Category: FIST LOGIC

We train to reinforce our philosophy and enable our strategy.

Sam was talking with Saleh and Kunal recently, both guys intend to return to training in the not-too-distant futrure, this post is mostly for them to be up on what we have been talking and thinking about for the past couple of months.

WHY ARE WE DOING THIS, AND WHAT SHOULD WE HOPE TO GET?

This is a BIG QUESTION, and it is tempting to think that BIG QUESTIONS require BIG ANSWERS, but a long life has taught me otherwise.

For sure BIG MISTAKES do call for BIG EXCUSES but BIG QUESTIONS are best served by small answers, the 30,000 ft view kind of answer, the broad strokes, outline only kind of answer.

So why do we train a martial art? We can expand this and ask why individuals train, groups train, and armies train.   There is a nexus.

Remember, 30,000 feet view.

We train to reinforce our philosophy and enable our strategy.

I will leave you to translate that statement in a way that fits your worldview, stuff like this must always be first person.

A NOTE OF WARNING. An insidious trap we must avoid is in thinking that we are training to learn Wing Chun.

Training, all training, any training, is a vehicle, a means to an end, it is not the “WHAT” that benefits us, nor the “HOW” as important as this is, we should be focusing on the “WHY”.

PHILOSOPHY is a map, a line in the sand that we choose to follow without deviation, and the clearer we can see this map, the deeper and wider this line in the sand is, the less doubt there is.

One role of training, which is I.M.O. The most important is to burn that map into our souls, to become so myopic that it is the only map we can see.

STRATEGY is a Workflow Chart, a deep understanding of what must be where and when for us to get to the desired destination when we follow the map.

As important as the map is, without a strategy, we have no way to read it.

To some people the IDEA of having a philosophy is alien, but we all have one, about everything, even if we do not know it, Martial Arts training allows us to recognise our philosophy toward violence, and training allows us to simulate situations so that we can see if our philosophy aligns with our choices.

If discover that our philosophy clashes with our actions it gives us the chance to change our philosophy or change our choices, in either way it allows us to align things.

A great many things are spoken about the Mind/Body connection, but it all starts here, if my actions {BODY} are not in line with my philosophy {MIND} there is no way forward.

There is a great deal of wiggle room in this because everything stems from our personal philosophy. 

Using myself as an example, {there is no demanding reason for this to be your way}…

My philosophy is counter-attack, so if I ever strike first or get involved in swapping punches I am out of alignment with myself, and this can only lead to problems.

My strategy to enable this is that I do nothing until the Bad Guy attacks me and is committed to his choices, if the situation devolves into swapping punches I break away and wait for the Bad Guy to re-attack, rinse and repeat.

Does this reflect my training?  If not something should be changed because I am either intending to use a method that I do not believe in or I am hoping to do something that I have not trained.

Crazy shit.

Another aspect of my philosophy is that violence is a mental issue and not a physical issue, my aim when I engage an attacker is to create an environment where the Bad Guy cannot think clearly. 

My strategy to enable this is to cause severe pain on immediate contact with the Bad Guy {severe pain interferes with the ability to think} or compromise the balance of the Bad Guy on the instance of contact or as soon after as possible {the nervous system overrides the Brain when we lose our balance and tries to save us}.

Does this reflect my training? If not, something should be changed because I am either intending to use a method I do not believe in, or I am hoping to do something I have not trained for.

So where to from here?

Step 1.  Identify your philosophy and, if need be change it, but it is easier to keep it and change everything else.

Step 2.  Direct your training to things that achieve the same aim.

As always, talk, think and learn.

I know you Guys do not like reading too much so here is a video from the archive that is somewhat related.

Hurry back, you are missing out heaps.

Strategy is the Secret Sauce, after all ‘you cannot change a plan if you do not have a plan.

Winston Churchill famously said…

“Plans are of little importance,

but planning is essential”.

consider popping in to touch hands…..  and touch minds.

Usually, this Blog is inwards facing as a means for the group to stay connected, but this post, this stream of consciousness, is being sent out into the Cyber Wilderness in the hope of connecting with a fellow traveller.

