Let discuss cooperative drills

[Greg]

I find something very beneficial and satisfying about full speed prearranged stuff due to having no gloves or protective gear on. I'd like to think that this kind of training has adaptability in the real world. -Josann

Well if you do a weapons art then you really have to do co-operative drills .......you can't knife your training partners. -jorvik

Both of these points go back to the idea of the notion of "controlled danger" which the yakusoku kumite allow. By eliminating the randomness inherent in jiyu kumite (or a real world encounter), you can leave in things like the intention to hit and do damage. In yakusoku kumite I know what the next attack is, but I also know that within that confined context my partner's goal is to attack in good faith and with intent; if I flub my defense I get hit, and at the yudansha (black belt) level I should be getting hit hard...

In formulating my thoughts about prearranged drills in general I try to take my example from those arts that are the least removed from combat - typically the Filipino and Indonesian martial arts. In training these, the more authentic styles (jutsu vs. do to mix my cultural martial metaphors) invariably utilize live blades at some point during training. I'll disagree a bit with jorvik in that context - if you are doing prearranged drills with live blades and mistakes are made someone will in fact get cut ("knifed"). Obviously using live blades in a non-prearranged drill is a different matter entirely...

Going back to Josann's point, there is something to be said for the intensity and real danger inherent in the practice of live blade training - do you want to be exposed to a live blade for the first time on the street, or in the dojo? Understandably many folks are reticent about this practice... then again many dojo don't practice attacking with intent at any level of training.

[Josann]

Many styles utilize knife training on a regular basis, something most uechi schools do not. Many a night I've come home from jujitsu a little shaken in my ability after doing poorly in knife defense exercises, realizing that if the blade had been real I'd be dead.

After you get over that discomfort you realize that this is a good thing and a neccessary part of training.

[Bill Glasheen]

I've had a bit of time with Raffi in Filipino knife training. Raffi says something which I repeat often.

If you get into a fight with someone who has a knife, you WILL get cut.

Maybe that's true and maybe it's not. But the percentages suggest that one should accept the fact, get over it, and move on. If the notion of getting cut paralyzes you, you're dead before you approach the life-threatening scenario.

Those who write about surviving deadly encounters emphasize the importance of making peace with your maker and/or your legacy. One of the most liberating things one can experience before facing such a seemingly impossible situation is the notion that death or severe injury just is, and is not to be feared. Ironically enough, it just might improve your chance of survival.

- Bill

[Van Canna]

In yakusoku kumite I know what the next attack is, but I also know that within that confined context my partner's goal is to attack in good faith and with intent; if I flub my defense I get hit, and at the yudansha (black belt) level I should be getting hit hard...

Hi Greg,

Hope you are doing well. You bring up a good point here in this post.

Again, my interest in responding to this thread has not been or will be to ‘bash the kumites’ ….

We want to practice them, as they are useful in a number of ways…so many of us have an opinion on how they should really be done, if one even has the knowledge to do them correctly, as they were intended to be practiced …to start with_ and or if any ‘modifications’ from the standard practice _are for the better or for the worse...and on and on...

When you write

if I flub my defense I get hit

We must define ‘my defense’ and place it in some sort of context…because again and again…what we do over and over and over _ imprints attacks assumptions and response actions in our neural pathways that may or may not be in keeping with successful street attack chaos and survival.

Again, you are correct in what you state, as we must start somewhere to get the students to deal with force on force drills that help us gain confidence in the style we love.

But when we talk about ‘defense’ …does the 'defense' we practice in the drills always mimics or imprints the right street defense?

This has been the crux of all the disagreements over the years…and certainly we have seen and expect all kinds of opinions…

This is the beauty of discussions that analyze what we learn and do _to improve our understanding and efficiency.

Let us take a simple example: Say Dan kumite #1…

You face the opponent…the opponent is there with an intent to hit you with his first reverse punch to your midsection so that you can block it, then counter with a front kick, which he then blocks, and fires back with another reverse punch to your midsection, that you then block and fire back with a punch. All done with great power and intent to 'let you have it' if you 'flub' your defense. OK..

