Do things that make you uncomfortable so that, once you accomplish the task, you realize you can succeed in this type of environment. Bravery is naivety. It is the ability to do something that blind faith alone has you believe possible. Youngsters tend to be brave, because they foolishly believe they are indestructible. Older folks are often less brave because they've seen or felt enough consequences over the years to know better. Courage is different. Courage is the determination to do what you perceive to be necessary no matter what. I agree on the point about put yourself outside of your comfort zone. Incidentally this is also how one tackles issues like phobias and anxiety.

Same with us. But specifically to the bold, yes we're encouraged to practice to. But here's the problem. Outside of class, your friends may not be fellow martial artists. Even the ones that are, may not be a comparable size and strength. For a middle aged family man, who happens to be naturally quite big, and naturally fairly strong from a lifetime of enjoying manual outdoor activities, it's nigh on impossible to find a willing training partner to train with outside of class, that can offer measurable resistance. In my case there's my wife. She is a fellow martial artist so willing to practice, but I can only go super easy, because in terms of size, strength and skill level, she is no match. But even if I was nasty enough to go at even 50% that would be no test of my skill. Some of our take downs only work against a comparable opponent if they're done right. I could pick my wife up and throw her down with one hand if I wanted to, she only ways about 50kg. All of this is why I pay money to attend classes. There is will find a mix of people of different strength and weight and ability. If we do one step, I can find someone about my size. Or if I get a choice before everyone else partners up, I get get someone stronger and more skilled than me. That's a perfect opportunity to test against resistance and learn as I do so. Or if I and someone else want to, I could end up with someone weaker. Then I can play the thug for them to practice subduing a larger attacker. The opportunities in class are far reaching, if the required training opportunities are presented. Sadly in our case, we get a few minutes per week. Way not enough in my opinion.

Who’s to say someone can’t do both, kata as “a weird pantomime” AND “practiced correctly with intent?” Would it be heresey to do a push-up between each count during one phase of class, and do kata as however one defines training it correctly during another phase of class? Doing it in non-traditional/other ways alongside alongside doing it any other way isn’t desecrating it by any means. They weren’t handed down by God or any other deity with explicit instructions to only use them for one single purpose. The bold bit put a smile on my face. I wish I dared tell that to certain people and organisations I know.

I don't think calisthenics are just warmup exercises, unless I've misunderstood something (always possible). My understanding is that calisthenics is the study of exercise through movement against resistance from your own bodyweight. Ie exercise that physically conditions and strengthens but requires no equipment. Basically any exercise, but with a healthy dollop of science on top to ensure that the conditioning is targeted rather than sort of haphazard. Forms seems to be the perfect candidate for that.

Doesn't that defeat the purpose of kata? Outside of karate, hyung or forms are about the flow from one position to the next. All those lovely stances we practice that serve no purpose if you can't move effectively between them, become relevant in forms as we get to see and feel how they fit into movement. Surely punctuating every move with a pushup must disturb that flow does it not? I buy that, and doing the one move/one press-up thing probably isn’t the “ideal” way to practice a kata. But mixing that in occasionally IMO could be a good way to work on building “strong spirit”, especially if it’s done multiple times in a row. Plus the benefit of doing the calisthenics. I could see it. Fair point. Which kind of gets me thinking. All that getting up and down off the floor, will help to get used to being down and getting up which of course is par for the course in combat. This further gets me thinking, given that in a realistic fight, it's normal that about half of it will be spent on the floor, in martial arts we practice sending people to the floor, so I wonder if there are any kata/forms that cover getting up asap from the very vulnerable position of being knocked/thrown down. I haven't seen any, but that's not to say that there aren't any. I'm aware that there are many kata/forms in existence that I've not had exposure to.

Doesn't that defeat the purpose of kata? Outside of karate, hyung or forms are about the flow from one position to the next. All those lovely stances we practice that serve no purpose if you can't move effectively between them, become relevant in forms as we get to see and feel how they fit into movement. Surely punctuating every move with a pushup must disturb that flow does it not?

I have a history of depression and anxiety too. Many people do. It's actually quite common. I'm sure you know already that sometimes you just have to do what you know will help you feel better for a while, even if you really really feel like putting it off. Ask yourself, when you put it off, are you making excuses or are your reasons genuine. Foot pain, get some decent supportive trainers to cushion your feet and bit. Talk to your instructor, see if he has any opinions on what he'll allow when kicking pads etc. A low profile sole perhaps, and keep them exclusively for inside the dojang. That way everyone knows you're not dragging in muck from outside. Hypermobility - sorry, can't help with that. Schedule - you know you'll get back into it quickly. Once it becomes routine again it will just be normal. Back to the first bit, please don't let issues at work affect your private life. I did that for a few years. It nearly ruined me. Work is where you go to trade some of your time and expertise for money. Sure it's great if you also enjoy it, but primarily you go there to sell something (a bit of your time and energy). Having fulfilled your side of the bargain for one day, you leave work, and your time is for you and those you choose to share it with.

