5 years, 1 technique?

Posted by: Ed_Morris

5 years, 1 technique? - 09/19/12 01:57 PM

you've all heard of the idea behind the book "Five years, one kata". ref: http://www.fightingarts.com/reading/article.php?id=443

What if that were taken to the more extreme of five years, one technique ?

which technique would it be and why? (if you were to choose to train one technique exclusively for whatever reason).
Posted by: duanew

Re: 5 years, 1 technique? - 09/19/12 04:20 PM

I would study and employ the change dojo technique:)

Duane
Posted by: Matakiant

Re: 5 years, 1 technique? - 09/19/12 11:32 PM

The question just seems silly... In so many ways it is a bad & fundementally wrong idea & thing to do.

But... I would choose my favorite technique.
Posted by: cxt

Re: 5 years, 1 technique? - 09/20/12 11:47 AM


Not sure I can answer that question-everytime I think I would chose techinque "x" I think of a reason technique "y" would be better.

Also thinking I would spend the time on "techniques" that might not be punching and kicking and grappling--thinking more of awareness and avoidence training.

If it has to be a single actual "technique" then I an leaning toward thing that would be illegal outside of "I did it to save my life" kinda things--something you would ONLY use when there was no other choice but to cripple/seriously injure someone.
Posted by: Ironfoot

Re: 5 years, 1 technique? - 09/20/12 12:16 PM

OK, if I were limited to perfecting one technique, it would be a lunge punch. Make it fast and strong as possible, while simultaneously pivoting to an angle. After all, the hand closest to the opponent will be the quickest and so hardest to defend.
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: 5 years, 1 technique? - 09/20/12 01:55 PM

agreed it's a silly question especially if someone reading it has the goal of becoming the 'complete MAist'... but I disagree that it's 'wrong'.

everyone has their own goals for training (or not training for that matter). If the goal is to be able to hit harder, then concentrating on technique(s) towards that end is not wrong.

if someone has a balance issue for instance, concentrating on improving that exclusively for a period of time may be the step towards a longer term training goal.

Is it more 'correct' to maintain a uniform curriculum vs diving deep in a much smaller set of techniques that are tailored for personal goals?
Posted by: cxt

Re: 5 years, 1 technique? - 09/20/12 03:23 PM

Ed

"Is it more "correct" to maintain a uniform curriculem vs. diving in a much smaller set of techniques that are tailored for personal goals."

Another thought-provoking question!

My personal opinion is that the latter would tend to help explain why there is so much variation between people that trained in the SAME system and even under the SAME teacher. Essentially that back in the day more focus was placed on the "tailored for personal goals" than the "uniform curriculem" part.

You could probably add "tailored for individual strengths and weaknesses" to the list as well. IMO.

Good question! smile
Posted by: iaibear

Re: 5 years, 1 technique? - 09/20/12 05:37 PM

I can only speak for iaido and aikido:

I am obliged to taylor my kata/techniques to the remaining ability in my blown right knee. Not much other choice left.
Posted by: Shonuff

Re: 5 years, 1 technique? - 09/21/12 03:28 PM

Hello all, long time no type angrily at:)

My one technique for 5 years would be oizuki. As well as the obvious power striking there's a lot you can do with the components of the movement, the retracting hand, applying angles, spins, the push-pull principle, use of the stepping leg etc etc.
Posted by: iaibear

Re: 5 years, 1 technique? - 09/21/12 05:29 PM

Spins, as in a weighted-flexed-twisting knee, just don't happen any more.
Posted by: Leo_E_49

Re: 5 years, 1 technique? - 09/24/12 08:13 PM

I could narrow this down to just the 8 directions of kuzushi. I get the impression that much of Judo boils down to just moving in these 8 directions.

If I had no experience with any martial art, it would probably be a lead hand jab from the fence. This is a really tough question...
Posted by: Matakiant

Re: 5 years, 1 technique? - 09/25/12 06:50 AM

Originally Posted By: Ed_Morris
agreed it's a silly question especially if someone reading it has the goal of becoming the 'complete MAist'... but I disagree that it's 'wrong'.

everyone has their own goals for training (or not training for that matter). If the goal is to be able to hit harder, then concentrating on technique(s) towards that end is not wrong.

if someone has a balance issue for instance, concentrating on improving that exclusively for a period of time may be the step towards a longer term training goal.

Is it more 'correct' to maintain a uniform curriculum vs diving deep in a much smaller set of techniques that are tailored for personal goals?




Martial arts and techniques are not ''seperate'' they are ''connected''

Per example... Your balance affects everything. As does your flexibility.

From there on it's muscle mass & speed

And from there on it gets down to the differences in techniques you may focus your training on kicks for awhile improving your balance and midsection strength and then going back to punches you might discover your physical ability there has improved as well.

But as to the question itself my answer simply is ''my favorite technique'' simply because it would have to be something I enjoy practicing and have a ''talent for''
Posted by: harlan

Re: 5 years, 1 technique? - 09/25/12 09:01 AM

Blast from the past!

One technique? Crap...running.

Originally Posted By: Ed_Morris
you've all heard of the idea behind the book "Five years, one kata". ref: http://www.fightingarts.com/reading/article.php?id=443

What if that were taken to the more extreme of five years, one technique ?

which technique would it be and why? (if you were to choose to train one technique exclusively for whatever reason).
Posted by: iaibear

Re: 5 years, 1 technique? - 09/25/12 10:04 AM

I agree: running is the one technique with applications across the board.
It builds and preserves strength and endurance.
Posted by: Shonuff

Re: 5 years, 1 technique? - 10/02/12 02:54 PM

Not sure what you mean?
Posted by: Ronin1966

Re: 5 years, 1 technique? - 10/02/12 05:19 PM

Hello iaibear

<<in my blown right knee. Not much other choice left.

Uggggggggggggggggggh, a pun there!!!
Posted by: Ronin1966

Re: 5 years, 1 technique? - 10/02/12 05:21 PM

Hello Shonuff:

Iaibear will speak for himself, however I think he was suggesting RUNNING as a critical and fundamental technique, which should be practiced...

Jeff
Posted by: Ronin1966

Re: 5 years, 1 technique? - 10/02/12 05:24 PM

Running prevents being bruised, broken and battered into a fine bloody mess too. Am a fan, even though I am unable...

Jeff
Posted by: Ronin1966

Re: 5 years, 1 technique? - 10/02/12 05:31 PM

Ancient thread, fun topic...

<<which technique would it be and why? (if you were to choose to train one technique exclusively for whatever reason).

Palm heel, a fun technique.

Usable in any quadrant. All kinds of situations and still appear to be non aggressive using it. Surprise whistle

Jeff
Posted by: iaibear

Re: 5 years, 1 technique? - 10/03/12 12:20 PM

As a Martial Art technique, I have often considered running to be nike-do.