Back to

if I flub my defense I get hit

This would mean, I take it, that if your attempt to block the incoming punch to your midsection with the ‘standard’ block_ and you fail somehow_ then you will be hit.

No argument there. But, again, what is this response action imprinting on your neural pathways as it relates to facing a 'puncher' in the street?

Is this the way we should think of street defense? i.e., allow a person with intent to hurt you_ to move within striking range, and then allow him to punch so we can block it and counter?

Again, this is ‘basic training’ and yes the drills need to be practiced, although there are other ways to get this same practice that other practitioners use to good results.

But back to the ‘defense’ definition…should we really keep on imprinting into our primal brain…the allowing of an enemy we sensed or should have sensed….to get within striking distance and allow him to launch a first strike with intent to hurt us...so we can block it or respond by moving and blocking?

This can be done successfully, but is it the best way? Sometimes it is ...thus we should be proficient with it.

Let's remember, momentum, plays a big part in defense.

Is there another way to ‘do better’ later, after you get out of ‘basic training’ ? We used to have the same discussions as infantry soldiers going from basic training to 'advanced Infantry' training.

Well…if we read Rabesa’s book on ‘kumite’ …this is what we see on page 65 ‘The Science’ … ‘Readiness’…

And remember….Rabesa wrote his book in relation to free style fighting in which he was a great champion, he did not write it with street defense in mind, although much of what he wrote is in fact applicable to street attacks as he has proven time and again on the street where some of his attackers are lucky to still be alive.

Readiness

concentration and good timing are closely related; to have enough self confidence to wait rather than attack at random[here you see the reference to free style fighting] ; to attack certain attacks and take the fight to the opponent. These come all under the heading of readiness.

There are some drills that can aid you in this. Although your pre-arranged drills are great for certain things …they do not help much here. Most prearranged kumite become too rhythmic. It’s too easy to ready one self for each attack.

If you do a non rhythmic, no count pre arranged kumite, it will help somewhat. You will still know what type of attack is coming and where it is to be directed.

Again, let’s keep in mind that ‘imprinting’ your neural pathways will occur in subtle ways and you will always revert to those ‘imprints’ whether you will remember it or not in a real fight.

What if your opponent fires at you a combination of punches you have not trained to deal with, such as uppercuts and hooks, or simply decides to stab you.

Is there some way to ‘imprint’ to deal with this in a safer manner?

Again, listen to what Rabesa says…which reflects what I have also said over and over

…. Although your pre-arranged drills are great for certain things…

With this in mind, read on

I prefer something different to develop timing and readiness. I call it “You move…I move” _It not only encompass your ‘reading’ but timing as well.

Face each other at closer than normal fighting distance. Use only punches for this distance.
Decide who will attack and who will ‘time’ _

The idea is to get your timing to the point where you can get your punch off as your partner does.

If you are touched first your timing needs work.
Keep the punches to the body area for safety.

After you have taken your turns, try it with either of you coming at random. This is an excellent way to speed up your timing and punch.

No blocking allowed here. Do the same with kicks.

Then read what he recommends and why with the famous ‘one step Kumite’ we have all been exposed to when working with the Okinawan masters here in the states during their visits.

Then keep on reading in his book why it is usually better to go into the attack rather than away from it…especially if the opponent is on the large side…and how he was able to defeat some big powerful opponents of the 60s and seventies, especially fighters from the southwest whose intent was to kill you in the ring.

[Bill Glasheen]

Hmm...

First, it's worth noting that the last person who worked with me on my Dan Kumite was none other than Art Rabesa. It was my godan test, and my partner was Manny Neves. Some of you know Manny. He's a wonderful fellow. And I used to love partnering with him because I didn't feel like I had to be gentle. In fact when Manny and I realized we were going to be partners for the test, we made a pact not to "put the board to sleep."

I think Art liked our yakusoku kumite. He smiled a lot. Used "strong" a lot with a laugh. And then he spent probably half an hour with us. Art had no shortage of pointers to give us, and I still enjoy drawing from that intense session I had with him.

