You've probably seen it. You may even be guilty of it.
* A student is in his sanchin and the instructor is striking the stomach. At one point the instructor makes an extra-big windup, and then pulls his punch just before impact. The student stumbles forward.
* Towards the end of the sanchin test, the instructor takes his fingers and flicks it to the student's eyes. If the student responds, (s)he somehow has failed that part of the test. Obviously the person is not in mushin.
What's going on here?
These are two slightly different scenarios, but they both illustrate a common misconception of what the student is supposed to be doing, and what the teacher is supposed to be looking for.
Let's take the first scenario. All right, I'll grant you that sometimes you will approach a student for testing and they will appear to be falling into everything you do to them. Is this wrong? Of course. Why? The reason is no different than if you watch a student hit the heavy bag, and you see they are leaning forward into the punch (head is beyond the center).
A student is supposed to respond to an outside force while in sanchin. I have often told beginner students that a granite statue of Uechi Kanei in a perfect sanchin placed on the ground could be tipped over by a child. It is an active mechanism for maintaining control of oneself and delivering powerful techniques. The very shallow nature of the stance makes response to outside forces absolutely necessary. A hard response means force meets the force. A soft response means stepping out of the way. How one implements that hard or soft approach is what separates the practiced from the learning.
There are many ways to handle the "hit" while in sanchin stance. First one must find a ground path - a line through the body that leads to a foot (feet) on the ground reacting against the floor. This allows one to meet the force at the point of contact. Then one must decide whether to absorb (inelastic collision) or reflect (elastic collision) the blow. Generally the latter is the desirable goal if you are holding your ground. This can be achieved by a type of contraction of the contact muscle, or a group of muscles that control the contact surface. Sometimes this is done at the time of contact, making the hitter feel like he just hit a wall. Other times it is done in a kind of elastic recoil fashion, making the hitter feel like he just hit a trampoline. And then sometimes it's something between the two extremes.
The trick that gives the appearance of not moving is strictly a matter of timing and coordination. Excessively flinching and falling forward indicates an inability to synchronize yourself with the attack. The more you tune yourself to the attacker and the intent, the more it will appear like something else to the outside observer. But the end result has the individual in sanchin as an active participant in the exercise. One does not lie back and take a beating.
As for the person performing the test, the purpose is not to observe whether or not the practitioner can survive a gratuitous beating. Each strike to the body should have purpose. Strikes to the latissimus muscles indicate the shoulders are being pulled down properly. Strikes to the legs show a reasonable amount of tension and an ability to withstand some force from the outside (one is not knock-kneed while protecting the groin). Similarly a kick in-between the legs demonstrate that the practitioner has the adductor muscles protecting the testicles (or labia). Strikes to the stomach demonstrate trunk firmness that will allow a student to transfer energy from legs to arms.
I find the "soft" testing to be a better gage of whether or not the student can respond. The student is supposed to detect and apply a measured response - not stay hard and hope to hell one doesn't fall over. Pushing in different areas of the body shows that the student knows where to redirect the force applied to the body.
So...what about the eye thing? It really isn't much different. Look at it this way - do you want to condition a student NOT to respond to a finger jab to the eye? I don't think so. We spend all our time teaching people to react to attacks, and then some bozo wants us NOT to react to an eye jab. It doesn't make sense.
Mushin is not about checking out; mushin is a process of separating the wheat from the chafe. When one is in a proper frame of mind, one removes the internal dialogue so as to be appropriately sensitive to what is going on outside. If an attack comes to the eye, one wants to block, move, blink, or some combination thereof. Mushin ideally improves the signal to noise ratio because the "noise" is diminished. This means a cleaner signal to the regions of the brain that must respond to an assault. Mushin does not mean removing the signal too.
Thoughts??
- Bill
[This message has been edited by Bill Glasheen (edited May 16, 2000).]
Sanchin - Testing misconceptions
Moderator: Available
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
Sanchin - Testing misconceptions
First, this is a great topic.
A quick question. The "trampoline" thing.... why would that be advantageous? You would not want a strike to penetrate a vulnerable area, only to bounce the opponents hand back at him, would you? You may be speaking of a training mechanism, I understand that. Could you clarify/expand?
Are there different levels of sanchin testing? At what stage would you expect a student to begin to understand his ability to selectivley focus or loosen certain muscular areas? In other words, if I am testing a brown belt, do I test him using the same method as I would if testing a godan? I'm speaking of method, not intensity or power.
A quick question. The "trampoline" thing.... why would that be advantageous? You would not want a strike to penetrate a vulnerable area, only to bounce the opponents hand back at him, would you? You may be speaking of a training mechanism, I understand that. Could you clarify/expand?
Are there different levels of sanchin testing? At what stage would you expect a student to begin to understand his ability to selectivley focus or loosen certain muscular areas? In other words, if I am testing a brown belt, do I test him using the same method as I would if testing a godan? I'm speaking of method, not intensity or power.
