Practising techniques against a static opponent?

It's funny how they show you techniques - how to do them.. how they work, with a STATIC opponents, on all the BJJ videos I have seen, but they always talk this BS about how "static is worthless."

You have to learn it that way, so you can understand it. Like when you first learned the alphabet. You are given templates.

Taiji Master Chen Zhonghua said: "follow the rules until they set you free".

This is what kata does. It teaches you the principles of the art. When you practice your art repeatedly, it is likened to fusing DNA. You develop instinct which is what is known as Mushin.

But these shallow pricks who are constantly trying to prove how much better they are than the rest of the world would not know about this.

When you have trained in breaking down the kata, and have the applications down to a reflex, you cannot practice them full-power against your class mate. The body knows its nature. So we continue to train in kata using full power and when you are attacked, Mushin engages and you are no longer in charge. Your technique manifests. And your nature fuses technique application with kata execution in full power. The results are devastation to the attacker.

I just hope you are not a troll and I have wasted precious information.

What the others said is true.

I still practice all my kata from Kyokushin but I do want to emphasise that 'alive' training is what makes it all work. I've encountered Karate students who use the same techniques that I use but might as well be doing gymnastics for all the good those techniques are to them. It's not the amount of time you've spent learning the techniques that makes them effective it's the amount of time you've spent learning to make them work, to force your opponent to suffer them no matter how much they don't want to. Kihon is pointless when you've never used it on someone, kata is nothing but dance steps if you lack the ability to apply it.

If I walked into a Judo school and stated that I knew some throws I'd be right. The big question would be could I throw the Judoka? The answer is for the most part no. I've probably only spent enough time practicing throws on resisting opponents to be equal with a blue or green belt. Before I started Brazilian Jujitsu I knew how to fight and grapple on the ground, however, I've done that for two years and my grappling ability still only merits blue belt. My striking, clinching and sweeping ability on the other hand is a match for pretty much anyone in my Muay Thai class because those are the elements I have spent the most time learning to apply.

Static practice should never be forgotten but it should never be raised above the practice of application.

Hi there

Im now going to try and tie my shoelaces for the very first time whilst moving?

So in the end did i learn to lie my shoelaces?

A thousand years of close in fighting all based on kata? hmmmm theres a thought? Now lets throw it all in the bin in the aid of tap out clothing and call it progress? pmsl!

No kata no technique. Granted the way its practiced parrot fashion and static is down to the poor knowledge of the practitioner. Henka and variation based on the basic forms with resistance and constant variation is the only way to learn.

Fighting isnt static its alive and any technique thats performed in a an unnatural way will always fail totally.

We have just forgotten how to use the kata as it was originally intended. Performing a 64 move dance sequence was never its intention because at the end of the day all you will have to show for your efforts is a 64 move dance sequence.

Best wishes

idai

Well said, @Karateka! I agree - static practice is just a teaching aid. In time, your opponents ought to be moving. I don't really like the phrase "resisting opponent", because anyone who is attacking you will not only NOT resist you, but will be easier to handle than when static. If you find your opponent is "resisting", then what happens is that s/he somehow managed to escape (or reverse) a technique you were applying, and now it's a game of you-versus-him, and likely, strength will prevail. To avoid that, you change your technique to something else, and so on, and so on.

I agree with you that static techniques are beneficiary and are the foundation of teaching martial arts like Karateka said but static training methods are used in MMA gyms too ,we use them all the time in mine ,if they weren't then it'd just be a mess for the student trying to learn the technique in the first place it's all a gradual progression so the fighter gets the basics of the technique and as they become more advanced then you start using live drills,although it can be said live drills are easier if we're talking about the striking exchange aspect of MMA as it helps people develop better reflexes ,rythm, footwork and blocks and that is important because the more a fighter gets used to the exchange the easier it becomes to avoid strikes and block them as well as lose one's fear of being hit , aliveness also helps in grappling but not so much as in striking ,because positioning and control are everything in grappling and to go straight into a live drill without first knowing the correct position to execute it is pointless,so in terms of grappling static drills are absolutely essential., As far as putting it altogether for MMA it's an even blend of static,reactive and live drills

Also I'd like to point out the stigma that a lot of martial arts are useless stems from the fact that throughout the world there are only so many quality teachers and schools to learn from, it's even true of MMA a lot of guys think they know what they're doing but haven't a clue , McDojos are actually more common than people think , I can find droves of Karatekas who couldn't explain the grappling aspect of a kata if they tried seriuosly they're like "What do you mean grappling?This is Karate you know punches and kicks " I'll be honest that made my balls jump up inside my chest when I heard that ignorant comment , from a nidan, a ******* nidan for christsake ,likewise I can find a lot of MMA coaches who can't bring any synergy to their technical training or some absolute boneheads that start gyms and they just try to help their students fight within the context of the rules , a simple thing in any sport but this is a combat sport for christsake you can't go into that without any true technical knowledge and hope to win with some kind of "organized street fighting tactic " sorry to ***** but this is the god honest truth there are as many bad quality MMA gyms as their are traditonal schools

My view is that they are only static as long as you are not using your imagination and cultivating intent and power in every move. Visualisation is a powerful tool and one that should be used in your forms training ( I include things like shadow boxing and bag work in this definition. ) Without it you are just moving your arms and legs and, other than a breath control exercise, you aren't helping yourself.

static techniques are used as basics the first stage of kumite, there are various levels of kumite. static movements are meant for easier corrections and to learn techniques.

as you get more advice you move from static to free style or as they call it live.

stances are not meant to be fixed but dynamic, they are also meant to be part of your techniques such as leg locks, or traps breaks and soforth,

kata also has various levels of training most of you only stop at bunkai and never venture past thats point. kata is meant to be used in kumite as part of jiyu kumite at its final stages or rather as your free style fighting.

kata is not just meant for static training but for what you term as live training as well, it is meant to be broken down and combined with other kata as you train and spar

You do those exercises to learn techniques and then, once you know how to do them, you learn to use them on opponents. Wanna know why that sounds familiar? Because it's on par with every effective teaching method since the beginning of time.