My point? Art loves yakusoku kumite, and can use it incessantly to teach many important fighting points.

Is it the be-all, end-all exercise in martial arts? Well conder that...

• Sanchin isn't
• Advanced kata aren't
• Bunkai kumite aren't
• Jiyu kumite isn't
• Scenario training isn't
• Reading isn't
• Etc.

It's just a tool you can use to accomplish certain things. And like most tools, it's the carpenter and not the hammer that builds the house.

Another thought... I don't like to use words like "defense" and "block" any more. I like the concept of pangainoon. To me it's like the yin-yang symbol. White swirls into black; black swirls into white. But there's no gray, is there? Similarly an attack is a defense, and a defense should be thought of in terms of your attack. As much as possible, I like to consider the dual nature of all the tools I have and all the moves I execute.

The scenario of Dan Kumite is one where - for whatever reason - the opponent initiates the assault. But the response should be thought of not as a defense, but rather part and parcel of an attack. I like the idea of attacking the attack. When you are good, you can even attack the intent.

Every attack from your opponent leaves an opening. Every response should be thought of as exploiting that opening as efficiently and as quickly as possible. In Dan Kumite #1 for example I'm lining myself up to attack the ribs (or wherever) at an angle. You'd be surprised how many people I nail. What? You're not attacking my block?? Just ignoring their attack (because your set-up takes you off the line of force) and instead focusing on how they help you nail them makes all the difference in the world.

Is this the way we should think of street defense? i.e., allow a person with intent to hurt you_ to move within striking range, and then allow him to punch so we can block it and counter?

By now the answer to that - for me - should be obvious. This doesn't come right away though. It comes with years of baby steps.

How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time.

- Bill

[Van Canna]

Hmmm…here too Bill…smiles.

1. Never said Art doesn’t like the kumites. He wrote

…. Although your pre-arranged drills are great for certain things…

What he means should be clear , most of all to me …especially given the fact Art was initially my student at the Mattson academy when I ran the free fighting class, that we fought against each other in the dojo and in open tournaments, and we that fought side by side against a couple of punks…you know the story.

I bring to your attention what he wrote in his book once again

…Although your pre-arranged drills are great for certain things, I prefer something different to develop timing and readiness. I call it “You move…I move” _It not only encompass your ‘reading’ but timing as well.

Face each other at closer than normal fighting distance. Use only punches for this distance.
Decide who will attack and who will ‘time’ _

the idea is to get your timing to the point where you can get your punch off as your partner does.

If you are touched first your timing needs work.
Keep the punches to the body area for safety.

After you have taken your turns, try it with either of you coming at random. This is an excellent way to speed up your timing and punch.

Now why in hell would he write this in his book, and 'tell' you different?

Clearly he is not knocking the drills, he is telling us of a more advanced method he feels works best for certain applications.

You wrote

It's just a tool you can use to accomplish certain things. And like most tools, it's the carpenter and not the hammer that builds the house.

Certainly so, but a defensive set of moves is nothing like building a house.

You practice moves long enough …they imprint for the better or for the worse.

Similarly an attack is a defense, and a defense should be thought of in terms of your attack. As much as possible, I like to consider the dual nature of all the tools I have and all the moves I execute.

Amen Bro, now we are in agreement…to wit

But the response should be thought of not as a defense, but rather part and parcel of an attack. I like the idea of attacking the attack. When you are good, you can even attack the intent.

Prosit …. smile.

Every attack from your opponent leaves an opening. Every response should be thought of as exploiting that opening as efficiently and as quickly as possible. In Dan Kumite #1 for example I'm lining myself up to attack the ribs (or wherever) at an angle. You'd be surprised how many people I nail. What? You're not attacking my block?? Just ignoring their attack (because your set-up takes you off the line of force) and instead focusing on how they help you nail them makes all the difference in the world.

Very good. And that’s dueling. I prefer to think that in street attack ‘defense’ …if I have time to line myself up then I have time to immediately move in to shut down the intent.