Sanchin - Testing misconceptions
Bill G, you wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
When I test a student in sanchin, I would like to see the eyes remain in an open, non flinching position. The response of the eye should be to get larger as an attack is approaching.
In another forum thread, I used baseball as an analogy for the eyes being open as wide as they can be. When the pitcher delivers the ball, the batters eyes should widen to the maximum and allow the hitter to focus on the ball. Then the hand and eye coordination will become greater. The same thing should occur in a fight. As the attacker moves forward the eyes should remain open at the widest to insure that none of the combinations will be missed. The Sanchin test to the eyes is for the same reason. If the student flinches (blinks) everytime a strike is attempted, they will be conditioning the eyes to blink whenever they are attacked. This will cause some students to have their eyes closed during a flurry of attacks and will therefore be hit by one of them in the process.
I do agree however that a student should close his eyes when they KNOW a strike to the eyes is attempted. I wear contacts and sometimes have had my contact lense fall out, and even once it was stuck to the persons fist after I had been hit in the eye. But, how do we distinguish an eye strike from any other face strike, in a flurry.
It is difficult to be absolutely sure an eye strike is comming, therefore I believe one should not blink when an attack is made to the face.
Some very good fighters use the distraction of face strikes to attack the lower body, trying to block their opponents vision to conceal the actual attack.
If a student closes his eyes during a fake to the face, or during the distractions of the hands in front ot the face, how will they ever see the attack to the other parts of the body?
[This message has been edited by LenTesta (edited May 17, 2000).]
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
Reacting to a face strike should not include the blinking of the eyes.So...what about the eye thing? It really isn't much different. Look at it this way - do you want to condition a student NOT to respond to a finger jab to the eye? I don't think so. We spend all our time teaching people to react to attacks, and then some bozo wants us NOT to react to an eye jab. It doesn't make sense.
When I test a student in sanchin, I would like to see the eyes remain in an open, non flinching position. The response of the eye should be to get larger as an attack is approaching.
In another forum thread, I used baseball as an analogy for the eyes being open as wide as they can be. When the pitcher delivers the ball, the batters eyes should widen to the maximum and allow the hitter to focus on the ball. Then the hand and eye coordination will become greater. The same thing should occur in a fight. As the attacker moves forward the eyes should remain open at the widest to insure that none of the combinations will be missed. The Sanchin test to the eyes is for the same reason. If the student flinches (blinks) everytime a strike is attempted, they will be conditioning the eyes to blink whenever they are attacked. This will cause some students to have their eyes closed during a flurry of attacks and will therefore be hit by one of them in the process.
I do agree however that a student should close his eyes when they KNOW a strike to the eyes is attempted. I wear contacts and sometimes have had my contact lense fall out, and even once it was stuck to the persons fist after I had been hit in the eye. But, how do we distinguish an eye strike from any other face strike, in a flurry.
It is difficult to be absolutely sure an eye strike is comming, therefore I believe one should not blink when an attack is made to the face.
Some very good fighters use the distraction of face strikes to attack the lower body, trying to block their opponents vision to conceal the actual attack.
If a student closes his eyes during a fake to the face, or during the distractions of the hands in front ot the face, how will they ever see the attack to the other parts of the body?
[This message has been edited by LenTesta (edited May 17, 2000).]
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
Sanchin - Testing misconceptions
Billy B
This trampoline thing is somewhat of a metaphor. Let me try to explain what I am thinking of.
To start with, the terms "elastic" and "inelastic" collisions are real terms in physics. For a collision to be elastic, it means that the objects maintain all of the energy they had (expressed as momentum)before the collision. Thus a child jumping off a trampoline and a baseball ricocheting off a bat are both effectively elastic collisions (for the most part). The key factor is the energy thing. One does NOT want to absorb energy in the tissue during the collision of fist with body.
An example of a mostly inelastic collision would be if the batter's bat is shattered when trying to hit the ball. One never sees a home run hit when the bat breaks. In the case of fist meeting body, this energy gets expressed as damage to tissue (bone, whatever) and/or unnaturally strong signals down nerve fibers.
I often tell students to imagine that their stomachs are like properly inflated basketballs. Too little air and the basketball deforms when bounced. Too much air and the basketball explodes. One wants the right amount of tension so that the fist will effectively bounce off the surface. In reality it's a bit more complex than that. Any muscle will be capable of an active as opposed to strictly passive response. A passive response would be what the basketball does. An active component to the total response (passive plus active) would be the muscle fibers detecting a sudden lengthening (high dL/dt) and activating a stretch reflex which causes a reactive contraction. Some people call this chi. Whatever....we all learn to do it (it's entirely a spinal reflex) by trial and error in body conditioning exercises. This is what happens when the inexperienced practitioner hits an experienced one and feels pain beyond what was expected.
