Success is INVISIBLE!
Firstly, find yourself a trainer, if you do not already have one, and approach him with this question regarding the application of knee barring. Submission work, like all wrestling, is a matter of kinesthetic sensitivity. A trainer can help you FEEL movement better. Neither text nor video can help you FEEL movement, only actual training can do this. Secondly, get yourself a book on basic anatomy and physiology, and become self-educated. A "technique" is something someone created because they thought that it was successful in application... so they try and replicate the success, but replicating the specific physical sequence of events. The only problem is SUCCESS IS INVISIBLE. What made the person successful was not the discover of an immutable law, called a "technique". What made the person successful was that for a moment in time, he became a Creator (rather than a Regurgitator). He unlocked the complex web of physical variables that is always new in each situation. He created a "technique" and you can too - all the time, in each of life's ubiquitous infinity of situations. Success APPEARS to be in the technique, because that is what physically manifested at that time. But the technique was just the physical demonstration of natural laws (of mechanical advantage, leverage, gravity, etc...) It was the FEEL that is invisible. It is the FEEL that is the invisible genie behind all successful athletes and operators.
It is this bodily wisdom that you can gain by CLAIMING your right to self-education, rather than waiting for the "privilege" of being educated with someone else's dogmatic perspective of success. Find out how the body functions and dysfunctions - verify this in your textbooks - then return to your physical "laboratory" and test your new discoveries, and CREATE!
There is a saying from an old swordsman that exemplifies this... "You can see the shape by which I am victorious, but you cannot see the form by which I ensure victory." (M. Musashi)
There are many followers (and as a result, many leaders) in the world. Claiming your RIGHT to authority of your own movement mastery is the first step in emancipation from the bondage of abrasive diagrams of technical rehearsal. Achieving the autonomy to create rather than regurgitate is through seizing, rather than awaiting, an education.
A trainer can help you by creating the ideal environment conducive to your self-discovery... He can share with you the reasons why SUCCESS IS INVISIBLE: We cannot see the mechanics that operate our world, but we can reclaim the autonomous wisdom to spontaneously direct them. © Scott Sonnon 2001. All rights reserved.
IP: Logged
gmattson
Posts: 2193 Registered: Sep 98 posted September 26, 2001 10:02 AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Scott: I've never encountered the term "knee barring" before. Is it a wrestling move? I like the rest of your comments. Here on these forums, we continually warn against "ritual" performance of movements/techniques.
------------------ GEM
IP: Logged
Sonnon
Posts: 22 Registered: Sep 2001 posted September 26, 2001 10:32 AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear George, My apologies - knee-bar: alluding to a pedestrian moniker for applying hypextending leverage against the knee. Fraternal, Scott Sonnon IP: Logged
gmattson
Posts: 2193 Registered: Sep 98 posted September 26, 2001 10:43 AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Scott: I sense everyone reading your posts has been overwhelmed by the content. I certainly was. However, after reading and re-reading your posts, I find lots of similarity and overlapping of philosophy with what has been discussed on our forums. Just with a difference emphasis.
I'd like to focus on a couple of points in your articles, hoping to clarify this connection or if appropriate, to determine the differences:
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. A "technique" is something someone created because they thought that it was successful in application... so they try and replicate the success, but (by?) replicating the specific physical sequence of events. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds a great deal like our "kata" (movement sets). Many teachers use these tools incorrectly. Students mimic their instructors in the mistaken belief that the movements contain magic properties.
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The only problem is SUCCESS IS INVISIBLE. What made the person successful was not the discover of an immutable law, called a "technique". What made the person successful was that for a moment in time, he became a Creator (rather than a Regurgitator) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This comment is a bit more difficult for me to understand. If a student works on a technique and is able to make it work in a practical situation, then he/she becomes a "creator" of a single, specific application, when it was actually needed?
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUCCESS IS INVISIBLE --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like a passage in the bible. . . could mean many things to different people. To those of you reading this: What does it mean to you?
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- He created a "technique" and you can too - all the time, in each of life's ubiquitous infinity of situations. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What is the relationship of "creating a technique" to formal martial arts? Is every movement used for a unique self defense situation a "created" technique? Isn't there some relationship between what is practiced and what is applied?
