Perfection vs Functionality by Darren Laur

[Rick Wilson]

From Darren's site:

http://www.personalprotectionsystems.ca ... nality.doc

Perfection vs Functionality


Before I get into the meat and potatoes of this posting, please have a look at the following link first (I know that this is not RBSD training, but it does effectively demonstrate a very important RBSD principal)

http://neurology.med.upenn.edu/~jason/f ... KungFu.mpg

It is interesting to see that those who are highly “skilled” in “technique” (all of the kung fu guys were high level practitioners) have great difficulty in making such “technique” transition to an open environment external to their style of fighting, usually because their techniques were learned via rote, and never pressure tested outside of their own style/system.

It is my belief that there are two forms of “technique”

1. “Perfect” Technique

2. “Functional” Technique

“Perfect” technique is what is usually needed for grading or acceleration in some martial arts and amateur/professional sports through demonstration performance abilities.

“Functional” technique is often not necessarily attractive or pleasing to the eye, but is needed for real world self-protection.

The Drunken style kung fu guys probably had “perfect” technique in their "closed" style of fighting, but “functionality” proved less desirable against the Kyokushin Fighters who were more focused, goal oriented, and functional in their application of technique.

A good example that draws a correlation difference between the two is police academy academia. Once one graduates from the police academy you learn “perfect” police science skills, but once the new recruit hits the streets, they quickly learn to make these skills “functional” via direct application.

It is important to have a strong and validated combative foundation based on technique, but one needs to ensure that the technique is functional for it to be of practical application on the street. Maybe this is another difference between the “art” and “martial” of martial arts in today’s modern world. IMO, many martial arts stress perfect technique (art) and in the process have forgotten about functionality of technique (martial) that is needed for true survival in today’s real world. It is because of this fact that many (not all) cannot transition or have great difficulty in applying their superior skill and perfect technique to either scenario based replication training (when combined with Survival Stress Reaction) or an actual street encounter.

To me “functionality” of technique is far more important than “perfect” technique for what it is that I do and teach. To me, it's a difference in priorities, outcomes, attitude and emphasis in what it is I train for in my opinion. Too many in this field however, fail to recognize this very important distinction due to their lack of real world experience, at times ignorance, and even outright willful blindness.


Darren Laur

[Stryke]

good stuff Rick , and to me where most of us In TMA go wrong .

I`m personally very poor at the perfection stuff , my kata has been ok and powefull , but I never had the capacity for perfection and pretty .

I always looked at functional .

Form should be function IMHO

to approach perfection to me is to entangle yourslf in the classical mess .

Apart from basic truths (shortest distance between two points is a straight line etc) I have yet to be convinced that from via perfection is a help in improving ones martial skills .

This endless pursuit of perfection goes against adaptation and understanding IMHO .

Live resistance training and ability to adapt and change are far more important to me .

[Stryke]

To much internal without enough external eh Rick

I just love that clip , great kicks .

Brawling karate ... Oyama was a heretic too Rick

[JimHawkins]

To me a perfect technique is the technique which fits the occasion in the moment. If it does then it's functional..

[Asteer]

I certainly think function is more important than form. However, in striving for functionality, I don't think it would be wise to drop perfection. A perfect mastery of the basics will make it so much easier to add function to your art. If we try to take the fast road to function, bypassing perfection, we get sloppy (IMO).

[Guest]

Perfection in accordance with what standard?

[Asteer]

Perfection in accordance with what standard?

Good question... IMO, perfection in accordance with basic principles of movement should be respected. Also, there are "basics" that are passed down with every style. If you believe in the style, perfecting those basics should make learning within that style easier, and using that style functionally should result. What I don't mean by perfection is that in your wauke your pinky finger has to be placed just so...

I teach a few different sports, principally among them alpine skiing, which I have been teaching full time for almost 20 seasons. I have seen many skiers take the fast route and become what most people would consider advanced fairly quickly, but who hit a ceiling and then spend years of frustration never being able to improve their skiing. I have also seen skiers take the seemingly longer route of perfecting basics at every step of the way and turning into elite and expert skiers even when starting at a late age.

The difference between the two is the perfection of a foundation upon which function can be built easily. Show a "new" or "advanced" skill to someone who has perfected the foundation of their basics and they will pick it up easily. Show the same skill to an "advanced" student who never perfected the basics and they will probably have more trouble because they must learn the new skill from scratch instead of grafting it onto the basics which have already been perfected.

Again, I totally agree that the end result needs to be function. In the case of MA that means self-defense. I just don't think function and perfection are mutually exclusive.

[Guest]

I like your analogy. The best skiers set the standards in perfection.

In Uechi Ryu it's different, the folks who mop up the floor in sparring get diss'd and the born losers who couldn't fight there way out of a bubble bath set standards of perfection that are simply retarded and not based on any real experience.

[Asteer]

In Uechi Ryu it's different, the folks who mop up the floor in sparring get diss'd and the born losers who couldn't fight there way out of a bubble bath set standards of perfection that are simply retarded and not based on any real experience.

I understand this well. During a certain period of the Canadian Ski Instructors Alliance something very similar was true. It became important how you held your arms or where you planted your pole or how far apart your feet were. It became a bit of a joke with the coaches, who have their own organization, because they always were focused on results, (who gets throught the course the fastest?) and thus function. I was lucky enough to be involved at a high level in both organizations so I did not get sucked into the "form for form's sake" approach.