There's another way to react to a force coming at you though, other than just getting out of the way or deflecting it. This is the trampoline effect I spoke about, and is what taiji people work on. Basically you absorb the hit to a larger degree (with body movement) and then recoil back. Like the "hard" elastic collision I spoke of above, it has both a passive and active component. The difference is that there is more "to and fro" motion, and it involves the larger (and more) muscles in the body. The passive component is the spring-like properties of soft tissue like muscle when they are stretched and would naturally recoil. The active component is once again the stretch reflex. A classic example of this in Uechi ryu would be the shoken sukuiage uke. The attacker really lunges the kick into the defender; the defender absorbs and rocks back with it, and then heaves the person back onto his duff (or head). There's another application at the end of seiryu kata with the wauke and morote boshiken tsuki. There is a technique in aikido called shomen ate where one absorbs an attack with the arms (the wauke), and then hurls the person back. It can involve a lot of leg movement back and forth. The effect of heaving back off the legs is a lot like the prestretch and then jump that a basketball player feels when going up for a rebound. Use of the leg happens when the practitioner masters the torso alignment and firmness necessary to transfer energy up and down the body.
As for this "trampoline effect" with a hit to the body, well it generally is not seen in sanchin. But some taiji practitioners can deform their entire bodies as a reaction to a punch, and then snap them right back. Once any good fighter develops experience, that concept can be expressed without much thought or training.
As for the testing of the less vs. more experienced student, I don't have a strongly dichotomized view here. But you are right when assuming one looks for different things at different levels. For example, I rarely "pound" on a beginner student. I spend most of my time just getting their body in the right posture. We want them to react to a stress on the stance, but we do not want to teach their bodies inappropriate responses that must be reprogrammed later on. In the beginning there is too much for a student to think about just to stand up straight and have the arms/legs in the proper place. I will only try gentle "reminders" like a knuckle in a rib (or a tickling for the kids) to get people to feel why arms should be in a particular place. Or I might push in on a knee if they are knock-kneed to get them to physically understand why this isn't appropriate.
Once a student has all the body parts in the right place and can keep them there while moving, then I start stressing and poking and pushing and pulling. As a student gets more advanced, I might try quickly changing directions in the "soft" sanchin test to see if their bodies are appropriately sensitive to what I am doing. I will also start testing while the person is moving in the form. For example, I like to push down on the lower rear leg with my foot while they are doing a sanchin thrust. This lets me know whether or not they are using their legs properly in the thrust. I might also grab onto their belt or britches while they turn to see if the turn is strong (VERY important). Or I might grab onto their belt from behind while they are stepping to test for the strength of their forward movement.
Every person is different, and everyone has a weak link. For the most part, I assess what I see (or take note of their general karate “opportunities”) and then make a decision on-the-spot as to what I will work on that day.
- Bill
[This message has been edited by Bill Glasheen (edited May 17, 2000).]
This trampoline thing is somewhat of a metaphor. Let me try to explain what I am thinking of.
To start with, the terms "elastic" and "inelastic" collisions are real terms in physics. For a collision to be elastic, it means that the objects maintain all of the energy they had (expressed as momentum)before the collision. Thus a child jumping off a trampoline and a baseball ricocheting off a bat are both effectively elastic collisions (for the most part). The key factor is the energy thing. One does NOT want to absorb energy in the tissue during the collision of fist with body.
An example of a mostly inelastic collision would be if the batter's bat is shattered when trying to hit the ball. One never sees a home run hit when the bat breaks. In the case of fist meeting body, this energy gets expressed as damage to tissue (bone, whatever) and/or unnaturally strong signals down nerve fibers.
I often tell students to imagine that their stomachs are like properly inflated basketballs. Too little air and the basketball deforms when bounced. Too much air and the basketball explodes. One wants the right amount of tension so that the fist will effectively bounce off the surface. In reality it's a bit more complex than that. Any muscle will be capable of an active as opposed to strictly passive response. A passive response would be what the basketball does. An active component to the total response (passive plus active) would be the muscle fibers detecting a sudden lengthening (high dL/dt) and activating a stretch reflex which causes a reactive contraction. Some people call this chi. Whatever....we all learn to do it (it's entirely a spinal reflex) by trial and error in body conditioning exercises. This is what happens when the inexperienced practitioner hits an experienced one and feels pain beyond what was expected.
There's another way to react to a force coming at you though, other than just getting out of the way or deflecting it. This is the trampoline effect I spoke about, and is what taiji people work on. Basically you absorb the hit to a larger degree (with body movement) and then recoil back. Like the "hard" elastic collision I spoke of above, it has both a passive and active component. The difference is that there is more "to and fro" motion, and it involves the larger (and more) muscles in the body. The passive component is the spring-like properties of soft tissue like muscle when they are stretched and would naturally recoil. The active component is once again the stretch reflex. A classic example of this in Uechi ryu would be the shoken sukuiage uke. The attacker really lunges the kick into the defender; the defender absorbs and rocks back with it, and then heaves the person back onto his duff (or head). There's another application at the end of seiryu kata with the wauke and morote boshiken tsuki. There is a technique in aikido called shomen ate where one absorbs an attack with the arms (the wauke), and then hurls the person back. It can involve a lot of leg movement back and forth. The effect of heaving back off the legs is a lot like the prestretch and then jump that a basketball player feels when going up for a rebound. Use of the leg happens when the practitioner masters the torso alignment and firmness necessary to transfer energy up and down the body.