And by now my answer, which is the same answer I have given over thousands of pages, should also be obvious.

Squaring off with a partner at a given distance is not true defensive practice in the sense of the word, though what we can learn can be good or bad depending on the applications….and the imprinting.










________________________________________

[Bill Glasheen]

I get the idea you feel that the format will permanently imprint to every possible martial application. I don't see it.

If all I did was kata, dan kumite, and sport sparring, well maybe...

If I also do bunkai kumite, many-on-one randori, scenario training, choreograph on the spot as I teach concepts, etc., well... THEN what am I imprinting? If you constantly go back to the underlying principles for everything you do, then after a while it's just the underlying principles that you imprint. IMO of course.

I agree about the "shut down" concept. Want to know something cool? I've been working with our Miss Vicki lately for her sandan test. Want to know what she's doing when I engage in a little bit of light sparring? She goes straight in and shuts the opponent down. She's all over you like a cheap suit. Little Miss (Greek terror) Vicki. Now where did that come from?

- Bill

[jorvik]

Quote
"In formulating my thoughts about prearranged drills in general I try to take my example from those arts that are the least removed from combat - typically the Filipino and Indonesian martial arts. In training these, the more authentic styles (jutsu vs. do to mix my cultural martial metaphors) invariably utilize live blades at some point during training. I'll disagree a bit with jorvik in that context - if you are doing prearranged drills with live blades and mistakes are made someone will in fact get cut ("knifed"). Obviously using live blades in a non-prearranged drill is a different matter entirely... "
Well Filipino and Indonesian martial arts can be just as unrealistic as any others....I've done quite a bit of FMA in the past 20 or so years and there are bad habits that can be picked up there as well, one is only hitting each others sticks.a kind of vicious Morris dancing.and the other...which sadly apllies to all arts and all drills is what Musashi called "passing on"........with two man drills you can fall into a timing or rythm.in fact you tend to search for this rythm to control what's going on ...I know I do
in reality a knife attack is only a quick stab or two ( in my hood at least ).......unless you meet a nutter or a cokehead then it's multiple stabs
folks tend to be unrealistic when they look for stuff like this, on the streets it will be just one or two moves learned from a buddy..........

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=s ... nife&emb=0

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=s ... nife&emb=0

[Van Canna]

Well, Bill, you can start by answering the questions as to why Rabesa wrote what he wrote.

It really matters not what you do in these discussions, you keep bringing that up constantly…. that’s fine…other people do different things _ in either modifying the engagement principle of the kumites as I do …and or other close quarters combat applications.

We are talking about general concepts, something that Rabesa brought up in his book that I brought to the attention of this discussion without knocking the kumites.

Ray,

You bring up good points...And Rory wrote extensively about this very problem in his book. And that's a no BS guy who lives the violence we imagine, in reality behind prison walls against the worst kind of attackers.

But we are excellent at rationalizing.

[Greg]

Canna Sensei,

I really enjoy doing Dan Kumite and like segment number one (how dare you trample on my fun? )

Having said that, I think that it is the one sequence out of our yakusoku kumite more than any other that seems clearly designed for jiyu kumite training; the way one trades attacks while moving to find an opening for a ‘clean’ hit is certainly indicative of this. Nevertheless it is possible to redeem the sequence somewhat and make it more worthwhile with some changes, e.g. changing the initial attack to a hook.

I tell my students that the presumption ineherent in our yakusoku kumite is that we’ve already f#^*ed up – not only by being unaware of an impending threat (and getting out of the area) but by being so unaware that we were caught flatfooted with no option but retreating as the opponent launches the first one or two attacks (of course the scenario presumes some awareness or the first attack would have already connected – that’s a different drill however…). With yudansha, the only time I advocate frontal attacks to the midsection is with weapons; all “punching” attacks are to the face or head otherwise. Suddenly an inadequate defense bears a cost, even in the dojo