Do abs exercises ever become easy? I hate doing abs exercises. Consequently my abs are pretty weak, for a martial artist at least. But catch 22, because my abs are pretty weak, I find abs exercises very hard. I know exercise is supposed to be hard. But take pushups. When I left training alone for too many years then went back, I struggled to manage even the minimum set of 10 pushups. But I persisted, and now I can benchmark myself against various military fitness criteria and on the pushups side of things, I'd pass any fitness test. But I can't say the same about situps or crunches. They really burn me out, and although I have made some progress with them, I've made nothing like the progress I've made with other exercises. I want strong abs and am happy to put in the work to get them, but I believe in seeking efficiency in everything. My current abs exercises clearly are not efficient because it's a lot of work for minimal gain. Any suggestions?

The many other reasons aside, why does that matter? Someone doesn’t have to be great at it to teach it effectively. Mike Tyson could’ve absolutely destroyed Cus D’Amato and Kevin Rooney. But those guys could watch Tyson, evaluate his strengths and weaknesses, and get him to perform far better. Not to mention coming up with an effective strategy for each opponent. Same can be said for any coach of any sport. The coach doesn’t have to be a great player; he/she has to be a great coach. My former teacher was one of the best martial artist I’ve ever been around. He was fast, strong, smart, and his technique was as flawless as anyone I’ve been around. But what good would that do if he couldn’t teach me? It wouldn’t do much more than entertain me. He was a very good teacher too, but that’s besides the point. My current teacher has some physical impairments. He needs yet another hip replacement, but is putting it off for as long as he can. Needless to say he can’t kick very well and he’s not very mobile. I’ve only sparred with him once, and there was no question in my mind why he’s a 7th dan. He was very crafty. My former sensei was significantly better physically than my current teacher. But my current teacher is a far better teacher - he’s seen my flaws and given me far better feedback and corrections. He’s made me a far better karateka. My former teacher was no slouch by any means. The teacher has to be a good teacher. Their own physical skills are irrelevant so long as they can get you to perform your best. I agree 100% with all of the above. Now imagine this scenario. You are being taught a technique. Attacker does this, so defender does this. OK fine. So what if when I'm applying this technique, attacker does this? He won't. Why? Because he's not a martial artist, he's a moron. OK, so what if he throws a punch with his spare hand? He won't. Why? Because you'll take him down before he realises what is happening. What if he's strong, or in the heat of combat I miss the technique? You won't. It will just work. Imagine hearing that many times. Then imagine, being picked out to be demonstrated on. You feel a lock going on. You don't like it. Instinctively you escape it without effort. As soon as you do you remember that that you're at the front and lots of people, paying students, are watching. So you slot your arm back in, squeal appropriately, and despite the complete absence of pain, tap the floor frantically just to avoid undermining the teacher. Imagine this happening many times. Not just once. If you can imagine all of that, then I'm sure you'll see that while I respect my chief instructor as a person and a fellow martial artist, and am happy to keep going for the camaraderie and the exercise, I'm looking elsewhere for the actual training.

I reckon I could defeat my chief instructor with minimal effort. That's just one of many reasons why I'm looking elsewhere.

You get to practice lots of rolls in Aikido. It's great fun. And the reason you practice them is because sometimes it's the easiest and safest way out of a joint lock. Incidentally that's something that leads to a lot of misunderstanding about aikido when folks see people deliberately diving and rolling after the slightest touch, so people think it's fake, when in fact the dive and roll is as much part of the demo as the technique they are escaping. But anyway. Back to my point. Diving and rolling on a mat is one thing. But in the real world, I don't think I'd want to dive and roll on a concrete floor. A floor which if a fight is happening, may be covered in broken beer bottles and who knows what. So apart from the safety of the dojo, is there any use for the aikido roll? As an aside, I keep calling it the Aikido roll. I know it's not exclusive to Aikido, I'm just calling it that because I think most will know what I mean without having to offer a detailed description.

Yes. Even in line drills fighting thin air. I'm currently sidelined due to injury. But I still go and watch because my family train. Being sidelined sounds awful but it does have the advantage that you get to see it from the outside, but with inside knowledge. Everyone was training the same thing but in their own way. To take two extremes, I saw one full of contemplation. Kicking to the count, but thinking about everything. I saw another screaming out and pulling faces and looking like a total psychopath. In the case of the latter, even though he was fighting thin air, I could see in his mind he was smashing some imaginary assailant to smithereens. Of course that doesn't automatically mean he can do it for real. I know he is a weakling and a bit naive. But he's young. I know that with that level of determination in his training he'll be formidable in time.