As for this "trampoline effect" with a hit to the body, well it generally is not seen in sanchin. But some taiji practitioners can deform their entire bodies as a reaction to a punch, and then snap them right back. Once any good fighter develops experience, that concept can be expressed without much thought or training.
As for the testing of the less vs. more experienced student, I don't have a strongly dichotomized view here. But you are right when assuming one looks for different things at different levels. For example, I rarely "pound" on a beginner student. I spend most of my time just getting their body in the right posture. We want them to react to a stress on the stance, but we do not want to teach their bodies inappropriate responses that must be reprogrammed later on. In the beginning there is too much for a student to think about just to stand up straight and have the arms/legs in the proper place. I will only try gentle "reminders" like a knuckle in a rib (or a tickling for the kids) to get people to feel why arms should be in a particular place. Or I might push in on a knee if they are knock-kneed to get them to physically understand why this isn't appropriate.
Once a student has all the body parts in the right place and can keep them there while moving, then I start stressing and poking and pushing and pulling. As a student gets more advanced, I might try quickly changing directions in the "soft" sanchin test to see if their bodies are appropriately sensitive to what I am doing. I will also start testing while the person is moving in the form. For example, I like to push down on the lower rear leg with my foot while they are doing a sanchin thrust. This lets me know whether or not they are using their legs properly in the thrust. I might also grab onto their belt or britches while they turn to see if the turn is strong (VERY important). Or I might grab onto their belt from behind while they are stepping to test for the strength of their forward movement.
Every person is different, and everyone has a weak link. For the most part, I assess what I see (or take note of their general karate “opportunities”) and then make a decision on-the-spot as to what I will work on that day.
- Bill
[This message has been edited by Bill Glasheen (edited May 17, 2000).]
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
Sanchin - Testing misconceptions
Len
Excellent post. I want to take the time for a thoughtful response. I'll be back on this shortly.
- Bill
Excellent post. I want to take the time for a thoughtful response. I'll be back on this shortly.
- Bill
Sanchin - Testing misconceptions
Bill-san...good thread...
Len-san, you raise an interesting point with the keeping the eyes open during a flicking motion to the face.
And this raises a question from me....I will generally blink when fingers come anywhere near my eyes (yes, I wear contacts too!!) and I believe it is a self-preservation movement, the blink is an instant reaction - and my body does not flinch. I am still "in sanchin"...not distracted by the flick but aware it is a potential attack.
I try to make my sanchin feel as natural as possible...if I am straining to keep my eyes open, does this not detract from the focus of my entire sanchin? Won't my body will be working against itself?
Len-san, you raise an interesting point with the keeping the eyes open during a flicking motion to the face.
And this raises a question from me....I will generally blink when fingers come anywhere near my eyes (yes, I wear contacts too!!) and I believe it is a self-preservation movement, the blink is an instant reaction - and my body does not flinch. I am still "in sanchin"...not distracted by the flick but aware it is a potential attack.
I try to make my sanchin feel as natural as possible...if I am straining to keep my eyes open, does this not detract from the focus of my entire sanchin? Won't my body will be working against itself?
Sanchin - Testing misconceptions
Bill.
Yes, I see your point.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
I learned to keep my eyes open this way.
Would you agree that Sanchin (being the foundation for all the learning) is a way to condition the body and eyes when attacked even though it is stationary.
The sanchin test to the body does not require the student to respond in such a way as to counterattack, although this is what will eventually happen.
The stomache is focused when hit (I love to use the basketball analogy also, because it has a hard cover and is full of soft air). When tested the body is stationary. This does not happen to an experienced fighter, mostly because of the forward movement when attacked. But we do not make the student perform a step during the sanchin test to the stomache. It is meerly a training aid to make sure the body is focused.
We should try to maintain the focus throughout the kata and I test my students with soft jabs to the stomach as they are stepping and striking. I also test the distraction to the face when they are completing the turns. But now they are moving and yes they are focused.
I absoulutely agree that you should not take an eye strike to an open eye, but how do you distinguish an eye strike from a bushiken or seiken in a flury?
Good questions you post.
Yes, I see your point.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
andBUT... is the student standing like a Guinea pig in sanchin moving and active? Can that student block and/or move his/her body? Can (s)he lean back? No. We have created an artificial situation. We are asking the student - in my opinion - to do something that is very unnatural, and we are asking for an unnatural response. And we are programming a response in that may help the flinch, but it may also stop the student from protecting his/her eye when they goof.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
I sure hope not!Might we inadvertently be training some of our students to take a finger in the eye? I wonder.
I learned to keep my eyes open this way.
Would you agree that Sanchin (being the foundation for all the learning) is a way to condition the body and eyes when attacked even though it is stationary.
The sanchin test to the body does not require the student to respond in such a way as to counterattack, although this is what will eventually happen.
