Harsh Training.

Admin Joined : 16 Aug 2007 Posts : 232

Hi Dave,

I was recently watching through an SDF seminar DVD (cup of tea in hand at work..no shock there then! Very Happy

)

A colleague was passing and stopped to watch for a minute or two. What I saw was a nothing too rough, typical seminar demonstration where the emphasis was on explaining the technique rather than the impact of the technique (which had been shown earlier on Stu). On the other hand my colleague who is a normal bloke saw pretty harsh violence being dished out.

His response was a bit of an eye opener. It started me thinking about some of the training I have heard you describe that was mentally and physically more harsh than anything being taught today.

I know your gradings have pressure as a watch-word, what were the Warfield gradings like to take part in or did they not operate in the same way? I just wonder what value you place on "training" at that level of stress and pressure as opposed to testing where I know you believe it is vital.

I also wonder if anyone training at the moment even touches on the same level of training that some of the guys you have trained with and spoken to did. I'm thinking particularly of the physical endurance of the guys at Billy Riley's gym. I just don't know anyone who puts themselves through that same regime.. and yet we have athletes today performing better and better while pushing the human body onto greater and greater achievements? They aren't doing anything like these old-timers but they are getting the times, the distance and the endurance from alternative methods?

probably two huge questions in one post there! Very Happy

cheers Dave
Chris

Subject: Re: Harsh Training. Tue Mar 25, 2008 2:22 pm

Probably 20 questions there mate.. but as always your perceptions and observations are spot on.

Not taking your ponts in the same order as written.. so first..

Yes modern athletes ARE indeed 'better' than their counterparts of 50-150 years ago.. BUT, (and here comes the Caveat) ... are they really THAT much better?? true on paper few records havent been broken, and probably those that havent would be if someone from today specialised on them..

But the marathon was first run 3000 years ago,, have the times improved THAT much..

Milo of Croton had a boulder enscribed after him which weighs 800lbs (about 360kgs) that he was supposed to have lifted.. pretty good by any standards..

specialist trainers, speciailst diets, specialist equipment, drugs etc etc, have all combined to improve standards.. but generally Joe Average isnt as good as those from the past.... I have lent Stu (Cutty) George Hackenshmidts book.. 'The Way to Live"....borrow it off him and ask yourself if anyone today could match Hack..

Bodybuilders are better because of chemists and equipment.. yet 21 inch arms and 55 inch chests were there 100 years and more ago.
Arthur Saxon's 'Two Hands Anyhow' lift is STILL the record after 100 years..
Lousi Cyr's Back Lift has only been beaten ONCE since 1911.. and that by Paul Anderson who was about 400lbs bodyweight.
Can you name ANY modern day boxer who could have stood toe to toe in the prize ring against Tom Sayers or any of the others of that day.. I cant
Would todays athletes be EVEN better if they trained the old fashioned way??

I understand your work colleague's response.. but I train my students LESS severe than Warfield did us back then.. I have ONLY ever trained TWO students to that level.. one is Dave Baker (Cammy) now with the Goshinkwai as a5th Dan, the other is Karl Blackwell.. 'nuff said there!

If you want as true an estaimate as I can give.. EVERY SDF grading you have taken part in or witnessed ran at about 75% of what I had to endure... for sure my 4th Dan was a grade I would NEVER want to go through ever again..

The actual 'manner' in which the Warfields (especially John) graded under was pretty similar to mine.. the level of intensity was harsher.

Today the SDF is about 80% of the John Warfield Goshinkwai.. but has a 'wider' range of methods.
Mike Gould, Jeff Keen and Cammy probably train as hard as we did back then.. Mike Gould especially trained harder than anyone I know.

The reasons are many, but being 'popular' is one of them.. 99% of clubs would close in a month if they trained 'properly'.. people wouldnt take it.

In all honesty and in now way egotistically .. The Goshinkwai/SDF black belts run rings around most other styles for 'true combat abilities' but not for fitness, style and competitions etc.
You see it yourself, I know Ian Harrison and Andy Crittenden see it and mention it all the time.. they see others not grasping even the basics..

In 25 years of travelling the UK teaching at seminars for other clubs I have yet to teach BEYOND YELLOW BELT stuff to anyone..

I know that (God forbid) if I dropped down dead tomorrow that the SDF/Goshinkwai I teach would be lesser by my passing .. sorry if that sounds big headed, its merely a fact.. NONE of my students other than Karl have reached the levels we had to train at in the 70's and according to the Warfields we didnt train as hard as Abbe and his peers...

I remember many of the old wrestlers I met and spoke to.. They are adamant that their training methods were harsher and tougher in their days.. some of it no doubt is retrospective exageration.. "When I were a lad.." type of thing.. But contemporary records do show that they weren't lying.. old training books etc show this...