Q. Why do new students not stay very long?

Our training group has evolved to be composed of only Senior People, all of whom have been training Wing Chun exclusively for a long time, at least 15 years, and myself over 30 years, it is not any kind of arrogance when I say we know all there is to know.

For one thing, it is not arrogance because knowing can be a long way away from understanding, and we know this also.

Another is that the total of Wing Chun knowledge is surprisingly small, so we should know it all, anyone, anywhere, who has trained for half a dozen years should know it all.

At first Wing Chun appears to be wide, deep, and mysterious, so many FORMS, so many movements, so much information, so many pieces to this puzzle.

But then without fanfare, it changes.

This point of change is different for everyone, but it is a real point in time and luckily unavoidable.

For no apparent reason and completely without warning we realise that the 100,000 pieces that are perceived as the Wing Chun pattern is a FRACTAL.

Hence “Knowing it all” is easy, but the understanding can be infinite.

If your training has reached the stage of the Mok Jan Jong the new pattern, the  “FRACTAL” design is close, maybe even visible if you look just a bit closer.

ONCE SEEN, IT CANNOT BE UNSEEN.

To be expected, from this point forward training becomes all about exploring and understanding the FRACTAL design, which can be exciting and engaging once you see it, but this level of understanding is unapproachable if you do not see it, and even just talking about it can appear hopeless, even useless to those that can’t yet see it.

This is why this post is titled “ACCIDENTALLY ELITIST TRAINING”, we do not do this deliberately but our training methods are not very palatable for people who are not at least close to the Dummy level.

We still hit shit, do Chi Sau, work on mobility and stability, use the Pole, swing the Knives, and run through possible violent scenarios and all of the other elements, but not in the way that early or intermediate students think of as REALISTIC training.

Until students recognise then see the FRACTAL design, and reach a level where they can play the Dummy without over-thinking, it sounds like Bullshit when I tell them that this way leads to stopping any incoming strike while delivering effortless counter-attacks that put nasty-folk on their asses.

And I do not blame them, I was there once, and I thought it was Bullshit back then.

The reason I say that the Dummy level is the FRACTAL is because, when we play the Dummy, we play with a combination of all aspects of the earlier FORMS, from here there is nothing new, all has been revealed.

As a small group we are always hoping to get a few new people to come and play with us, but here again the “ACCIDENTALLY ELITIST TRAINING” has us looking for people who can come and add to the collective knowledge, perhaps bring in a new perspective.

FRACTALS repeat themselves into infinity but they do this in every direction to all destinations so more eyes help see more dimensions.

If we can free our thinking up to where we see and work on the FRACTAL IDEA itself and not just on one of its manifestations such as Kung Fu or even more selectively Wing Chun we see it is everywhere, engaging an attacker in a violent situation is governed by the same forces as a car crash.

If this stream of consciousness rings any kind of bell with you, consider joining in the conversation, even better if you are close enough to Western Sydney consider popping in to touch hands…..  and touch minds….. perhaps even bend fenders.

QUOTE

Hey guys,

Since the escalation of trouble in the world, Ukraine, Gaza, and M.A.G.A. Madness there has been an upturn in people’s level of anxiety, and an upsurge in interest from people in where and when we train.

One question that I keep being asked is on the lines of “How far away are you from Bankstown, or Liverpool, or Homebush, or Campbeltown, it appears that distance is an important metric.

I get it, we are all time-poor, we all love convenience, and we have developed the opinion that 20, or 30 minutes make some kind of difference, but lets face it, in Sydney on any day it is almost impossible to be sure of how long any trip will take you.

If you guys are talking to anyone that is thinking of training with us and ask how far remind them that we are “Closer than Hong Kong”.

For 17 years I would travel 36 klm, at peak times, to train with my Sifu, on a bad day this could take 2 hours {and right now, today, Costas and George travel the same distance twice a week, to train with me} even though there are other choices much nearer.

My reasoning was simple, training with the best person available and accessible was more important than convenience, also training with any top Master ends up saving years, not minutes, and here again, that is why Costas and George first chose to travel so far across town, and that was when Sydney was awash with Wing Chun, 12 years later they still make the journey twice a week.