Enough for now.
------------------ GEM
IP: Logged
Sonnon
Posts: 22 Registered: Sep 2001 posted September 26, 2001 11:53 AM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by gmattson: Scott: I sense everyone reading your posts has been overwhelmed by the content. I certainly was. However, after reading and re-reading your posts, I find lots of similarity and overlapping of philosophy with what has been discussed on our forums. Just with a difference emphasis.
I'd like to focus on a couple of points in your articles, hoping to clarify this connection or if appropriate, to determine the differences:
What is the relationship of "creating a technique" to formal martial arts? Is every movement used for a unique self defense situation a "created" technique? Isn't there some relationship between what is practiced and what is applied?
Enough for now.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear George, PRECISELY! Every application is a "trick." I prefer the term trick to technique, for it applies ONLY within the constraints of that specific set of variables... And here is the reality slammed into our face:
It is IMPOSSIBLE to reproduce the same results twice. No two events are EVER the same.
The primary attributes with which I instill my client/trainees are: IMPROVISATION and INNOVATION.
I thought you and the members of this forum might find worth while. The url is: http://www.shinyokai.com/interview.htm
There is a discussion towards the end concerning the need inovate and renovate styles.
The most critical quote in relation to our discussion was, "Techniques did not matter because they were guided by concepts. New techniques could be devised to address new realities while embracing the time honored concepts that form the arts core. This would not be abandoning the art. This would allow the art to maintain its effectiveness and relevance to a new generation and era."
I was laughed at when I first began saying this in America, by representatives in the Chinese, Korean, Japanese and EVEN my own Russian Martial Art community (for ROSS Performance Enhancement System in America has moved BEYOND Russian Martial Art - http://www.amerross.com/history.html).
Now this is part of the common vernacular of these particular individuals and groups. It makes me chuckle. In the Post-Eclectic Age of Martial Art in America, this has become the clarion call of TRUE COMBATIVE REALITY. For most sensible folks having experienced my system, they have moved beyond the hybridization phase of studying martial art, and moved on to the systematization phase of development. ROSS Performance Enhancement is critical in this juncture for it holds a steadfast vigil against becoming a dogmatic style.
ROSS is a SYSTEM that allows the individual the knowledge and wisdom on how to forge their own unique style.
Takamura Sensei's words reflect that he discarded Jujitsu as a style, in order to preserve authentic Jujitsu as a SYSTEM. Individuals such as this esteemed teacher are entirely too rare.
It is unfortunate that the current craze in martial art is "fytin n wrasslin not anni-a-dat filosophee crap."
For in this anti-rational approach to training the crux and cornerstone of personal development is LOST. In the decades to come, we are about to see the emergence of "Classic" (aka mislabelled "traditional") "Mixed Martial Art styles" with names such as "submission wrestling" "freestlye fighting" "hybrid fighting" etc. They shall each contain as much dogmatic blunder as the stigamtized "classical arts" of today....
UNLESS this "revolution" (so-called), this hybridization phase of martial art in America, is followed by a grass-roots systematization phase in the development of American martial art traditions.
ROSS has become the map on how to do this immediately. Hopefully more people are beginning to realize this.
Regarding Technique vs. Trick:
Technical rehearsal if for the reason of communicating principles of natural laws can be a valdi training methodology, though the trainers I have encountered in this methodology do not understand the principles and mistake the "techniques" for the reality of the natural laws. They have moved INTO these constructs and accept them as reality, rather than merely a time-relevant and situation-relevant RE-presentation of one individual's reality.
This method has the pedagogical formula of
Standardized Techniques * the number of techniques in the style * the number of repetitions = ability to apply "variations" on the standardized techniques
There are also other methodologies, such as the ROSS P.E. System of teaching Biomechanical Exercises (to keep with your analogy, these are the training wheels in tihs methodology), explaining the relevant natural laws, and creating Fluid Drills in which the trainees must improvise an effective & efficient response.
This other methodology has the following formula:
Biomechanics + Objective/Scenario * Fluid Drills (attribute development) = Tricks (improvised techniques and innovated tactics)
Fraternal, Scott Sonnon
http://members.optecs.com/premium/premium.asp?distid=3339