A training conundrum...

[bushido_man96]

I was thinking about our TKD training tonight. What came to my mind is that I am training in a Martial Art that is supposed to help improve my self-defense, which is usually at least a two-person event. If this is the case, then why is the bulk of what I do in class consist of individual work? Like tonight, we spent about 30 minutes on basics. Then, we spent time on forms, before getting into one-steps.

So, in a 1-hour class, nearly 40 minutes or better is spent on individual drills, as opposed to working in pairs to move with someone. The one-steps are two-person, but they are severely lacking in actual self-defense applications.

This leads me to ask, how many other practitioners out there are under the same kind of class layout, with basics first, then forms, then sparring or some kind of sparring exercises? How much time do you spend drilling with partners as opposed to the individual drilling?

Wouldn't it make more sense to spend the bulk of the class time working with partner drills?

[tallgeese]

I agree with your assessment of how time would ideally be spent, bushido man. We are training to fight, to do that you've got to be laying hands on each other.

Personally, our classes are almost exclusively conducted with two person drills. Most basic striking and such is done against mitts or shields and this is usually in some sort of dyamic fashion to help mimic fight conditions.

We do individual work, but this is usually on a solo basis away from class. Bag work and such. I do think it's useful to do some movement drills and such as indivdual work, but even then it's best to throw a second person in as quickly as possible to make the training more "live".

[DWx]

I think there's benefit to both methods. Partner work definitely has its benefits.. after all we are training to use these techniques against a real live person, not just air. There has to be some multi person drills otherwise its near impossible to translate the techniques learnt in class to an actual situation. However I think there are plenty of benefits from working solo. Solo lets you concentrate on each movement without having to worrry about someone else. Solo work is also something you can easily take away and practice at home which IMO is especially important for lower grades. One big problem I've seen is where beginners are just put into that partnered situation straight off and suddenly everything they've learnt goes out of the window. You need some sort of basics foundation of drilling the movements until they are natural and then you try to put them against someone. Of course it all depends on how the moves are being taught paired, sometimes this can be more effective. Personally I like training time to be at least weighted 50:50, solo:paired, but maybe more like 40:60.

[ninjanurse]

I always try to incorporate partner drills into everything-even basics and forms occasionally but I think solo work is just as important in developing other aspects of the arts-muscle memory, concentration, meditation, self-discipline, etc.

[JusticeZero]

I'm going to be rearranging my classes; I'm trying to decide if I should have three hour sessions rather than two. Before it was Theory, then Singing, then warmup (using stancework and breakfalls), two exercises (either paired or line), then if we had time, some sparring before cooldown stretches. I'd like more time to work on some of the exercises, though.

Sometimes the drills are partner work, but sometimes they aren't. It really depends on what we have to work on that day. If we need to drill footwork and tumbling, it's most efficient to just get lines of people au-ing, stepping, role-ing, or whatever across the floor; if I want to do FORM on the kicks, I don't want to add the complexity of there being someone in the line of fire, because I need them blasting the kicks through loosely until the flow starts to click. And then the sparring environment is itself a bit different from anything relating to self defense. I don't want to skip some of the important stuff just for the sake of adding more partner work for the sake of partner work.

[bushido_man96]

I wouldn't say that one should add partner work for the sake of partner work, but for the sake of learning to interact with someone, on some level. It doesn't have to be intense to be beneficial.

Nor am I saying that basics are not important to Martial Artists. However, even with 30 minutes of basics, I think you can still find some good, productive partner drills that can be taught, even to lower ranks, using very simple movements, like the chambering position of the knife hand strike or the middle block. Its never to early to learn to cover and counter.

Here is another example; I am a 3rd dan, and I still do the same basics in our traditional classes that the white belts do. I am not saying that I can't benefit from 40 minutes of basics up and down the floor, but I could benefit a lot more with 40 minutes of two-person drilling, self-defense work, or sparring. I realize that my school isn't like all schools, either. But, I don't think you can learn to fight or defend yourself as effectively with solo drills as you can with multi-person drills.

[BDPulver]

it depends on the night. We try to break up a routine so its not the same everynight so as not to cause boredom in the student.

[DWx]

... Here is another example; I am a 3rd dan, and I still do the same basics in our traditional classes that the white belts do. I am not saying that I can't benefit from 40 minutes of basics up and down the floor, but I could benefit a lot more with 40 minutes of two-person drilling, self-defense work, or sparring. I realize that my school isn't like all schools, either. But, I don't think you can learn to fight or defend yourself as effectively with solo drills as you can with multi-person drills.

Do you have mixed grade classes? Sometimes if you always have lower grades in the class you end up where all you're doing is lower grade stuff. Its not a bad thing on occasion but IMO higher grades ought to be doing higher "basics", more grade specific stuff otherwise the higher grades have a tendency to stagnant...

[bushido_man96]

I agree, DWx.

Unfortunately, our classes are pretty much mixed. And we just started doing some different basics, and it is tougher for the 6 new white belts we have to catch on.

[tallgeese]

I still really think that the quicker you get to two man drills the better. People have made really good points above, espically about overloading newer people and loss of precision.

I do think that these factors can be mitigated by properly structuring the drills to accomodate their level. I also am in a minority that we don't need to stress perfectin in movment initally prior to moving on in either intensity or options. An accptable facsimile of the movement will do just fine to start with. You can tighten it down as you go. Mind you, I'm not talking about wholesale sloppiness here, just and acknowledgement that, at a rudimentary level the student it processing the movement. You can now correct on the fly AND give him a more realistic feel at the same time.

These drills are often useful for training the "what if" if a movement goes arwy. This is something that basics in the air simply don't do.

I agree with using two man drills also to push basic teaching. It's easy enough to construct a two man drill that focuses on foot work and distance. Now, give one of the guys a pair of 16 oz. gloves. In round 1, you just do the movement, in round 2, he can jab, in 3, jab or hook. Now, you trainee has had three rounds of the movement drill you designed with the added realism of defending as he does so. You accomplish multiple tasks in a relitively simplistic manner. If your attacker varies his attack as well, you've also introduced a basic form of spontaneous response training in very early on. It become a very efficient way to transmit information quickly.

I think that this is much more valuable in the long term that more static basics done solo.

It does require more time to set up, more attention to what everryone is doing and, in short, is a bigger pain to put together for the instructor. But I really th ink it's worth it. It's also harder to run with differnt levels in the same room. Which m ight be part of the hold up on doing more advanced stuff, bushido man.

To get around that, try starting the paired work three or four steps ahead of where the newer guys are starting. So, if round 1 will be move for the new guys, the advanced guys should jump right to round 2 or 3 (from the above example). Then the progression could continue from here. I'll acknowledge that this is eaiser said than acutally supervised and might be more suited for the smaller class sizes I deal with than more successful commercial endevors that other might be a part of.