But “I get it”, if we think we can save just ‘5 minutes’ commuting it is like we have won the lotto.

Stay frosty.

WHAT KIND OF DAY IS IT?

Hoping to achieve relaxation by thinking about relaxing is just an “Are we there yet” moment.

The paradox of training for composure.

This is a bit of a brain twister and may need to be read more than once, if we are actively training for Composure then at that moment we are not composed, {if we are composed why are we trying to achieve it}and as such we have already failed and have zero chance of success because we have tricked ourselves into thinking that maintaining this state of non-composure will somehow lead to being composed.

If this does not make sense re-read it until it does.

Just like being relaxed, being composed is an end-state and not something we can engage in.

We become composed or relaxed due to other actions which, due to how we use language, especially English, appear to deal with the opposite condition.

Until we get this we will think that everything we are being told or asked to do is completely backwards from achieving the end state and find it difficult to engage in.

This can and often does bring about a level of cognitive dissonance.

We all know by now that if we are not mentally involved in the action we are doing we will struggle to get the outcome we are after.

Relaxation is the result of releasing, or at the least diminishing tension, as counterintuitive as it sounds, if we are not mentally connected to, and thinking about tension we will not become relaxed.  How can we release tension if we are not thinking about tension?

Hoping to achieve relaxation by thinking about relaxing is just an “Are we there yet” moment.

We need to build the correct mental architecture for the condition we wish to be in, which in this instance is composure.

As a starting point, it should be a given that we would only work on being composed if we think we are not composed.  DUH!

If we are thinking of being composed we will automatically measure our present state against our desired state, and no matter how close we are to our desired end-state not being there will create stress, which will just eat up whatever composure we have at that moment.

Here is where everything sounds backwards, If we are in a dangerous situation the only way we can remain composed is to not think about the danger we are facing, and the only way we can do that is to think about something else.

It is a bit like ‘Fight Club’.  The first rule of ‘Fight Club’ is not to talk about ‘Fight Club”.

Training for composure is Multi-tasking, it is about doing one thing and being completely involved with that thing, with the ‘intention’ of achieving something else, while also doing sometimes many other things.

This is not as weird as it sounds, there are many ways we do this every day, we do it when we are driving, for instance, and we do it when walking through the crowded city shopping district window shopping.

We fail because we are trying to turn these subconscious actions into conscious actions.

We need to think backwards, we need ‘Fight Club’ thinking.

The first rule of training for composure is that we cannot think about composure.

If you can unscramble this egg it will make tonight’s work so much easier.

This is a very counter-intuitive IDEA,  to do the FORM during a violent encounter.

The most important ability in a violent confrontation is maintaining composure.

Composure is the state or feeling of being calm and in control.

How do we train this, and most importantly how do we transition this skill from the training hall to the street?

There are only two ways to accomplish this.

1. Make training the same as a violent event.

2. Operate in a violent event in the same way as we operate in training.

The obvious problem here is that these two sides never meet, they are opposites, training is the camp of the left side of the Brain whilst actively using our training is in the camp of the right side of the Brain, with the left hemisphere being more analytical and logical, and the right hemisphere being more creative and intuitive.

The only sensible choice is #2.

This is neither as simple nor as straightforward as it may sound.

Without any intention of pointing fingers, most students mistake playing for training and spend far more time in that zone, there is nothing wrong with playing it is a very important part of transferring information and skill, but it is not the best vehicle for attaining knowledge.

In many ways playing or practising is similar to fighting, it is mission-critical with pre-determined objectives, namely coming out on top, whereas training is about understanding the things we will choose to use when we play.

Training is about understanding the theory, the IDEA, the WAY and not so much the how or the why, and this can only be done in a calm, relaxed environment, where no one else is trying to push their agenda, which essentially means that it can only be approached through solo training, through the FORM.

Through understanding the deep meaning of the FORM, or perceiving the connectedness of information regarding individual aspects of the FORM that are not about movement or shapes.