The stomache is focused when hit (I love to use the basketball analogy also, because it has a hard cover and is full of soft air). When tested the body is stationary. This does not happen to an experienced fighter, mostly because of the forward movement when attacked. But we do not make the student perform a step during the sanchin test to the stomache. It is meerly a training aid to make sure the body is focused.
We should try to maintain the focus throughout the kata and I test my students with soft jabs to the stomach as they are stepping and striking. I also test the distraction to the face when they are completing the turns. But now they are moving and yes they are focused.
I absoulutely agree that you should not take an eye strike to an open eye, but how do you distinguish an eye strike from a bushiken or seiken in a flury?
Good questions you post.
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
Sanchin - Testing misconceptions
Len
The nice thing about this discussion is that we all understand the issues. The only discrepancies are the approaches to dealing with them. And there is no silver bullet.
You wrote <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
I agree that the problem could probably be worked on in sanchin, but I'm personally reluctant to work on it while the student is standing still. That doesn't mean my approach is right - just that I worry about the consequences. I think I would rather find a way to address it in prearranged kumite. There the student is allowed to respond. I think it's issues like these that make people like Gary Khoury so keen on sparring. Eventually you pick things like these up by just going into the pit and getting hit with those fakes. Ouch!! Maybe they won't do that again. Maybe. But it isn't easy, and not all of us are talented like a Gary Khoury. Somehow it would be nice if we could bring this problem back to sanchin kata like you suggest, and like I alluded to with Billy B. It is indeed a mindset issue, but one of highly trained perception. It is very complex.
A practitioner will always be faced with this problem. Did you watch the Portland vs. Utah game last night (5/16/00)? Did you see the deciding shot by Scottie Pippen from 3-point range that sent Utah packing for the season? On first glance, it looked like someone missed their blocking assignment. But when they did the instant replay, it was obvious - it was Scottie's years of experience that made that play. He dropped down to come up for the shot, and paused ever so slightly. The defender mis-read his intentions, and popped up like popcorn to block the phantom shot. Scottie just waited and then came up when defender was going down. In the end, he had a totally uncontested shot. A talented veteran pro out-foxed a younger pro in an adrenaline moment. But they were both highly trained professionals. I'm sure Scottie had this done to him many, many times in the past.
As I was thinking about my post, the thought occurred that one of my analogies I used to articulate your position might actually be a good training aid. Rich is our resident Charlton Heston, and brings others and me out to the range to help sharpen shooting skills. Some days he and our expert marksman (Tom) will be out there with a cornucopia of weapons and ammo. About 3/4 through the day one time he took a 38 special (I believe) and loaded a very high-powered round in it. We all shot the rounds. Then I went back to my favorite (a Glock 45 caliber) to close the day. I could not hit squat. I could not even hit the bloody target. The recoil from the high-powered rounds had conditioned a flinch in me, and I was moving the gun before the trigger was pulled every time. It was so bad that I had to call it a day and come back.
And I shoot in a modified sanchin!!
Here is a case where you want to program out a natural response. What you want is counter-intuitive in terms of natural reactions, but it is what you want to achieve the end - protecting yourself. This is appropriate. And the situation is generalizable.
Too bad we can't do sanchin training in the shooting range, no?
- Bill
The nice thing about this discussion is that we all understand the issues. The only discrepancies are the approaches to dealing with them. And there is no silver bullet.
You wrote <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
I have a mixed reaction to that. First of all, we spend a lot of time testing the person while they are stationary, and then most instructors walk away once the person starts moving. As we know, in-between a left and a right sanchin stance, one is still in the sanchin stance. The problem is how do we test a moving target. It isn't easy. Is this an issue? Absolutely. I can remember a case of a highly ranked and talented individual in New England (Nice guy...I believe he was one of George's students) who was doing really well in his kata. He would get rave reviews, good scores at tournaments, used in demonstrations of good technique, etc. But for god sake, the guy would bounce up and down when he went from stance A to stance B. There was no easy way to correct this, short of filming the guy and showing him what he was doing frame by frame. It wasn't just me. I remember talking to a senior about it (one who liked his form), and he agreed that the problem was there once I pointed it out. Nobody had been able to ferret it out with the typical pedagogical approaches.Would you agree that Sanchin (being the foundation for all the learning) is a way to condition the body and eyes when attacked even though it is stationary.
I agree that the problem could probably be worked on in sanchin, but I'm personally reluctant to work on it while the student is standing still. That doesn't mean my approach is right - just that I worry about the consequences. I think I would rather find a way to address it in prearranged kumite. There the student is allowed to respond. I think it's issues like these that make people like Gary Khoury so keen on sparring. Eventually you pick things like these up by just going into the pit and getting hit with those fakes. Ouch!! Maybe they won't do that again. Maybe. But it isn't easy, and not all of us are talented like a Gary Khoury. Somehow it would be nice if we could bring this problem back to sanchin kata like you suggest, and like I alluded to with Billy B. It is indeed a mindset issue, but one of highly trained perception. It is very complex.
