"Soft and Slow"..is it martially valid?

[Shane Smith]

As a qualifier for what will follow,let me say that I hold a teaching certificate in the Asian Arts so I have first-hand knowledge of the subject matter at hand(a pre-requisite to forming an opinion on ANY subject in mind <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" /> ).

Soft and Slow in the martial arts;

When you enter the training halls of these Masters,you will be immediately struck by just how disturbingly quiet it is.Next you will see the class crisply going through forms and pre-arranged attack and counter drills at half speed or less with no intent.Their reasoning being that any movement peformed properly with correct form and mechanics for enough repetitions will become "automatic" when needed.When asked to demonstrate at full speed on another skilled martial artists,these same Masters generally decline by appealing either to safety concerns or,more rarely, to a sense of mysticism(MY secrets are so powerful that you aren't ready to accept my teachings <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" /> ).

....With all we know about muscle memory and the like,ie. it taking some 3000 reps to instill a movement which will be performed spontaneously once programed,I am amazed that the soft and slow guys don't see the potential for diasater inherent in teaching their bodies to perform the movements exclusively at false speed with altered timing. I have seen more "soft and slow" BlackBelts that would scare you to death if you watched them do kata fail miserably in combat than I can count.They always seem to be "behind the curve"...Could their sloft and slow training have programmed them to fight in false-time? Could this same line of reasoning be reasonably applied to our work at the hilt?

Edited to include this; What I am speaking of here are practitioners who adhere to a strictly soft and slow only approach.,NOT those who use soft and slow as a training tool to complement training at more realistic speeds.Both are neccessary yet some employ only the former(utilizing only the latter would be just as silly to my mind).It is with that philosophy that my contention lies.

[Stuart McDermid]

I too have an AMA teaching certificate and will give my two cents.

Hard and Fast in the Martial Arts:

When you enter the training halls of some folks reconstructing HES you will be struck by just how disturbingly chaotic it is. You will see the class going through drills at a blindingly fast pace seemly with the intention to actually harm thier partner with what is a potentially deadly weapon. Without a level of control that comes from drilling at a significantly slower pace than one would fight, techniques are not properly ingrained and the mechanics behind the way they work cannot be properly internalised. Speed is increased only after the technique becomes very precise at a slower speed both for the safety of the students and in favour of them fencing in a historically accurate fashion.

These masters choose not to fence with just anyone that walks in off the street as they are (quite rightly) unable to gauge their level of control over what is a lethal weapon until they have trained with them for a while or they come from a school that the teacher is familiar. These masters are effective in assaulting but have their ego in check so as they feel no need to constantly test their skills by drilling at assaulting speed.

I am amazed at folks who constantly talk of intent and speed and yet have an incomplete understanding of fencing theory, and whose methods, although perhaps effective look nothing like the manuals they are trying to reconstruct the art from.

These folks have no idea of how much damage their "hard and fast" method is doing to their ability to move to the proper place, at the proper time in the proper fashion.

Could "Hard and Fast" training have programmed these folks to fight in a fashion that may have dire consequences were the weapons sharp and the situation real? I hope not for their sake
Cheers,
Stu.

[Shane Smith]

Interesting Stu,

So,if we take all of the above into account,how do we account for the fact that on the street as in the ring,the soft and slow practitoners fail to get the job done? Is there some sort of interplay between the Instructor and the students in the class that makes their techniques work against one another that does not allow them to work when applied against "somebody off the street" at speed with intent? I fail to see how that would invalidate my observations.A true fight is effective regardless of the opponent faced is it not?Why don't they at least demonstrate to the class at full speed using their OWN students as assistants?

AS for chaos in training,I think your making a stretch here,but I would contend that combat itself IS chaos.If it were not,why would it make so many uncomfortable(and dead) on occasion? To those unaccustomed to intense training,a boxing match may appear to be chaos,yet each man has a plan and seeks to force his will on the other by implementing it.Thats a form of combat(though lessened by degrees).These same two men moving with one-another through a sequence of pre-planned gentlemanly movements would be "dancing"...Good for some things,but not for combat.

Also,I would be interested in finding out who these speed and intent freaks you speak of are,I've never heard or seen anything so rediculous sounding.I train with speed and intent but the basics were of course learned at a reasonable speed...But only after I saw it's effect when done at speed by a skilled Swordsman.Thats the difference in "believing" a technique will work and "knowing" it will.

[Guest]

I'd rather accept a certain form of "soft" than any form of "slow", the acceptable form of soft being controlling the blows while using dangerous means of practice, wood or steel swords for exercise or some form of sparring, given good control one can benefit from learning how unpadded blades react in free play and how techniques are effected by them. I know this is contrary to what I've said time ago, but one learns new things <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" /> Sure one does not start doing full speed, but he should push to it, I think.

[Guest]

Same here as Stu and Shane in teaching AMA as well as military/law enforcement P.A.R.T. (Phyiscal Apprehension Restraint Techniques) and CQC.

Control: Control comes in time by conducting a lot of training. Stu is right...swords (steel or wooden) are deadly weapons in the wrong hands during training.