The WAY, and not the how or the why.

The WAY we make rather than use the movements and shapes.

This is why I say that Wing Chun does not fight, we use the WAY, the IDEA, the “FORM” even when we beat the shit out of attackers.

This is tricky stuff to write or talk about, mainly because many of us will believe we already do this, but frequently, and against our best intentions, our nervous system hijacks the situation at the last minute and we slip out of the FORM and into playing/fighting.

This is a very counter-intuitive IDEA,  to do the FORM during a violent encounter.

But think on this, when we are doing the FORM {correctly}, even amid Chaos, we remain physically, mentally, and emotionally relaxed, in short, we have the potential for COMPOSURE.

If I am fighting someone I am concerned with and responding to someone else’s agenda, this at the very least requires some level of multi-tasking, and trying to multi-task in a shit storm is not my IDEA of SIMPLE.

Words are tricksy, we will work on this.

THIS CREATES A DIFFERENT APPROACH, WHICH CREATES A DIFFERENT UNDERSTANDING.

How well we perform any act is never a reflection of the level of our training; rather, it is a direct representation of the level of our understanding. 

The last post was the first instalment of a packet of information that, if delivered in one shot, would more than likely miss the target, if you did not read the last post, read it before this, then take a break and read this when the dust has settled.

If we digest the content of these two posts before Thursday evening training, it will leave more disk space, more R.A.M. and more processing power for the work we will do on the night.

We want to get the thinking done before training because we will be hitting things throughout training.

To our missing brethren, if you are thinking of coming back to training, even if it is just for a catch-up, this would be the week to choose.

What is a ‘Theoretical Physicist’?

Very few people, myself included, have a deep understanding of what they are, what they do, and how they do it, most of us ask ourselves, ‘Do they just make shit up out of thin air’?

This is a tricky one to answer for a layman, while they do make shit up, it is not out of thin air, they make shit up from an atmosphere that is thick and deep with well-established and accepted facts.

And what they come up with, these new IDEAS or CONCEPTS are constructed from elements of that atmosphere and are measured against that atmosphere.

Before they can come up with something new, they must know and understand everything old.

As Carl Sagan humorously pointed out “If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.”. 

 When we are only ‘THINKING’, we need to build a solid environment in which the thing we are thinking about exists, even if we only build it in our heads.

How does that relate to this thing we do?

Like it or not, we need a complete and concise understanding of the physical nature of the environment before we can approach the non-physical aspects of that same environment.

This is the bit that all students, and I do mean ALL STUDENTS, because, at one point in time, everyone that became involved with Wing Chun was that guy, get the wrong IDEA.

The environment we need to understand is not the physical aspect of Wing Chun, and therefore, the non-physical aspect becomes the non-physical aspect of  Wing Chun.

The environment we need to understand is VIOLENCE.

To a very large degree, Wing Chun is the non-physical aspect of violence.

The reason statements like this can be a bit difficult to deal with is usually because we approach them with the wrong Mindset.

The most important thing to understand about Mindset is that different Mindsets bring about different patterns of thinking, IDEAS that make perfect sense in one Mindset makes no sense at all if we adopt a different Mindset.

Thinking that Wing Chun is a fighting style creates a different Mindset than thinking Wing Chun is a Self-defence system.

This creates a different approach, which brings with it a different understanding.

The work is the same, but the goal, and frequently the results, are very different.

HOW WE FEEL CHANGES WHAT WE THINK.

WHAT WE THINK CHANGES HOW WE FEEL.

THEY BOTH CHANGE HOW WE ACT.

A violent encounter is a form of ‘Culture Shock’, and the only way to deal with ‘Culture Shock’ is to accept, adapt and find the middle ground.

I recently read an article that claimed Western Intelligence is waning due to our avoiding reading over watching video.

Watching videos requires no mental interpretation, and as such, we are eroding our ability to convert words and IDEAS into mental images, as we all know our Brains love and live by mental images.

Just putting this out there, it has nothing to do with this post.