A practitioner will always be faced with this problem. Did you watch the Portland vs. Utah game last night (5/16/00)? Did you see the deciding shot by Scottie Pippen from 3-point range that sent Utah packing for the season? On first glance, it looked like someone missed their blocking assignment. But when they did the instant replay, it was obvious - it was Scottie's years of experience that made that play. He dropped down to come up for the shot, and paused ever so slightly. The defender mis-read his intentions, and popped up like popcorn to block the phantom shot. Scottie just waited and then came up when defender was going down. In the end, he had a totally uncontested shot. A talented veteran pro out-foxed a younger pro in an adrenaline moment. But they were both highly trained professionals. I'm sure Scottie had this done to him many, many times in the past.
As I was thinking about my post, the thought occurred that one of my analogies I used to articulate your position might actually be a good training aid. Rich is our resident Charlton Heston, and brings others and me out to the range to help sharpen shooting skills. Some days he and our expert marksman (Tom) will be out there with a cornucopia of weapons and ammo. About 3/4 through the day one time he took a 38 special (I believe) and loaded a very high-powered round in it. We all shot the rounds. Then I went back to my favorite (a Glock 45 caliber) to close the day. I could not hit squat. I could not even hit the bloody target. The recoil from the high-powered rounds had conditioned a flinch in me, and I was moving the gun before the trigger was pulled every time. It was so bad that I had to call it a day and come back.
And I shoot in a modified sanchin!!
Here is a case where you want to program out a natural response. What you want is counter-intuitive in terms of natural reactions, but it is what you want to achieve the end - protecting yourself. This is appropriate. And the situation is generalizable.
Too bad we can't do sanchin training in the shooting range, no?
- Bill
-
RACastanet
- Posts: 3744
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA
Sanchin - Testing misconceptions
Well thank you Bill - 'Rich is our resident Charlton Heston" - that is quite a compliment.
The gun that did you in that day was a .357 magnum with very hot self defense rounds in it. One thing I have worked on with handguns is to be able to pick up pretty much any kind and hit a target's center of mass. Yes, that requires a non flinch response to the recoil you know is coming. I had shot so much in the past six months that I really conditioned the flinch away. However, I gave myself tennis elbow in the process and a serious flinch has returned. More practice I guess.
I'll pick up some extra practica ammo this weekend. Drop me a note if you can get free one afternoon next week.
Regards, Rich
The gun that did you in that day was a .357 magnum with very hot self defense rounds in it. One thing I have worked on with handguns is to be able to pick up pretty much any kind and hit a target's center of mass. Yes, that requires a non flinch response to the recoil you know is coming. I had shot so much in the past six months that I really conditioned the flinch away. However, I gave myself tennis elbow in the process and a serious flinch has returned. More practice I guess.
I'll pick up some extra practica ammo this weekend. Drop me a note if you can get free one afternoon next week.
Regards, Rich
Sanchin - Testing misconceptions
Excellent topic.
I consider Sanchin to be a meditation in motion. My greatest fascination is with the "soft" strikes or pushes -- sometimes only nudges -- that ever so slightly disrupt my balance. Oh sure, I get ego points when I take hard blows to whatever target, but I don't learn anything.
I consider Sanchin to be a meditation in motion. My greatest fascination is with the "soft" strikes or pushes -- sometimes only nudges -- that ever so slightly disrupt my balance. Oh sure, I get ego points when I take hard blows to whatever target, but I don't learn anything.
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
Sanchin - Testing misconceptions
Len (et al)
OK, let's eye this problem for a bit.
Let's start with what has already been put on the table, so-to-write.
I wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
If a student closes his eyes during a fake to the face, or during the distractions of the hands in front ot the face, how will they ever see the attack to the other parts of the body?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> And the answer is they won't flinch if understand the intent of the initial attack. Now before I go further on that one, let me point out where you and Mary agree with me. You wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
Len, you brought up an important issue. As you eloquently stated, <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
BUT... is the student standing like a Guinea pig in sanchin moving and active? Can that student block and/or move his/her body? Can (s)he lean back? No. We have created an artificial situation. We are asking the student - in my opinion - to do something that is very unnatural, and we are asking for an unnatural response. And we are programming a response in that may help the flinch, but it may also stop the student from protecting his/her eye when they goof.
Maybe.
Do you see my point? This is why I am against students standing and taking gratuitous beatings in sanchin. I got a personal epiphany on that one day when working with my own dojo "Mongo". Tony weighs 330 lbs., and now does dan kumite very gracefully. He has a roundhouse kick that shakes the rafters of our large gymnasium when he hits the heavy bag that hangs off a steel beam support. One day I stood there and took one of his kicks like a man with my cross block. My elbow still hurts today. When an SUV meets a VW Beetle, the SUV wins. It's simple Newtonian physics. The natural thing to do is to move with the blocking motion. While there are days when I like to take what I can of Tony in kotekitae and ashikitae, I know that there is a limit and that I must also train to go with the flow.
Might we inadvertently be training some of our students to take a finger in the eye? I wonder.
I don't have all the answers, but this is my concern. I would personally rather find another way to solve the very real problem you speak of.