I guess its just a trend we cant reverse

bloody good question yet again mate

Admin Joined : 16 Aug 2007 Posts : 232

Cheers Dave,

I appreciate what you are saying, I just can't imagine that in todays world you would manage to find anyone willing to work at that level and take that kind of punishing regime.You have to wonder how these guys managed to keep training at that level. I can't imagine that you lot were ever without injury?

Or did additional and supplementary training alleviate some of the stresses and strains that you were putting on your bodies? To work in that way day after day must take a terrible toll?

The big question I suppose is, would you personally WANT to reverse the trend? What value do you place on being conditioned at that level, is it a requirement or just desirable for good combat men?

thanks again
Chris

Joined : 03 Sep 2007 Posts : 77

A great discussion.
It's interesting to note that today's grading within the Goshinkwai/SDF are around 75% of what you had to endure. Do you think there is room for 'upping the ante' at least for the Dan grades?
I'm curious why only two students have ever training to that sort of level - is that because others weren't ready for it, or just didn't want that level of severity?

When I first went along to the Waltheof club there was a 1st Dan grading a few weeks later (Steve Galley and Steve Fox). It was a real eye opener for me, and was both frightening and exhilerating. I hurt for a week afterwards, but loved it and that ensured I stayed with the art!

Fastforward three years or so, and we had James Ashford's grading at the same level. The pace must have been quicker as it was one student not two, so the pressure must have upped some as a result. Now that grading was pretty hard, but not unreasonably so (well, perhaps some of the time Very Happy

), and it certainly seemed a little tamer than the two Steve's 1st Dan grading - I am guessing this is just me getting used to the methods and aggression.
Makes me think though - if that's how it seems to me at the moment, then I am sure that some of the senior students would thrive on harsher trainign regimes. You can see it on the mat now - those that 'put it in' to a fair degree all of the time, rather than just settling for going through the stages of each technique.

What do you think Dave - is there room for the harsher methods that might be closer to the way you trained back in your Warfield days?

Paul

Subject: Re: Harsh Training. Wed Mar 26, 2008 5:42 am

This is an excellent discusion, with several inflluencing factors..

Firstly the training is ALWAYS available, but very few have actually wanted it.. the nearest I have had in recent years has been Stu Cutty who would withour doubt have been capable of training at that level

second.. everybody barring a very small number of those who trained very harshly and physically several generations ago were NOT 'upper class'.. they were the lower class when we had TWO classes.. Rich and Poor. .. so their entire life was harder, harsher and tougher...
there was NO welfare state, so you worked or you starved.. so you trained hard or you lost

Money for the LOSERS is less than 70 years old in boxing AND wrestling.. if you lost you went home broke.. hell of an incentive to win dont you think..
After all some heavyweighht in world championship fights have been paid MILLIONS if they LOST.. I would be more than happy to have gone in with Lennox Lewis for £2million win or lose

The old 'mountain fighters' used to gather the 1st Sunday in every month.. crowds would throw pennies into a hat.. and numbers from 6-20 fighters would take on one at a time until only one was left.. he got the hat, the others got the bruises and went home broke.

Go back to the gladiators ..losing meant death, winning meant eating and the chance of freedom.. you trained bloody hard because of it.

We think a bit too often about the 20th and 21st centuries.. I for one am happy that I know I can never actually STARVE, and that if I got rid of phones car, steak etc, and walked talked and ate one meal a day I could probably save £100 a week.. as could we all..
But less than 60 years ago, you paid for every doctor's visit.. there was no 'dole' no child benefit.. you worked or you starved, and 150 years ago there was NO police Force and NO courts as such.. you defended yourself or you died... made playing at combat a mistake...

Think of the old label 'The Wild West' in the USA.. 100 - 200 years ago, there was NO LAW .. you carried a gun and used it.

In England for CENTURIES we carried weapons such as swords and daggers etc .. if you ddint your life was cheap.

so SOCIETY has lessened the need for the type of combat abilities needed 40 years ago and backwards..
Law Suits if you smack a burgllar.. arrests if you defend yourself.. compensatation and law suits if you have a student injure themselves and so on..

The training we did was very harsh and the supplementary extras were VITAL so that we would go to work next day...

but by seeing and being part of others whose standards were off the chart simply encouraged you to match them..

I remember thinking "I'll never match John Warfield, maybe I could get as good as Micky Gould.. well if not then maybe Jeff Keen or Bob Taylor etc"
their presence and John Warfield's personality pushed you on to greater levels than you thought possible ..

just a question BACK Chris and the rest of you..