My Sifu’s school was an excellent place for beginners to engage with Wing Chun. It was orderly,  technically informed and above all, safe, but as you progressed to the intermediate level, very little changed in the approach, even as a Senior Instructor, the training was pretty much unchanged from the very first day we entered the school, still orderly, still technical, still informed and above all, still safe.

So, what is wrong with this approach?

Perhaps nothing.

It depends on why you are training in the first place.

My Sifu offered an approach where progress was measured by the ability to accurately copy what we had been taught and then to explain the established method of instruction to others.

This is an Academic approach to training, the system was a copy of organised education, a genuine SCHOOL.

As such, the end game was to progress from student to teacher {Instructor}, from teacher to professor, {Master} and finally from professor to recognised expert {Grand Master}.

It was an Academic approach where progress was measured by the ability to accurately copy and explain what we had been taught and to advance the established method of instruction.

This is in no way a criticism of my Sifu’s approach; he made it very clear that this is what he was selling, and as an Academic product, it was of a very high quality. We should be a bit more even-handed; this is the mainstream Martial Arts model of every style.

There were many occasions when asked about how we could use the training; my Sifu would say that it was up to the individual and how well they could transition the knowledge into practice.

If we step away from Martial Arts for a second, this is reflected in everyday life, it is essentially the tension between an Academic Expert and a Master Craftsman.

The value of each depends on context. If you wish to design a water delivery system, you would call a hydraulics engineer but when the pipes burst you call a plumber.

My Sifu turned out many quality Hydraulic Engineers.

How do we now become Plumbers?

ALL TRAINING IS INADEQUATE AS A METHODOLOGY.

Engaging with a violent and aggressive attacker is just about as far away as we can get from how and what we train.

But is it different?

If we revisit my Sifu’s comment that “ it was up to the individual and how well they could transition the knowledge into practice”, this implies that the information is already in the teaching and that once fully understood, there is nothing needed to add, nothing extra to learn.

I agree with this.

Once we see that most martial arts training is about training future teachers and not future fighters, it makes it easy to differentiate between what is an academic explanation and what is a practical methodology. 

But most importantly that they cannot be both.

Once we accept that all of our FORMS are collections of movements and not patterns of movements, and here again, that they cannot be both, we create fertile ground for hybridisation.

Training is inadequate when it comes to dealing with violence.

The difference between violence and training is not a difference of scale; it is not about being quicker or more physical or even more relaxed or more mindful, it is a difference of philosophy.

The difference is the WHY.

Neither is this a difference in identity; we are not trying to measure apples by oranges. Wing Chun is organised or systemic violence, and what the attacker is doing is, at least from our perspective, unorganised or non-systemic violence, but they are both expressions of violence.

A violent encounter is a form of ‘Culture Shock’, and the only way to deal with ‘Culture Shock’ is to accept, adapt and find the middle ground.

Ask any ‘Tradie”, and they will tell you that the answer always contains a level of compromise, that, like it or not, all work is done in the middle ground, which must work here and now while professors get trapped going over old blueprints, locked in their study looking for perfection, rapidly becoming irrelevant.

To be sure the best ‘Tradies” are the ones that know the most and compromise the least, but they still compromise.

Navigating a violent encounter is about capturing the middle ground, about compromise, about mixing what we know to be “RIGHT” with what we think is perhaps simply “NOT RIGHT”.

It becomes a sliding scale between what we know is ‘RIGHT” and what we know “WORKS”.

LEARN THE FORM AND THEN ABANDON IT.

LEARN THE WAY AND THEN ABANDON IT.

THIS IS HOW YOU FIND YOUR OWN FORM.

THIS IS HOW YOU FIND YOUR OWN WAY.

Hey Guys,

Just in case one of the lost children tries to come home this weekend be aware that I will not be here.

Mandy and I are away up the coast so in the meantime keep up your solo training.

One of the down-sides of reposting old videos is the visual proof that the passing years are not being kind.

Stay frosty.

Like all ‘TRULY SIMPLE‘ things, they open a portal to increasing complexity that can only be navigated if we can maintain the original SIMPLICITY.