What do you think?
- Bill
[This message has been edited by Bill Glasheen (edited May 17, 2000).]
OK, let's eye this problem for a bit.
Let's start with what has already been put on the table, so-to-write.I wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
I put the bold emphasis in later. You wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Some very good fighters use the distraction of face strikes to attack the lower body, trying to block their opponents vision to conceal the actual attack.The trick that gives the appearance of not moving is strictly a matter of timing and coordination. Excessively flinching and falling forward indicates an inability to synchronize yourself with the attack. The more you tune yourself to the attacker and the intent, the more it will appear like something else to the outside observer. But the end result has the individual in sanchin as an active participant in the exercise.
If a student closes his eyes during a fake to the face, or during the distractions of the hands in front ot the face, how will they ever see the attack to the other parts of the body?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> And the answer is they won't flinch if understand the intent of the initial attack. Now before I go further on that one, let me point out where you and Mary agree with me. You wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
and Mary wrote <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quoteI do agree however that a student should close his eyes when they KNOW a strike to the eyes is attempted. I wear contacts and sometimes have had my contact lense fall out, and even once it was stuck to the persons fist after I had been hit in the eye.
So...I think we all agree there is a time and a place to blink. In the end, to use Mary's own words, we don't want to condition ourselves to respond in a way where <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quoteI will generally blink when fingers come anywhere near my eyes (yes, I wear contacts too!!) and I believe it is a self-preservation movement, the blink is an instant reaction - and my body does not flinch.
In other words, we do not want to de-program an appropriate and natural reflex.my body will be working against itself
Len, you brought up an important issue. As you eloquently stated, <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
So, just as we want to stop a shooter from flinching before pulling a trigger, we want to keep the moving and active fighter in a real situation from flinching.As the attacker moves forward the eyes should remain open at the widest to insure that none of the combinations will be missed. The Sanchin test to the eyes is for the same reason. If the student flinches (blinks) everytime a strike is attempted, they will be conditioning the eyes to blink whenever they are attacked. This will cause some students to have their eyes closed during a flurry of attacks and will therefore be hit by one of them in the process.
BUT... is the student standing like a Guinea pig in sanchin moving and active? Can that student block and/or move his/her body? Can (s)he lean back? No. We have created an artificial situation. We are asking the student - in my opinion - to do something that is very unnatural, and we are asking for an unnatural response. And we are programming a response in that may help the flinch, but it may also stop the student from protecting his/her eye when they goof.
Maybe.
Do you see my point? This is why I am against students standing and taking gratuitous beatings in sanchin. I got a personal epiphany on that one day when working with my own dojo "Mongo". Tony weighs 330 lbs., and now does dan kumite very gracefully. He has a roundhouse kick that shakes the rafters of our large gymnasium when he hits the heavy bag that hangs off a steel beam support. One day I stood there and took one of his kicks like a man with my cross block. My elbow still hurts today. When an SUV meets a VW Beetle, the SUV wins. It's simple Newtonian physics. The natural thing to do is to move with the blocking motion. While there are days when I like to take what I can of Tony in kotekitae and ashikitae, I know that there is a limit and that I must also train to go with the flow.
Might we inadvertently be training some of our students to take a finger in the eye? I wonder.
I don't have all the answers, but this is my concern. I would personally rather find another way to solve the very real problem you speak of.
What do you think?
- Bill
[This message has been edited by Bill Glasheen (edited May 17, 2000).]
Sanchin - Testing misconceptions
Thank You Bill.
Mary,
I do not think you should be straining to keep your eyes open. Keeping your eyes open should be a natural response when one is attacked. Just one more muscle to focus with the rest. The shutting of the eyes takes more energy than it does to keep them open.
Look into the eyes of the children when they see something amazing (such as the first time they saw their sensei perform Sanseiryu). Their eyes are wide open, {and sometimes the mouths too
} and it didn't take any straining to do it.
I remember my sensei used to tell beginner students they already had an instinctive reaction to an attack. For almost all it was to cover the face and turn the head away from the attack. Because of this you didn't see the attack. It is the wrong way to act but it is instinctive.
He then told us that by studying karate we could change this wrong method of covering up, into an effective forward block and counter. The eyes must betrainednot strainedto stay open as this occurs.
Straining to open them wider requires more concentration than is necessary. It should happen instinctively.
Mary,
I do not think you should be straining to keep your eyes open. Keeping your eyes open should be a natural response when one is attacked. Just one more muscle to focus with the rest. The shutting of the eyes takes more energy than it does to keep them open.
Look into the eyes of the children when they see something amazing (such as the first time they saw their sensei perform Sanseiryu). Their eyes are wide open, {and sometimes the mouths too
} and it didn't take any straining to do it.I remember my sensei used to tell beginner students they already had an instinctive reaction to an attack. For almost all it was to cover the face and turn the head away from the attack. Because of this you didn't see the attack. It is the wrong way to act but it is instinctive.
He then told us that by studying karate we could change this wrong method of covering up, into an effective forward block and counter. The eyes must betrainednot strainedto stay open as this occurs.
