Alteration with an eye toward preservation

[ShoriKid]

I have a question that I haven't come up with an answer to on my end just yet. Well into the theoretic realm.

If you were put in charge of the cirriculum of your school how would you change things. Your two goals are as follows; increase the combative nature of the average lesson and increase the combative effectiveness of the average student. Second, do not alter the style so much that it loses core consistancey or can no longer be identified as the original system. You can change things, but in the end, Shotokan should still be Shotokan as an example. And anyone familiar with the system should readily see it.

Now, what do you change? Is is the training methods only? Style content or alteration of technique? Is a core philosophical change enough to make this change?

To establish a definition of what "combative" means I will say, in this case, it is the following. To be applicable in a self defense encounter. This will cover anything from the "consentual combat/ego fight" to group assualt.

By the "combative effectiveness" I mean core proficiency and ability of the average student to apply the art. They don't have to "win" encounters, but they should fair substancially better during a fight. This means at least taking less damage and upping their survivability. You can't win them all, but if you can walk out of a fight on your own, or with minimal help, in RL that's better than you would have done in many cases.

[Ranpu]

wow, thats a good question, but I would say, just do more classes helping with speed and blocking, because then, a person can block most attacks in a fight, and you can do that untill your opponent is tired, so you'll be unharmed, other then that, I would be at a lose for a solution too.

[tallgeese]

This one's kinda hard for me simply due to my backgournd. Preservation has never been at the forfront of my mind. Still, there are constantly things I'm doing and trying as part of my set up. Plus there are things I've seen other people do over the years that are along the lines of what you're talking about.

-Getting rid of any "chambering" actions associated with striking or blocking. all hands should be moved to the head.

-Remove all static blocking and move to a movement oriented defensive scheme where the attacking limb AND the target (you) both move.

-Add spontenatiy drills when applicable. No matter what movements you're using they should be applicable on the spot not simply in one-step set ups.

- Use of mitts and shield in realistic attack and defesne patterns. Again, no mater the movement keep both parties moving as if in a fight whenever possible.

-Train to stirke thru the targets, not at the surface.

-Contact sparring of some sort, sometimes at least.

-Move from a technique based strategy (x black to counter y attack) to a priciple based one.

-Get away from stances during any self-defense portion of training that cause you to be immobile in any way.

-Cross train in arts that compliment weaknesses in your own. Acknowledge where you got the info from and integrate it into your syllibus.

-Add modern weapons training to your platform. If you like trad weapons, keep doing them. Add knives, sticks, and guns to the syllibus. Get training needed to add these if you haven't done it before.

-Use "rounds" during sparring and drilling to keep the intensity up and the rest down.

That 's just some thoughts on the subject. Im certain that there are plenty of other things that could come up. These are the ones that jump out at me.

[bushido_man96]

This is a great topic. I like this.

For TKD, I would change the sparring approach, first and foremost. I'd still probably do some tournament type of training for those wanting to compete, but it wouldn't be my focus.

I think that basics/kihon are good to keep, because they teach good movements for developing power.

Although tallgeese doesn't like the chamber motions of strikes and blocks, if trained properly, it can be useful as a flinch-style cover, prior to technique execution.

I would find applications for forms training that would lend itself to self-defense more. Reading books and experimenting with the moves, and with scenarios. I did one with the simple knife hand strike in class last week, and I thought it went really well.

Introducing some combatives from some of the RBSD stuff that I do from time to time comes to mind, as well.

I'm sure I can think of a better way to line this out, given some time. I really think that this is something that can be done by just about any style.

[JohnC]

Although I agree with Tallgeese, your original question limited things to working within the given system's approach (e.g. specific blocking motions, formal stances).

Assuming an Okinawan / Japanese Karate based system (as I don't know TKD, Hapkido and the various Kung Fu styles except in passing), then my short answer would be: return to the techniques / applications that were originally taught in Okinawa / Japan and get rid of most / all of the techniques that have been added since generation O and 1. One can look at traditional kata and bunkai to see techniques and applications. Second, use modern sports science and teaching theory to train the content instead of traditional methods where the methods conflict.

My two cents.

PS. I'd point out however that any art that doesn't seriously address all three segments of the fight (standing, grappling and ground) is incomplete, no matter how wonderfully it addresses the subset, imo.

[tallgeese]

Good point. I guess it depends on how far you're willing to stretch the boundries of change and what you'll call identifiable.

John's method of going to the source is a good one as well.

[DWx]

I don't think I would change a great deal content wise as I think there is a fair bit to work with, just maybe the approach that is taken. I can't really speak for every school in the style but I would like to see a lot more focus on application work as in general it tends to be that a technique will be explained and situations that it can be applied to but when you practice it, its really formalized and doesn't translate that well to sparring. What I mean is like you'll get taught that a low block applies to these types of attack and then you'll practice it against a variety of attacks but these'll all be in proper stances and to target areas. I'd like to see it practised more often in a bit of a more free environment, bit like a self defense spar kinda thing..

[Tiger1962]

For starters, I would incorporate a lot more weapon defense and using a variety of weapons also: knife, bat, gun, pipe, etc.

If someone has a gun pointed at your face, I don't know if there's much you can do no matter how trained you are, HOWEVER, I'd still train students ways to try and get control of it, nonetheless. (My theory being: better to know it, than to not know it at all).

I'd also probably get someone who would be willing to put on one of those padded suits and practice real life attack situations with the students.

This is what I would ADD; I wouldn't necessarily REMOVE what we do so far.

[joesteph]

This is what I would ADD; I wouldn't necessarily REMOVE what we do so far.

This is a good point; I feel the same way.

I'd add a light contact sparring day that would be at least once a month, which would be voluntary and follow the non-contact wishes of those who take Soo Bahk Do because it is non-contact.

I'd increase the joint locks emphasis.

[bushido_man96]

Something I thought of tonight after class, when I was having one of those "if it were my school, I might try it this way" epiphanies...was what about doing a block training, like, say, take a month and work on knife defenses. Take a month after that to block off for ground fighting. Block the next month for something else. Doing this might also allow one to arrange for instructors that tend to specialize in different areas to be scheduled for appearances.