Why do I prefer the term  ‘Fundamental Particle’ when other words such as seed, core, or root would do the same thing?

 Apart from being a bit of a nerd, it is because, by definition, Fundamental Particles are considered indivisible. There is no need to look beyond this IDEA and create confusion, but you can call it anything you want, they are only words, and it is the IDEA we are concerned with.

Let me ask a few questions first though.

Imagine, for whatever reason, that a ‘big’, fit, strong, and angry man is in the process of trying to punch you in the face.

Q. How important is it that your defence works the first time of asking, straight out of the gate, so to speak?

I know my answer but this question is for you.

In a random incident where there will be some level of surprise, there is a good chance that any response will not work optimally unless you are Bruce Lee reborn.

Bad Guys that intend us harm always follow up on the attack and follow-up fast, regard this as a rolling, almost continuous attack.

Q.  Do we think that our follow-up defensive action would be more effective, equally effective, or less effective than the initial defence?

It is your call, and in this scenario, your face, so answer any way that makes you happy.

Accepting for one moment that you are not Bruce Lee reborn, and did not finish off the Bad Guy at the instant of the first attack…

Q. How many chances do you think you will get to prevent disaster?

There is no right answer to something with so many variables; this is just establishing ‘CONTEXT”, and helping us estimate the cost.

The Fundamental Particle is ‘Physical Alignment’.

I told you it was SIMPLE.

In over 25 years of teaching, this is the cause of all the failed exercises I have witnessed.

Think of your training, and believe me, I can see it in my own past training, how often do we get the easy stuff wrong the first time of asking, only to have a ‘Facepalm’ moment when we realise?

Good results come from good application of technique; good technique is always dependent on the level of our physical alignment.

Like all ‘TRULY SIMPLE‘ things, they open a portal to increasing complexity that can only be navigated if we can maintain the original SIMPLICITY.

At this point, we could shift to the term SEED and ask what grows from this SEED,? And how do we nurture and maintain it?

If we get this RIGHT and maintain its RIGHTNESS as it migrates upstream, it becomes increasingly difficult for things to go WRONG.

STEP 1.  Establish correct physical alignment.

STEP 2.  Maintain correct physical alignment in dynamic and complex situations.

STEP 3.  When things go awry, as they most certainly will, regain correct physical alignment.

Think about this, and ask questions.

Or not, it is your face, after all.

Phew, that was close I hear you say.

This post serves as a precursor to my next post, I pose a question here that I want us to think about and form an opinion, so that it influences what we read in the next post.

I have a decent understanding of how our brains treat information, if I include this as the first paragraph of an article, it will be read and then ignored as we hunt down what we think is the “Meat” of the post.

This is just how our brain works.

I would like us to establish a self-evaluation Metric?

Q. What parameters need to be met for us to think that something is CORRECT?

Dictionaries come up with things such as accurate, exact, free from error, ‘in accordance with fact or truth’.  In short, for something to be correct, it needs to be 100%.

To be expected, if we talk about something as being Incorrect, the opposite is true, and the dictionary brings in such words as mistaken, wrong, in error, erroneous, and ‘not in accordance with particular standards or rules’.

If an action or idea is 1% incorrect it is not correct. DUH!

This leads to the counterintuitive statement that being 99% right is the same as being 100% wrong; it is not CORRECT.

Think about that for a moment, where do you stand on this?

This is a self-evaluation, I have no investment in your choice.

Q. Why is this even important?

A. Because it shows us how we measure things.

At the centre of any system, there is something, a component, a concept, a “fundamental particle” that influences and impacts the whole system to such an extent that being less than 100% negatively impacts EVERYTHING upstream.

It may not break the system, but it makes it impossible for the system to reach optimum operational status.

The next post will be on and around Wing Chun as a system, do we know what the “FUNDAMENTAL PARTICLE” of Wing Chun is?

There is an old joke about a guy who is walking down the street when a roofing slate slides off and falls downward, he dodged at the last moment and it missed sticking in his shoulder by 10cm.

Phew that was close I hear you say.

Unfortunately, it hit him in the head and killed him.

When it is a close call Metrics matter.