The pack animals known as feral youths are capable mentally of both inflicting and enjoying severe injury on their victims...even death is laughed at.. witness that 15 year old girl recently jailed for filming her pals kicking a man to death and laughing about it. and this has increased in the last 10 years.
However in my view their actual fighting abilities have diminished so much they are utter garbage..

they are only really capable of Jackal style Killing.. not Lion style Killing...

Even being punched by most of these yobs isnt that bad as they cant bloody FIGHT, but they can gang up and be a pack of jackals.. doesnt make them any less deadly of course not.. but the INDIVIDUAL 'hard cases' that we all knew in our youth of 40-50 years ago dont seem to exist.... certainly not in any numbers..
Can you imagine the Roy Shaws ro Lennie McCleans of the 60's taking sh*t from five 14 year olds??
I watch lots of CCTV stuff of so called violent encounters.. they are bloody TAME in many ways.. half a dozen lads brawl until the cops come and ALL run off.. its rare there many left on the foor unless the half dozen was 5 onto ONE

so my question is .. given that individual street hard men (youths) are less, are the youths of today actually softer in individuals?

and if so is the harsher training really needed due to the general softening of society?

over to you guys

Joined : 03 Sep 2007 Posts : 77

I guess I wasn't thinking of the need, more the desire - can't really explaint eh appeal other than it's just there...

As for the youths of today - yes the gangs of kids are jackals, I agree with that. But fighting 10 of them at a time is something that most don't train for (I know you are never fighting 10 really).
Where I live is right next door to an ex-mining village, and there are numerous neanderthals around. No problem in that my daily life doesn't bring me into much contact, but if I venture to the local pub, then some of them are in there.
Maybe the tough guys of today aren't as tough as yesteryear, I don't know. But if my survival might depend of being capable of outfighting even today's natural predators then I feel that I need as much pressure and discomfort as I can stand in my training.

Just my thoughts.

Paul

Admin Joined : 16 Aug 2007 Posts : 232

thanks Dave,

Thinking about your question regarding whether such harsh training is required today then I suppose it is because the level of threat is still there even though the type of threat has changed.

The consequence of the type of violence is still potentially fatal so while the concepts trained may alter to suit the prevelant threat does that not mean we still would be better served by the same level of conditioning as mentioned above.

If you take the analogy of attack from lions or jackals. The attack and the violence will have a different form and face but the conditioning required to survive the attack is the same? The type of violence is different but the result and attributes required to gain a result stay roughly the same?

I think the youth of today (makes me sound ancient but I'm a generation BEFORE the computer game age and the prevelance of parents driving kids everwhere so I think guys of my age just slip into a more active generation) IS physically, emotionally and mentally softer but I also think having seen them up close that there is the greater viciousness in their "weakling" violence. A willingness to go further faster and to use weapons in doing so. I've just coined a name for it by the way... "WEAKLING VIOLENCE." Very Happy

That said, I also know a LOT of lads in their 20's who are training hard and competing well so there is still that group of strong, well conditioned, athletic scrappers around. They are just a greater minority because they have to actively go and seek out such training as day to day life doesn't provide a bedrock of physical and mental toughness. They also aren't the type to get involved in meaningless violence and petty crime. Maybe I come into contact with them because I live and train in mining villages.. in my years away from home I saw a different world, one that was generally populated by what I would consider "softer" individuals. Sometimes softer in good ways, sometimes softer in worse ways.

I also think looks can be deceptive and the human spirit is a strange and unexpected thing. I know its only anecdotal but there are two teenagers training with us in Peterlee and they don't look like they could fight sleep but they are committed and sticking in taking whatever is dished out. Week after week they are there training hard when other "tougher" nuts have lasted five minutes. People can surprise you sometimes and I suppose that's what you train for, surprises in whatever shape or form.

Stu probably didn't think I'd last five minutes at his place, I've been there five years now. Very Happy

Subject: Re: Harsh Training. Wed Mar 26, 2008 6:55 am

I tend to agree with what you say Chris, but with a small caveat..

when fighting ONE lion you will always struggle to make him accept defeat.. I think of Karl (Blackwell)'s comment when asked about was he ever worried when up against someone who was a known 'hardcase'.. Karl's answers was .. No .. I only worry about how far I have to go to beat him'

With Jackals they can be 'scared off' much quicker.. attack them and beat say 2, and the others will be less inclined to keep attacking you...

In a gang of say 6 lads.. the ratio is usually 2 who CAN fight and enjoy it.. 2 who WILL fight but would rather not,and 2 who are gutless and simply wait for their opportunity to get the boot in.
Destroy one or both of these who CAN fight and rest assured you wont have 4 left to deal with because the latter 2 simply wont be there.