jorvik,
There is nothing magic about a martial art – currently Filipino and Indonesian styles are in vogue to some degree (much the way karate, kung fu and BJJ have had their turn in the spotlight) and thus there is good and bad out there. Certainly bad habits can be picked up anywhere, however if you reread the excerpt you quoted you will note I referred to the more “authentic” styles. This was an effort to avoid offending… Bottom line is that those styles that were created and taught by those with true combat experience are more realistic – for the historical context in which they were created. So, are they addressing an exchange of slashes and stabs in their drills? Absolutely. They were developed in large part to teach someone to fight against a skilled knife fighter. However if the practices that you’ve seen rely solely on stick on stick training developing rhythms that no one subsequently departs from and/or if they do not address the sudden “assassination-style” knife attack, you weren’t seeing the “real deal.”

[Van Canna]

Canna Sensei,

I really enjoy doing Dan Kumite and like segment number one (how dare you trample on my fun? )

Hi Greg,

Hope all is well. Good to hear from you. Put a smile on your face… hate to see you crying kumites are here to stay.


You state

Having said that, I think that it is the one sequence out of our Yakusoku kumite more than any other that seems clearly designed for Jiyu kumite training; the way one trades attacks while moving to find an opening for a ‘clean’ hit is certainly indicative of this. Nevertheless it is possible to redeem the sequence somewhat and make it more worthwhile with some changes, e.g. changing the initial attack to a hook.

True enough…but why should we change anything!

The purpose for prearranged kumites is and shall remain primarily as a preparatory exercise for free sparring. It is the reason why they came into existence.

We can work in drills for dealing with uppercuts, hooks, head butts etc. in other formats.

In many practitioners’ opinions they shall always remain a ‘stepping stone’ to more challenging ways to train for the unpredictable dynamics of street attack, the manner outlined by Rabesa sensei as just one example.

Had they been designed for street defense, surely we would have seen more of the habitual acts of violence in their make up and execution.

I tell my students that the presumption inherent in our yakusoku kumite is that we’ve already f#^*ed up – not only by being unaware of an impending threat (and getting out of the area) but by being so unaware that we were caught flatfooted with no option but retreating as the opponent launches the first one or two attacks

OK…good.

Any training activity ends up with ‘imprinting’ on your neural pathways if done over and over even if shared with other activities.

kumite imprints the ‘my turn …your turn’ where you enjoy a ‘pause’ for turns…a luxury in a street attack that can be deadly.

Another imprinting problem….

Look at the way we square off and ‘keep our distance’ in the drills….this alone tells us they were designed for sparring.

Real fights start at very close range, such as some guy in a crowded bar cold cocking you because he didn’t like the way you looked at his date.

In his book, Rory writes

Most styles start much too far away to simulate a sudden assault. Either they are working from the dueling assumption or the drill was introduced to substitute distance for time _
By making the attacker reach, it gave the defender little more time to work on the subtleties of the defense…

I think he nailed it on the head when he wrote

Either they are working from the dueling assumption

Also think about what happens during the performance of the drill we practice over and over albeit subjected to a number of ‘innovative’ variations….

You will constantly condition yourself to expect a certain behavior from your partner in the way he moves_ targeting of strikes and counters, matters not how fast or how strongly performed.

Obviously some prearranged work is needed to get a handle on the workings of the style.

But how far do we take it? What percentage of our training should the kumites take up? What of the more specific training aspects of habitual acts of violence, or reflex drills such as Rabesa was pointing out?

Here we have a parallel:

Fencing masters write

“ Prearranged training_ conditions the fencer to expect a certain behavior from his opponent. This expectation is a preeminent factor in the personal evaluation and classification of the imminent combat scenario and in the external development of the fight itself.

Expecting an opponent to behave in one-way or the other is not without danger. Often, being right or wrong determines who's going to live or die at the end of an encounter--before the actual fight has begun”

Bottom line...do kumites...enjoy them...they are fun...

