PDA

View Full Version : Favorite Technique



Guantes
02-24-2005, 11:49 AM
I realize that no one technique is a do all end all. With that said nearly everyone regardless of style or discipline has a favorite technique that they gravitate to or that has worked for them when things get grim.

Mine is the finger jab to the eyes. A flicker jab as a distraction or a stronger one when opportunity permits. It is very effective. I have seen men that appeared to have "steel balls" or "iron jaws" but none with "wooden eyes". It is easy to learn and naturally improves with practice, I use a tennis ball swinging on a string.

Whats yours?

RES
02-24-2005, 12:48 PM
Frankly, I don't have one.

I used to, when I was younger and more technique-oriented; after this period, was the period where I had several favorites; then it became a favorite skill set (i.e. I liked throwing techniques); then it became "I like all of the techniques"; nowadays, I have no preference or affinity for any technique, any more than I have a preference for a screwdriver over a wrench.

I think this is the way of experiential development.

There is a term in budo- "tokui waza", which some people translate as "favorite technique". I think some people take a too-literal translation of this; "favorite" isn't as accurate as "one which I am best at".

If you were to ask me "what is my tokui waza?", my answer would be "aiki otoshi" or "sumi otoshi", depending on my mood.

Guantes
02-24-2005, 02:09 PM
RES
Well put.
Would you agree that the human desire to excell frequently creates a synonymity between favorite and best, be that good or bad. Ones best golf shot is often their favorite, a favorite length race is often what one is fastest at, etc. In some cases I suppose this could be negative by inducing more practice on the favorite at a cost to others. On the other hand it might raise one techinque etc, to excellent as opposed to all being good.

RES
02-24-2005, 04:01 PM
In some cases I suppose this could be negative by inducing more practice on the favorite at a cost to others.

A friend of mine in Nebraska refers to this, with regards to firearms, as "mental masturbation".

Coops
02-24-2005, 11:54 PM
RES
Well put.
Would you agree that the human desire to excell frequently creates a synonymity between favorite and best, be that good or bad. Ones best golf shot is often their favorite, a favorite length race is often what one is fastest at, etc. In some cases I suppose this could be negative by inducing more practice on the favorite at a cost to others. On the other hand it might raise one techinque etc, to excellent as opposed to all being good.

Anything which you have a good level of success with, especially in the eyes of others (because we all like to impress), becomes a favourite.

In combat, if you have success repeatedly with something, you begin to prefer it. I don't see that as a bad thing. If it keeps working for you, then you should use and rely on it. If it keeps getting your ass outa trouble, then it's a good friend.

Coops

RES
02-25-2005, 01:28 AM
In combat, if you have success repeatedly with something, you begin to prefer it. I don't see that as a bad thing. If it keeps working for you, then you should use and rely on it. If it keeps getting your ass outa trouble, then it's a good friend.

Of course; remember, though, that you and I are speaking in terms of a seasoned, disciplined practicioner who understands the difference between "training" and "mental masturbation".

The inexperienced, undisciplined, and (frankly) lazy person, will infrequently and incorrectly practice the single technique at which he's (at best) halfway-decent; for him, this becomes his "favorite".

It's that attitude, which chafes me- I hear "favorite technique", and I think of someone who has a heavy bag in their basement, which hangs in the corner collecting dust. It has one set of knuckle impressions in the dust, from the last time it was struck. The owner of said bag, in turn, probably tells people "I'm a pretty decent boxer".

Charles Rives
02-25-2005, 02:44 AM
Gabe once wrote, "think targets not techniques" with regard to empty hand fighting. I think that's good advice. I know that when I used to play tournament Judo, I would get my butt handed to me if I let my mind wander to think of techniques but did some butt handing when I simply thought of off-balancing, movement and position. Often when I looked back at the fight tapes at (winning fights), I saw myself using wierd hybrid throws or joint locks that don't resemble any particular formal technique.
If you attack aggressively and toward open targets the techniques will fill themselves in. This is even easier to apply to striking technique.

Miyamoto Musashi wrote:



You should not have a favorite weapon. To become over-familiar with one weapon is as bad as not knowing it well enough. You should not copy others, but use weapons, that you can handle properly. It is bad for commanders and troops to have things that they like and dislike. These are things you must learn thoroughly.


At another end of the combative spectrum, Aikido founder Ueshiba didn't believe that there were separate techniques. Just a few basic principles that could be expressed many different ways. He refused to name any of the throws or techniques in his art until his students pushed him to do so.


