tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1540643628218431638.post329048042682941869..comments2023-12-19T07:45:21.442+08:00Comments on Kojutsukan: ma ≠ F ClarifiedJohn Coleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14634192254115557179noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1540643628218431638.post-19448512242485053672012-11-13T18:41:26.346+08:002012-11-13T18:41:26.346+08:00Not to put too fine a point on it, but what you sa...Not to put too fine a point on it, but what you said? That's just basic physics. What you need is to sit down with a physicist and get them to explain force, power, and KE, and explain their inter-relationiships.<br /><br />I'd help...but it was half a lifetime ago that I last looked at all that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1540643628218431638.post-27892343093626968642012-11-13T18:37:51.049+08:002012-11-13T18:37:51.049+08:00Not to put too fine a point on it, but that's ...Not to put too fine a point on it, but that's just basic physics. What you need to do is sit down with a physicist and get them to explain force, power, and KE and their inter-relationships.<br /><br />I would...but it's half a lifetime ago since I looked at that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1540643628218431638.post-41607770669502019232012-04-24T09:55:42.673+08:002012-04-24T09:55:42.673+08:00Hi Paul. Thanks for the comment.
Never come acro...Hi Paul. Thanks for the comment. <br /><br />Never come across sequencing training so I had a bit of a look at it. It appears to be a training method. My work is more about understanding what makes techniques work rather than training methods. Having said that, once you understand what makes a technique work, you can then target your training accordingly.<br /><br />To clarify further. In the case of a punch; how does a punch injure a person? Injury science tells us its through energy exchange, in this case kinetic energy. KE is one half of the product of mass and velocity squared. This then tells us to look for what is being done in terms of mass and velocity in a punch. Ok, so now we look for mass and velocity in a punch action. Using a wing chun or power punch as an example, the distance these punches travel is small so their velocity and KE and therefore their capacity to injure an opponent is relatively small. But then you see different ways they increase the mass behind their punches in order to increase the forces applied when impact is made. Now you understand what makes those punches work. <br /><br />When you appreciate the role of KE in a punch, what do you orient your training around. Velocity has an exponential contribution to KE, so, like virtually every author who refers to it in the martial arts literture, you should orient your training around increasing velocity in your punches. How do you do that? There are a number of ways. However, studies hidden away in academic journals consistenly show that the difference between experienced and inexperienced practitioners, and even nonpractitioners, is that experienced practitioners exert more force on a body or object through increasing the mass behind their strike. Many studies show the difference in velocity is negligible, it is mass that is the difference between the different type of practitioners. This then suggests where the focus of training should be.<br /><br />That is the objective of my articles, and work, at this stage. It also produces a teaching method. Teach the student what is important to look for in a technique. They then know what is important, and why it is important. This should increase the rate of learning of those students.<br /><br />I agree with you totally. A practitioner of a particular movement can perform it better than one who only understands how it works. In fact, this is the norm in the martial arts. Most practitioners can do it and have no need to understand why it works. They understand the how and don't understand the why. This becomes very evident when they try and explain the why of the how. Most of them should stick to explaining the how and not attempt the why.<br /><br />The thing that is common to all techniques in all of the martial arts is the science. For instance, all striking techniques contain KE which is the potential to cause a change in the motion or shape (injure or damage) of a body or object. So, you can analyse familiar and unfamiliar striking techniques, and their teaching methods, and understand what they are trying to do and why. This then should increase the rate of learning and improved performances.<br /><br />With regards to my striking experience, the jujutsu I studied included a lot of striking and kicking, although in a more karate fashion. I've also trained silat quite a bit, different styles, and less so boxing, kung fu, and a couple of styles of karate.<br /><br />The science is the common element to all these techiques in all these arts. The science enables us to understand the techniques, but you still have to train them in order to become proficient at them. No doubt. Understanding the science offers the tantilising possiblity of increasing the rate of learning and proficiency.<br /><br />CheersJohn Coleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14634192254115557179noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1540643628218431638.post-58634569292513810142012-04-23T17:02:28.085+08:002012-04-23T17:02:28.085+08:00Striking is much more in my area of knowledge. Ha...Striking is much more in my area of knowledge. Have you looked at sequencing, and sequencing training for your article? You may find that quite interesting. Sequencing at the micro level is one of the ways of explaining why similar people can achieve widely different results, especially in striking. You’ll find mma coaches using cross fit type techniques to improve sequencing in their athletes if you look hard enough.<br />One of the laurels I have to give to mma is that the money has made people truly professional, and specialist and knowledgeable coaches and scientists are being employed by them to deliver real results.<br />From a Karate perspective, many of these things can be compared to traditional exercises, but people now understand more of what is happening and how to get the most out of them.<br />This is where the gap of understanding the physics and being able to apply things appears. I might understand the macro-mechanics of Judo techniques, but a child who actually practices Judo can apply them better than myself, without ‘understanding’ anything.<br />This leads me to worry a bit about you moving into striking after only looking at it on an intellectual level – besides the quoted bit of Silat, have you done much practically in terms of striking arts (western or eastern)?Paul Fishhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11412637930552211810noreply@blogger.com