Right on Matt.


Chen Zen! What's up bro?! That's a good point about OJKD. But what I'm discovering is that the main problem may be the fact that such "arts" (like so many traditional arts) are taught in a linear fashion. I think that is essentially why so much material has been dropped by those who train functionally.

For example, I learned a lot of material coming up that I was taught in a specific manner. We called that 'training'. Yet when taught as it was, in a linear fashion, it never translated over to sparring or fighting, because fighting doesn't play out like that (is non-linear I suppose you could say).

When I abandoned linear style training (one technique, then another technique, then another, 'stacked' together) and only trained functionally, over some period of time, I was able to begin to put some of those techniques I had learned into the mix and have them actually work (one example being, the kenjit found in silat).

Through spending enough time boxing and wrestling, I managed to find the timing necessary to make it work. Not all of it mind you, or even a lot of it.

And I think that's one of the problems with training "arts" as they often are, in that linear fashion, as opposed to just teaching principles or adding techniques in here and there and having people just train it with aliveness. In fact, I believe that the linear approach often defines an art and people are loath to give that up.

Later I discovered that, perhaps, part of the problem was the cultural differences in the areas where these particular arts originated. And this may sound odd so it's just a theory but, here in the west, our timing (athletic, western boxing timing) could be different than those who say, taught silat in Malaysia or the Philippines and thus to make some of those things work, it has to be practiced with western boxing to develop the timing for use here. Does that make any sense? I'm just curious.

Just a thought.