Simplicity

[Brock]

Do you need five blocking techniques when one will suffice? Should you have thirty types of attacks when several are really all that’s needed? What about defending against all points on both sides of the body when only one side is sufficient?

Sound like a quote from The Tao of Jeet Kune Do? It's actually from the Senkotiros website. I find it odd how relatively unknown Senkotiros is when the basic premise behind the art is so similar to JKD. I'm surprised more JKD practitioners haven't picked up on it. Not that I think there's anything wrong with the JKD Kali or that they need to train in Senkotiros (well, no more so than I think everyone needs to train in it, but I'm pretty sure everyone thinks that their art is awesome and everyone should be doing it! :coolyello) it's just that I'm surprised that more JKD people haven't stumbled upon it.

[chubbybutdangerous]

:bow:I agree wholeheartedly with that statement. Where I'm at it is something we really stress. Take for instance boxing (we do a lot of boxing training also). How many different strikes do boxers use? How many different ways can you jab... it's still a jab. Actually, how many different ways can you punch an adversary. We (my teacher and myself) believe that if you have "x" amount of attacks/techniques that you are really good at and can make them work "real time", you don't really need much else. We really stress basics to build a strong foundation. Build a strong foundation and a building will stand even when you build much more on it. Have a weak foundation and when you build upon it it will just crumble to the ground no matter how fancy you try to make it.

Respectfully,
Chubby

[geezer]

:bow:I agree wholeheartedly with that statement... Respectfully, Chubby

Don't let that Chubby guy fool you. He knows a zillion techniques and can make 'em work. He just boils them down to a zillion expressions of a few basic concepts.That's the foundation. And, as he frequently reminds me, if you don't get that right, your techniques don't mean... squat.

Along the same lines, I was playing a little game with a training partner the other day. He'd throw a number one strike and I'd use a favorite defense and counter. Then he'd attack again, varying the angle and force a little, then a little more, and so on until he was throwing a wide variety of attacks... and each time I'd try to adapt and use the same defense just to see how much "mileage" I could sqeeze out of a single technique. We found that you can do an awful lot by adapting just one really solid move.

[Brock]

How much mileage did you get? I pretty much use the same defensive technique to defend against darn near everything. My follow up tends to vary slightly, but the intial defense is alomst always the same.

[geezer]

How much mileage did you get? I pretty much use the same defensive technique to defend against darn near everything. My follow up tends to vary slightly, but the intial defense is alomst always the same.

That's interesting, I'm coming to the same conclusion. I actually do better by keeping it as simple as possible. When I get "creative" I always scew up. You'd think that by varying your responses, you would keep your opponent guessing. But I do better just trying to do one thing right. Maybe that will change with a whole lot more practice. Or maybe not.

[gagimilo]

I've also found that a tendency is creeping up to boil my responses to two categories - closing and opening movements, i.e. forehand or backhand.
However, in attack, there seems to be more diversity in my work.

[chubbybutdangerous]

:bow: You know, after thinking it over and trying to replay what I do at the gym, I also have to say that I rely pretty much on the same basic techniques. Geezer, I work out with you more than anyone, would you agree? I think I usually just try to angle off and take out the head if possible. Either way, I try to keep it simple. My instructor and I both call what we do "Lazy Man Martial Arts". I say I'm too fat, old, out of shape and and not good enough to pull off what other people do. But it seems to work for me.
:whip:

Respectfully,
Chubby

[5tirosCamarin]

There's only one way to defend in Senkotiros: cross the attacker's stick with your stick (this is also a direct quote from the website). You can do this in several different angles (in fact we have a 9-count blocking drill), and you can either absorb the impact by bracing and cushioning like you would catch a ball or you can deflect it with a force to force block, but there remains only one method of defense that is the common denominator for all of them. Most often, though, I think you'll see Grandmaster use the vertical block, which resembles Balintawak's candlestick block. This is how his stick becomes his shield. To block on one side, shield. To block on the other side, move your shield. Then, take away your weapons and the same principles apply.

[geezer]

:bow: You know, after thinking it over and trying to replay what I do at the gym, I also have to say that I rely pretty much on the same basic techniques. Geezer, I work out with you more than anyone, would you agree? I think I usually just try to angle off and take out the head if possible. Either way, I try to keep it simple. My instructor and I both call what we do "Lazy Man Martial Arts". I say I'm too fat, old, out of shape and and not good enough to pull off what other people do. But it seems to work for me.
:whip:

Respectfully,
Chubby

Yep. You beat me with very simple stuff, but with infinite variations. I think that's the thing about simplicity. It's really deep. Like, if you really grasp the core of FMAs it (apparently) becomes simple. And your infinite variations are just a matter of adapting a simple way of moving to the infinite angles and energies you are confronted with.

As far as being lazy... to paraphrase an old saying, "Laziness is the mother of invention." After all, if you weren't lazy, you'd probably be content with doing things to "hard way". A smart and lazy person finds a better way!

Now that I've got the idea... how come I can't do it? Since laziness isn't working for me, I guess I better get back to training!

[geezer]

There's only one way to defend in Senkotiros: cross the attacker's stick with your stick (this is also a direct quote from the website).

I really like this philosophy. But I assume you can also defend by "crossing your opponent's hand that's holding his stick". Or, by by just evading his shot and hitting him... thet would be "crossing his head with your stick" I guess. Anyway, this Senkotiros is something I'd like to find out more about.

[TheSilentOne]

I just worked with Guro Brock and Jason quite a bit on some of this. The basics are really simple. In Senkotiros you see there are five movements used with the rattan stick. From there you counter to stop the bad guy's stick and strike with your stick.

[Brock]

I really like this philosophy. But I assume you can also defend by "crossing your opponent's hand that's holding his stick". Or, by by just evading his shot and hitting him... thet would be "crossing his head with your stick" I guess. Anyway, this Senkotiros is something I'd like to find out more about.
I'm not sure how I missed replying to this before, but your assumption would be correct. You can also defend by crossing your opponents arm with your arm.

[5tirosCamarin]

I'm not sure how I missed replying to this before, but your assumption would be correct. You can also defend by crossing your opponents arm with your arm.

Yeah, I should have mentioned in my earlier post that the Senkotiros weapons techniques, methodologies, and principles are pretty universally applicable for any weapon, be it a stick, knife, empty hand, whatever. There are exceptions, however. One wouldn't use a Vine or Stick Snake disarm against a sword, for example. But as far as translating stick techniques to empty hand techniques, the answer is YES.

I learned all this stuff from you, so I dunno why I'm replying to your post as though you didn't already know :)

More for the benefit of the guy we were both talking to :)