I think that eliminating a technique focus is one of the things that helps those "brawler" or "streetfighter" boxers and MMA competitors who become successful. Many of them could probably show beautiful boxing technique if they were interested in doing so. However, they enter the ring with one thing in mind, that is to attack and hurt the opponent using all of the targets available.

Chuck

michael
02-25-2005, 06:26 AM
I don't have a favorite either, and prefer "targets, tools, and techniques". A core group of techniques applied to proper targets with tools if they are available.

The techniques would be knees, elbows, palm strikes/chin jab, EOH/hammers and the carotid choke or forearm strangle.

Guantes
02-25-2005, 07:58 AM
I think that with the coming of age one is more prone to have a small core of favored techniques as others become more and more difficult to accomplish. That does not infer a neglect of training , only a realization of what is possible.

Matt
02-25-2005, 08:33 AM
Miyamoto Musashi wrote:



You should not have a favorite weapon. To become over-familiar with one weapon is as bad as not knowing it well enough. You should not copy others, but use weapons, that you can handle properly. It is bad for commanders and troops to have things that they like and dislike. These are things you must learn thoroughly.


Ahh - you beat me to it. "Favorites" are not a good thing. Approach every encounter with an open mind (even better - no mind) and respond to that specific threat with an appropriate response. Deciding ahead of time what you will do or what you would like to do will mean you will fail.

Guantes
02-25-2005, 09:48 AM
"You should not copy others, but use weapons, that you can handle properly"

An open mind is good, but the "appropriate response" must fit within the limits of your capabilities, based on many things including age. Maybe it is not so much picking favorites as eleminating those things which are beyond your capabilities.

Coops
02-25-2005, 10:47 AM
Ahh - you beat me to it. "Favorites" are not a good thing. Approach every encounter with an open mind (even better - no mind) and respond to that specific threat with an appropriate response. Deciding ahead of time what you will do or what you would like to do will mean you will fail.

Whilst I agree that it is good to prepare prior for the encounter, I find quoting Musashi at this point a bit daft, to say the least. The bit about open/no mind - absolute twaddle.

Do you, anyone on this forum, know of anyone who has entered a fight in that zen state. Conflict is scary. Some people have an increase in heart rate when they complain about restaurant food, so you can bet that people will find it difficult to empty their mind, prior to risking serious injury.

I know a doorman who has only head butted as a strike. He rarely uses more than grabs/pushes etc, but if it comes to hitting, that's what he uses. What he is really tactically good at is ensuring that everyone plays 'his' game. That's what gets the butt into the right distance. Thing is, because tempers are flared and everyone isn't thinking straight, nobody knows they are falling into his trap. They might have a well rehearsed physical toolbox, but they fall for his gameplan every time.

But I'm talking about real violence here, not martial arts. Oh Matt,so you don't favour the axe hand or face smash then :D

I agree with the target,tools handle also. Problem is that targets are moving dynamically and dissapear quickly, unless you're being pre-emptive, which is one thing I would ALWAYS try for. That's the only way you can choose from a selection of blows.

Only my view though and anyway, I'm not very accurate when it comes to landing precise shots.

Coops

Geezer
02-25-2005, 11:08 AM
Matt posted: "Deciding ahead of time what you will do or what you would like to do will mean you will fail."

Ahh, I'm still here and the OG is all gone. Maybe you want to insert a "sometimes" or other modifier into your statement.

God bless and y'all be mindful out there.

RES
02-25-2005, 11:15 AM
At another end of the combative spectrum, Aikido founder Ueshiba didn't believe that there were separate techniques. Just a few basic principles that could be expressed many different ways. He refused to name any of the throws or techniques in his art until his students pushed him to do so.

*beaming grin*

That's exactly the point- CONCEPTS!

The techniques themselves serve really no purpose except as a vehicle to learn, and then apply, the concepts. When one understand these concepts, they can make any technique work.

The great failing is in believing that the techniques are, themselves, the only thing to learn. In the grand scheme, they're the basest level of comprehension; with further development, they become essentially irrelevant.

Guantes
02-25-2005, 02:05 PM
RES

I must admit that you are one of the most agreeable people I have had the pleasure to disagree (sometimes) with.

"The heart of the martial arts is in understanding techniques."