Slow: Learning the technique....cuts, wards, counters, must be taught at a slow speed as a foundation. Slow speed is only a beginning foundation of a pyramid which tip is "fast with intent". If you only train in slow speed and then try to apply the technique in "real time" or "how the technique was applied in the real world" you will not fair very well against someone who trains with intent.

Musle Memory: If you're teaching medieval and reniaissance martial arts then you need to allow the scholar to apply "hands on" training. They will learn nothing by you standing there talking to them. They have to actually do it.

Free Play: Some people harp on ARMA because of use of padded weapons. Sure if everyone could afford a full harnass then we wouldn't need padded weapons but this is not the case. This is a debate in itself but padded weapons are a part (I said a "part") of our methodology as are blunts, replicas, manuals, communication, research and wasters. I have recently discovered that there are "WMA Instructors" out there that don't even free play (with intent) and they are teaching a fighting art. This is just plain wrong.

Just my 65 cents <img src="/forum/images/icons/tongue.gif" alt="" />

[Guest]

how do we account for the fact that on the street as in the ring,the soft and slow practitoners fail to get the job done?

I agree with Shane here. I know martail artists who are great in the school and tournment but I have seen them in several incidents on the street such as inside a bar or parking lot that they get thier "arse" handed to them from a guy off the street.

Shane is right...Combat is Chaos. If you have never locked horns in the real world where tunnel vision, anger, hate, adrenaline, unfamiliar surroundings, voices yelling, and fear are factors and lets not forget pain then you really can't understand the reasoning behind teaching slow and building to fast with intent and strength.

The same applies to Medieval and Reniassance Martial Arts. Sure...you can learn the same technique, as taught by the manuals, over and over and over. Show that technique with intent with your partner to where the public goes "wow!" but take that same technique and attempt to apply it in a free play or real enviroment and add some of the above factors. It's quite a learning experience and will carry a martial artist to a new level in thier training....eastern or western.

If you don't know what tunnel vision is then free play with someone and get close and start to grapple.

[Guest]

Sully, agreed 100%, I'd add that not everyone knows how to build a padded sword or have the patience to experiment...
If those of us who have good models put our heads toghtether and came out with a little book on building padded swords of different kinds for different kinds of sparring or tastes, we would give WMA a good tool.
This was a cocky Italian <img src="/forum/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Shane Smith]

Try this Parisi;
http://www.anomaly.org/wade/paddedsword/index.html That might fit the how-to requirement.

[Guest]

Carlos,

No you're Irish <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" /> You Celt you. Actually is it true that Italians drive around on mini scotters saying "Chow"?

Anyway I have the same instructions on making a padded sword: http://www.armanortheast.com/sparringsword.htm

And a place to get Laudau Foam Cheap in 60 foot rolls: http://www.atrim.com/Page73.html

Chow,

[Guest]

Nice and well explained. I've examined two long swords of this kind and found them very robust.
I've my little tricks too, I've worked mainly to obtaining realistic balance and weight, one handed swords with good estethics, complex hilts, safe home made rapiers and replaceble blades (so you can keep your hilt), pole weapons.
I guess that if we put our ideas, those of all of us toghether, we could come out with a true best seller, explaining how to make heavy duty swords for sparring with protections, pretty swords, light contact swords for sparring with little protections.
I'd add we could treat the waster subject too, not any weapon has a corrispondent waster at the moment, and some uses require a waster you can ruin.

[Guest]

Yes Sully, a lot of mini scooters here, we say "Ciao".
My Irish being may or may not be proved by the fact I like Guinness more than wine.
The fact I'm a gnome who spends his free time experimenting and building three times the swords (padded or waster) he needs, does qualify me as an imp?
Ciao

[Guest]

We all in ARMA wish you could have made it to the International Event. Perhaps next time?

Chow,

[Guest]

To be honest my travelling possibilities at the moment are limited because of the continous interferences my graduation is subject to and my limited budget. Maybe I'll be able to go to an event if the decision can be taken at the last moment and travel costs are low, this means it's just merely possible I'll go to the Hemac one now. Probably I'll have to stay at home...working <img src="/forum/images/icons/frown.gif" alt="" />
Probably next time.
Chow

[Tony_Indurante]

I think that both Shane and Stu made the true point, either extreme is wrong. You can't learn correctly by training exclusively one way or the other. You have to use both.

[MurrayMoore]

A little background. Before ARMA (B.A. ?) I did about 4 or 5 years in TKD, and my club did forms, one-step and 3 step drills, "Blossfechten" sparring (hey, if we borrow Eastern terms to describe WMA, I say let's use WMA terms to describe EMA items!!!) and padded sparring.

The forms were ALL done "slow and hard". When I first saw another group do their forms "fast and hard", I was impressed that they were showing more martial intent, since in my original group, the forms had become "pajama ballet" rather than battle training.

When I first saw some of John Clement's early floryshes, I was VERY impressed, since they were NOT choreographed. I think a full-content florysh done with speed, force, intent, randomly executed with a large variety of technique, is much better preparation than a cookie cutter martial ballet. ---- It's just much closer to what you'd find in the true fight - just common sense.