There's a million ways to earn a living helping people. You just need to understand that there's a million ways to help. In my professional life, I was a software developer for over 20 years before transitioning to business analyst. Geeky yes? How is this helping people? Well, people spend nearly 33% of their hours at work. They spend roughly half of their waking hours there. They do the same thing, I'm the same place, among the same people all the time. They might kind of enjoy their work, but really they're there because they need to earn a living. Really they are slaves to the system. I can't release them from that. But I can make their life a bit easier if I put the right tools in place. If I can stop someone getting frustrated by a tedious task that they do once a month, then they will go home to their families less tired and in a better mood one more time per month. If I can reduce the mental burden of one task that someone does for one hour per day, then they can focus more on their colleagues that they've become friends with and less on their screens for one hour per day. This is just one example of a million. If I earned my living as a cleaner, I'd be helping people by making their environment more pleasant. If I sat at a checkout at the supermarket, I could help people just by smiling and engaging in polite chit chat as I serve them. Sounds silly, but for some people, especially the old folk, that's their social interaction for a week. I guess my point is, if you want to help people, you will help people, no matter what you choose to do. True story. About 5 years ago, my wife and I went to a new fast food place that had just opened. It had a good reputation. We ordered, we received our food, I paid up. I then immediately managed to drop my meal upside down onto the floor as I left. I didn't have enough cash to replace it. I was ready to put it down to bad luck. But the lady that ran the shop saw what happened. She replaced my lost meal for free. This was years ago, and it's still fresh in my mind. It contributed and continues to contribute to my attitude that doing a simple good thing for a complete stranger every now and then makes the world a better place. Do whatever you feel compelled to do. But do it with the attitude you will help people and if you do that, I guarantee, you will fulfil your wish of helping people.

There's a regular ongoing debate about the value of Kata in the modern day, when we don't need to condense the essence of a system into a sort of dance to preserve it anymore. We have video recording and most people can read and write now. Funakoshi makes a solid point in his book kara te do kyohan. He notes that kata enables the student to practice karate anywhere, even if no equipment or training partners are available. Any thoughts? Personally, I think kata / forms / hyung have great value. Not necessarily directly combat related. But physically they offer balance and coordination as well as general conditioning fitness training. They also offer a good opportunity to practice coordinating the breath through a full range of movements. Some find them effective as a form of meditation. I also think there is a misuse of them in the typical class. At the beginning of class, there's a range of warmup exercises and stretching. Then at some point later in the class, kata / forms are trained as important in their own right. I think we miss a trick here. I personally think a more efficient use of training time, given that we can do stretching and cardio etc outside of class, would be to use kata as the warmup stage. They can be performed at a steady pace to develop strength and balance, or with vigour for cardio. Why not start 'tai chi style', gradually step it up, then 30 minutes in you're not only warmed up and stretched off, you've also had 30 minutes of actual practice under guidance that you wouldn't get at home.

At TSD we have il soo sik, or one step sparring. Karate and other styles have the same notion under different names. Basically one person does a predetermined attack, the other does predetermined defence and counter. The idea is to isolate a technique to enable it to be drilled until it's reflex. But what is the minimum amount of time that we should consider worthwhile for practice? At wado, kung fu and aikido, we'd take maybe one or two basic technique sets, and we'd drill them over and over for at least half the class. Then we'd drill them again at the next class. To save us getting bored we'd mix it up a bit, but not much. We'd mostly practice one or two patterns until we could do it in our sleep. Here at TSD things are very different. Here we practice lots of things, but for a much shorter time. The philosophy here is more that it's about creating options rather than drilling specifics. Here one technique will get just a few minutes per class. You might get to practice one defence and counter perhaps 3 times per class, but you'll get to do that as part of a set of at least 15 different sequences.

With respect, I've heard this claim a lot, especially from BJJ fans (not only, also heard it from others including some karate fans). But I've not seen any objective evidence to back it up. I get that it seems to be common sense, but that doesn't make it true. A few hundred years ago it was common sense that the earth was flat. I think it's hard to make a fair assessment of anything in the absence of objective evidence. Within such evidence, an idea is nothing more than opinion or theory. The most common form of 'evidence' that training against resistance works is that it works in the gym or it works in competition. If we take a similar example but outside of the field of combat, the flaws in that logic become self evident. Take the jet pack or the flying car. Both have been proven viable and effective several times, within the constraints of the test environment in specific conditions. Yet looking out the window now, I'm not seeing any. Combat is perhaps the most extreme test of anything. We know from larger scale conflict (wars) that even the most highly trained soldiers meet their demise in the battlefield because something was not as they'd trained for. Such appears many times throughout history. Whether or not it is necessary to practice regularly against full resistance depends largely on the techniques you hope to use. My understanding of BJJ is nearly nil. It is limited to what I've seen in a few videos. But it looks complicated. And it looks very easy to get wring. And the consequences of getting it wrong look dire. They look like the kind of techniques that you really must practice against full resistance regularly if ever you hope to make them work in the dynamic and unpredictable heat of battle. But to punch or kick then extract yourself, this is built in human nature. Untrained people do it when they have to. They push and shove and call in knees and elbows if they have to. There's lots of evidence for this. And it is easily observed live if you know which nightclubs to stand outside of. Most punches and kicks miss completely, or miss their intended target and hit something that isn't really an effective point, like a shoulder or a glancing blow across the torso. Yet these people often manage to escape from the fifth unharmed. The very definition of self defense. If through training, you can refine this inherent built in ability to increase your accuracy and power, and at the same time become more stable on your feet and better at judging distance, then there's no way it's fair to dismiss that training, even if it's not against full resistance.