"Maturity does not mean to become a captive of conceptualization. It is the realization of what lies in our innermost selves."

"The leading finger jab is one of the most effecient weapons, especially in self defense, and should be cultivated to the highest form of proficiency."

TAO OF JEET KUNE DO

*aged grin*

Matt
02-25-2005, 02:11 PM
I suppose I should have been more specific. "Techniques" to me means a series of basics put together in a specific order to deal with a specific attack - ie: attacker gives right punch to the face, you respond with XXX, attacker then kicks with left foot to groin, etc.

If you go into a fight thinking of that technique, and the attacker grabs you and gets in your face, that "technique" will not work. If we're talking about basic concepts (ie: a kick, punch, or "axe hand") put together in an order that responds to the attacker (instead of deciding ahead of time what that order/attack should be) then we are saying the same thing - that is a good thing.

As for the "no mind" - it's not so much that you see conflict is coming, sit down in seiza and meditate until you are ready - I agree, that would be silly and totally unrealistic. It's more about not committing to a specific game plan ahead of time, and reacting to your opponent instead. More of a general state of mind than a "here it comes - quick, empty your mind!" thing.

However - that doesn't mean don't practice techniques ahead of time, simply learn what those techniques are trying to teach, and put them into a whole series of "combinations of concepts" as Roundeye put it.

I guess I just should have said "don't put all your eggs in one basket" and left it at that........didn't mean to stir anything up.

RES
02-25-2005, 03:10 PM
RES

I must admit that you are one of the most agreeable people I have had the pleasure to disagree (sometimes) with.

"The heart of the martial arts is in understanding techniques."

"Maturity does not mean to become a captive of conceptualization. It is the realization of what lies in our innermost selves."

"The leading finger jab is one of the most effecient weapons, especially in self defense, and should be cultivated to the highest form of proficiency."

TAO OF JEET KUNE DO

*aged grin*

Why, thank you!

AAAhhhhh.... you actually DID read it!

Look at what Bruce said, and then remember the context from which he said it- Bruce spoke English as a second language, and he was writing to try to change the thinking of practicioners of the 60's, who were the folks mostly responsible for the mess of the 70's and 80's which we're still cleaning up. Both of these things, leave his writings somewhat open to interpretation.

When Bruce said "understanding techniques", he's not saying "train techniques, and that's it", he's saying "do these techniques so much, that you live, breathe, and dream about, these techniques". Understanding them is a great deal deeper than "being good at them".

As far as being a "captive of conceptualization"; I believe Bruce was saying "don't be a daydreamer". Almost all of his writings were conceptual; he spoke most about "timing", "tempo", "balance", etc. These are "concepts", as I use the term.

As to the efficiency of the finger jab- that's his preference. Remember that "Tao of Jeet Kune Do" was a collection of his musings, focused on what he preferred, which he wrote down while he was recuperating from a weightlifting injury. He NEVER meant for the book to be a training manual. Linda put them all together into a book, after his death (which I am not sure if he would have actually agreed with, or not).

Note also, the dedication of the book: "Absorb what is useful, and discard the rest". None of his principles were etched in stone, which is an essential facet for a "free, creative martial artist".

Guantes
02-25-2005, 03:30 PM
RES,

Aaahhh...of course I read it.

I will agree to disagree on the overall subject.

RES
02-25-2005, 04:40 PM
I will agree to disagree on the overall subject.

Hey, that beats a loud, abusive argument on the subject! :)

MTS
02-25-2005, 06:06 PM
I know a doorman who has only head butted as a strike. He rarely uses more than grabs/pushes etc, but if it comes to hitting, that's what he uses. What he is really tactically good at is ensuring that everyone plays 'his' game. That's what gets the butt into the right distance. Thing is, because tempers are flared and everyone isn't thinking straight, nobody knows they are falling into his trap. They might have a well rehearsed physical toolbox, but they fall for his gameplan every time.
"Everyone has a plan until they get smacked in the mouth." Mike Tyson

RES
02-25-2005, 06:19 PM
Thing is, because tempers are flared and everyone isn't thinking straight, nobody knows they are falling into his trap. They might have a well rehearsed physical toolbox, but they fall for his gameplan every time.

Good onya, Coops.

The first guy you describe, illustrates exactly what I mean, when I refer to a "tactician", as opposed to the latter example, a "technician".

Hence, my disdain for those who train techniques, and then purport to have learned everything there is to learn.