Straining to open them wider requires more concentration than is necessary. It should happen instinctively.
Sanchin - Testing misconceptions
Bill
Great discussion here.
Solutions can be tossed around and tested.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
Try this:
Have the students wrap their belts around their eyes and perform Sanchin. During the steps, turns and strikes use the soft and hard tests to the stomach, chest, and lats randomly. Also I use my held out arm with fist from behind while they turn to test the focus of the arms and the hips when they turn.
The student must stay down and focused throughout the kata or they will "fail" the test.
This method of course does no good for the blinking of the eyes, but it teaches the student to be focused constantly.
Another drill I like to use while "blindfolded" is:
Have the students spread out in the dojo with their belts covering their eyes. Using stealth movements and a "poker" (a carboard tube used to hold CAD drawings is what I use)
sneak up on the student and try to disrupt their sanchin stance. The student can attack the poker with wauke blocks as you try to push them out of sanchin. My junior students love this drill and they ask to do it frequently. Some have "stolen" the poker with their wauke blocks.
The ability to stay focused while waiting for me to poke them is similar to the stationary sanchin test. But once poked, they must turn and attack the poker and be aware of the body focus while doing so as I try to break their stance with the poker.
Do you think this could be one solution to the stationary sanchin test?
Great discussion here.
Solutions can be tossed around and tested.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
The trouble with testing the students in Sanchin kata while moving is that they can see the attack and can focus the area being tested.The problem is how do we test a moving target. It isn't easy. Is this an issue? Absolutely.
Try this:
Have the students wrap their belts around their eyes and perform Sanchin. During the steps, turns and strikes use the soft and hard tests to the stomach, chest, and lats randomly. Also I use my held out arm with fist from behind while they turn to test the focus of the arms and the hips when they turn.
The student must stay down and focused throughout the kata or they will "fail" the test.
This method of course does no good for the blinking of the eyes, but it teaches the student to be focused constantly.
Another drill I like to use while "blindfolded" is:
Have the students spread out in the dojo with their belts covering their eyes. Using stealth movements and a "poker" (a carboard tube used to hold CAD drawings is what I use)
sneak up on the student and try to disrupt their sanchin stance. The student can attack the poker with wauke blocks as you try to push them out of sanchin. My junior students love this drill and they ask to do it frequently. Some have "stolen" the poker with their wauke blocks.
The ability to stay focused while waiting for me to poke them is similar to the stationary sanchin test. But once poked, they must turn and attack the poker and be aware of the body focus while doing so as I try to break their stance with the poker.
Do you think this could be one solution to the stationary sanchin test?
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
Sanchin - Testing misconceptions
Rich
I'll check my calendar. In the mean time, keep working on those exercises we talked about. That tendonitis will take a while to cure.
Knight
I'm with you. I prefer to take my beatings in sparring or in kotekitae/ashikitae, where I can return the favor.
- Bill
I'll check my calendar. In the mean time, keep working on those exercises we talked about. That tendonitis will take a while to cure.
Knight
I'm with you. I prefer to take my beatings in sparring or in kotekitae/ashikitae, where I can return the favor.
- Bill
Sanchin - Testing misconceptions
Questions on the blink test:
I agree we'd all be better off if we kept our eyes open while facigng attacks... although you get more light/information by widening the pupils, not the aperture of the eyelids, but that's a minor thing.
What we really want is a student not to flinch from an attack to the head in a fight.
If something comes out of no where, while we're walking down the street, we're going to blink, (I hope) because in that situation most likely it'll be a tree branch and not a bad guy and I wouldn't want a branch in my eye nor would I want to walk around primed for wideeyed combat at all times...
So the from-the-side test... if a hand is really that close to my eyes, i think a blink is in order. If I keep them open i'l not only lose my vision for the duration of a blink but for a lot longer while my roughed up cornea keeps me truly blind for minutes.
On the other hand, if their blink response is tested from the front, from a resonable sparring distance, this would better replicate the experience of seeing an attack come in and learning not to flinch from it, although there is the artificiality of their not being able to respond as we'd want them to.
Thoughts?
I agree we'd all be better off if we kept our eyes open while facigng attacks... although you get more light/information by widening the pupils, not the aperture of the eyelids, but that's a minor thing.
What we really want is a student not to flinch from an attack to the head in a fight.
If something comes out of no where, while we're walking down the street, we're going to blink, (I hope) because in that situation most likely it'll be a tree branch and not a bad guy and I wouldn't want a branch in my eye nor would I want to walk around primed for wideeyed combat at all times...
So the from-the-side test... if a hand is really that close to my eyes, i think a blink is in order. If I keep them open i'l not only lose my vision for the duration of a blink but for a lot longer while my roughed up cornea keeps me truly blind for minutes.
On the other hand, if their blink response is tested from the front, from a resonable sparring distance, this would better replicate the experience of seeing an attack come in and learning not to flinch from it, although there is the artificiality of their not being able to respond as we'd want them to.
Thoughts?