However, the funny thing is that on the "instructor" side, the very best skiers still demonstrated that remarkable mastery of the basics common to good skiers. They may have been sucked into the form approach in their teaching, but in their own development they new the importance of perfecting the basic movements and not the perfect placement of the pinky.

I have read in these forums that you are involved in boxing. I really only know of boxing what I have seen through media, never having tried it, but I am sure that it is a sport that seeks ultimate functionality through necessity (of not getting your teeth knocked in...). However, I also have the impression that boxers spend hours and hours perfecting "the basics" of the sport. I have seen lots of clips of things like boxers ducking under ropes from side to side and practicing uppercuts. That kind of thing is what I mean when I say perfecting the basics.

I am kind of isolated where I am, and thus don't see much of the uechi that is out there apart from what I read in these forums. My sensei is 1000 km away and I can only make periodic trips, but they are worth it. He runs a tiny dojo with a handful of students who train to make their art functional. He relentlessly pounds the basics into his students, but not in a mindless way that copies by rote the accepted basics out of a book. Him and his students test and explore the "right" way of moving. There may be more than one right way, but there are also wrong ways. I think those wrong ways, which are repeated without question by many instructors, are the root of the "standards of perfection that are simply retarded and not based on any real experience" that you talk about. They are form for form's sake, where the original function has been diluted or glossed over.

Like anything, I am sure that there is crappy Uechi and great Uechi. But IMO, anything great is based on an excellent mastery of the basics of that thing...

[Rick Wilson]

Asteer -- Welcome to the forum.

Very good posts.

No time now but will post again tonight, I just wanted to welcome you.

[Guest]

Well, my question was "who sets the standards of perfection". In skiing, it's the skiiers, in boxing, well.. it's the guy who kicks everyones ass. In Uechi, it seems to be people who don't know anything about fighting. They get their say so by appealing to the masses somehow. Why the masses migrate to them, who knows? I agree about the importance of the basics but their comes a time where you have to put all that behind and leave the nest... those basics will be with you no matter what you do, knowing this, there is no need to concern yourself with them. Some sensei's will never leave you alone because the only thing they are good at is critiquing others based on the phony standard of perfection that has been propagating through the ranks.

Say, I wanted to get some help on a bankai for Seisan... but there are only two Sensei's in town, Joe Blow, an expert on thumb and toe position, or Carlos, someone who took a knife from a punk and then beat the living crap out of him. ..... hmm.. tough choice here...

[Asteer]

Say, I wanted to get some help on a bankai for Seisan... but there are only two Sensei's in town, Joe Blow, an expert on thumb and toe position, or Carlos, someone who took a knife from a punk and then beat the living crap out of him. ..... hmm.. tough choice here...

And I bet Carlos' basics are spot on and that he never stops perfecting them. I think we agree that the basics are not necessarily what the masses are doing. The basics are the sh*t that works. The basics, IMO, is taking what works and doing it again and again until I know that I can reproduce it when the extreme situation comes. I can't say that I am anywhere close to that in Uechi, but I am in other sports.

I think one problem that comes up in your posts is that of "Standards" vs the basics. When the standards are confused with the basics, and when they do not stand the test of real world functionality, they become deadweight on the sport or the system.

The point I am trying to get at is that basics and standards are not necessarily the same things. In any sport, activity, field of study, MA, etc. you can set crappy standards that lose sight of the basics.

[Asteer]

Well, my question was "who sets the standards of perfection".

I think the answer to that question is that you set the standard of perfection for yourself. I choose to set my standard of perfection against my Sensei because I trust that he is going in the right direction for me. But one can always walk away and look for a better standard of perfection if one looses that trust. At a certain level I would imagine that you learn to be more independent in setting your standard of perfection. At that point, you can work to perfect what you think works best for you. However, I do think that perfection is a worthy and necessary step to functionality. But I also agree that you can and should not blindly follow some notion of perfection set arbitrarily and without substance. I think one has to develop a critical eye in this regard (I somehow don't think you have a problem with that... )

[Eternalstudent]

Hi

It depends what you want from your martial art.

I want to be able to defend myself and others first and foremost.

So If the training I do acheives that then it is perfect in a sense, for me.

I'm not interested what some long dead sensei or the current world champion kata man thinks.

Does it work for me, if it does I'm happy.

All the correct form and foot placement etc is to hide lack of real MA knowledge.



Eternalstudent

[jorvik]

Well I came to Martial arts in a round about way and I know where Tony's coming from. I'd had lots of fights before I did Ma's and I found all these fat old blokes telling me how tough they were ....the ones who were I can count on my fingers .( and that's after 40 years training)............you have to take it right back to basics, that is true, and basics means good physical condition and being able to punch and kick HARD, and being able to move well.after that there is honesty...which you find in boxing clubs .folks know who the best fighter is and they are not afraid to admit it .now if you accept that Uechi and all karate has no rules in it.well then you get to another level of honesty.where you have to face death as a possible outcome..........if you treat Karate as a spiritual practice as well....then you must recognise all of this before you even consider meditation. Karate must start at a physical level ( not always attainable........before my hip operation I was stacking weight on like no tomorrow ).a very fundamental basic level..........and to be honest I don't think that in a real confrontation it will ever get higher than that..so you must look at the simple things very deeply and realise that there is no such thing as an advanced technique ....and some of the nasty things like eye pokes and groin slaps and grabs must be your staple along with low kicks and good punching skills