[jorvik]

Quote
"You bring up good points...And Rory wrote extensively about this very problem in his book. And that's a no BS guy who lives the violence we imagine, in reality behind prison walls against the worst kind of attackers. "

Van no disrespect to Rory.but read my post again I quoted MIYAMOTO MUSASHI.some say the greatest swordsman in Japan....I think he knew even more than Rory does...and I reckon he killed more folks with a blade

[Van Canna]

Ray,

Mushashi is fine with me conceptually as is Rory _ in my view as the 'modern warrior'

[Van Canna]

Ray,

Just so that you know I understood and agree with your thinking, I repost this from you

….there are bad habits that can be picked up… which sadly applies to all arts and all drills is what Musashi called "passing on"........with two man drills you can fall into a timing or rhythmic fact you tend to search for this rhythm to control what's going on ...

This is the one reason why so many practitioners dislike two men drills done constantly along the same pattern, done over and over and over, regardless of the ‘re-packaging’ …

As you know, some Uechi-ka just plain refuse to do them and prefer alternate ways to ‘school’ their street defensive and or free fighting abilities.

When it comes to the ‘negative imprint/bad habits’ one criticism is that the aim of our practice is to inbred the stopping of a fight quickly not to run it as we can program ourselves in the practice of lengthy drills.


Yet more sustained drill practice, that takes into account habitual street fighting dynamics, that does not imprint unrealistic expectations _

_ needs to be practiced because not all fights can be stopped quickly _ and as we can foresee unstable force on force encounters …we must be able to move our position, react in an instant and be able to change from one technique to another.

My personal view has always been that our kumites should be practiced well at critical points of our development, as they ‘bridge’ many abstract aspects of our early training, especially if one wants to get into open competition _ which is also a good way to develop ‘combative experience’ short of seeking it on the street, another point of contention voiced by many.

But the drills must be looked at from the perspective of the why and the what _ they were designed for, without getting all in a huff over them.

At some point we must progress to drills which have a mix of effective, pre-emptive and pro-active strikes and some which, in contrast, train a response to realistic attacks (no spinning back kicks or head-height roundhouse kicks)using foot work and body positioning and no-frills counter-attacks to neutralize the assailant.

Some of us do indeed practice this in one form or another, such as Bill does in his dojo.

All drills can be practiced together if one wishes, but being very aware and of concern over ‘imprinting’ ….this is an insidious enemy.

If people were to calmly accept the reasoning that one activity should be performed for a specific reason…then another activity performed for another specific reason…and understand the potential dangers of ‘cross breeding’ we would not have such ‘kumite wars’ on these forums.

For example, I post from Rabesa’s book

Although your pre-arranged drills are great for certain things… I prefer something different to develop timing and readiness. I call it “You move…I move” _It not only encompass your ‘reading’ but timing as well.

And people don’t respond to it for obvious reasons.

I post this from fencing masters

“ Prearranged training_ conditions the fencer to expect a certain behavior from his opponent. This expectation is a preeminent factor in the personal evaluation and classification of the imminent combat scenario and in the external development of the fight itself.

Expecting an opponent to behave in one-way or the other is not without danger. Often, being right or wrong determines who's going to live or die at the end of an encounter--before the actual fight has begun”

And of course, it gets swept under the tables because ‘they’ know better.

One positive comment I got from Rabesa’s quote from his book, comes from Okinawa, and I paraphrase …

Rabesa Sensei has just about perfectly described the art of basic Jiyu kobo:

- attack/counter technique at close, realistic range.

Moving with. Not
before, or after, but with perceived motion from the opponent.

And starting with the punches, then, Later, with kicks. Then combos. Then a continuous stream of such unchoreographed attacks.

This of course is from the Zankai [ Breyette sensei] describing Kanbun’s fighting drills as observed, practiced and reported/instructed by Toyama sensei.

Breyette sensei also was very appreciative of Rabesa’s method as follows

To Rabesa Sensei's credit:

He came upon, developed, and perfected this fighting concept independent of
Okinawan guidance or training. Proof of his expertise is that he can
explain it so simply and concisely, engendering immediate understanding.

"You don't really understand your subject if you can't explain it in simple
words."

[Van Canna]

http://www.martial-arts-video.net/2007/ ... odile.html

No step ...block then bite