Yes looks can be deceptive.. take Scott Sykes from the SDF club in Sheffield run by Paul Powers.. he's a baby faced short slim guy (fights at about 65kgs) who would give a grizzly bear the first bite then turn it into a rug..

because of 'electrical' typesof contact, humans have been de-sensitised to a degree..

firms with the old style 'factory' workers for example which might have had 100's of people in one room, and lots of semi enforced 'mixing' are rarer.
Kids get a lot of contact via computers and mobile phones..

there is less mixing with others in large numbers, so they have the 'Stalin' approach to tragedy..
"One death is a tragedy.. a million is a statistic"

they care less for their victims, so because their ethos is less humane, they care less about what they do..

articficial injuries via X-Box games and even u-tube stuff will NEVER have the same impact as seeing your brother battered in front of you..

its all at a distance thus less impactive.. thus it requires increased violence levels to get the same 'kick buzz.

Joined : 17 Mar 2008 Posts : 22

This is a good thread its got me thinking.
We all agree on harsh training giving you the tools to survive a violent encounter if all else has failed. But this is only limited to a small minority in the world of combat/martial arts.
My thoughts are if you only train with a small minority under these circumstances how do you continue to grow. I know there will be people better/tougher than you in this group but surely after a while you will get use to there movement, power etc. I understand working the door/mma will provide you with partners that are fresh but how would you overcome this if you did not want to venture down the door/mma route.

Dave was this why the 'warfields' mentioned you seeking other arts.

Thanks
Dave

Subject: Re: Harsh Training. Wed Mar 26, 2008 2:03 pm

One of the reasons I will quote from John Warfields own treatise on Goshinkwai

"By training with others of all levels, you see and feel your dominance and superiority"

When they close the gap .. you simply widen it again .. (thats MY quote)

Admin Joined : 16 Aug 2007 Posts : 232

"By training with others of all levels, you see and feel your dominance and superiority"

Now THAT'S a quote and a half Dave! lol!

The question of finding new people to train with is a good one. It isn't actually that difficult to do. Good, bad or indifferent training partners are out there in abundance you just need to go out and train with them.

That said, sometimes one group is all you need. For example in the NE SDF if I want to train with a top notch grappler I partner up with Andy, if I want someone who can punch the head from my shoulders I partner up with Gordy. If I want someone who is literally twice as heavy as me to try and move around then I grab Davey. If I want to train with someone who is strong, aggressive and tough then I grab Jason and if I want the guy who knows how to put it all together I grab hold of Stu for a while or have a session with Lee.

As things got comfortable with those guys Dave stepped up our training in Doncaster so there is always a challenge there.

These types of groups do exist, you just need to seek them out.

About a year and a half ago I started training with a MMA group alongside the SDF training. They worked HARD on conditioning and fitness in the fight. They were young, strong and fit lads. Just the WORST kind of opponent and even better I had no idea at all what they knew so the question marks about what was coming next were all there. That fact alone made it more than worthwhile to get along to the training sessions. Martin at the uni has an influx of new students every 12 months and they make life interesting as well. I don't think its enough to just go out there and train with the same people time and time again. You have to find new opponents to give yourself a realistic benchmark.

In the last twelve months I've trained with Aikidoka, kickboxers, MMA guys, MT instructors and learned something from all of them.

Having said all that, I haven't found a better training group than the lads at the NE SDF. I'd put them up against anyone and if I couldn't then I'd probably head off somewhere else to train. They weren't easy to find but it was worth the effort.

Subject: Re: Harsh Training. Thu Mar 27, 2008 3:16 am

True Chris..

The thing is you never know anything about your opponent on the street until he/she is actually your opponent on the street..

Everyone has SOMETHING different to everyone else.. its those difference sthat can influence the outcome of a real go..

Unless tehre's been some kind of 'build up' with say a neighbour or workmate..then chance are you wont even know ANYTHING about the next street opponent.. and the worst time to find out he a superior puncher to you is when you are trading punches for REAL

One aspect (of many) in using different training partners with a myriad of sizes, skills, abiities etc, is in learning to RECOGNISE those traits very quickly indeed..

the old Japanese masters termed that skill NIN-SO (nothing whatsoeverto do with bloody Ninjas)

remember the story of Abbe and dthe young Karate-ka who challenged him..perfect example of real Nin-So
I think I told you that one chris didnt I?

Admin Joined : 16 Aug 2007 Posts : 232

Subject: Re: Harsh Training. Thu Mar 27, 2008 5:47 am

I think so Chris, after all Abbe had gained some incredible grades whilst very young.. Japan's youngest ever 5th Dan at 18 and youngest ever 7th Dan at 25...

He did many Arts, and often once he reached a reasonably high Dan level he simply stopped doing them..

I know he tended to mix in odd little bits from other arts.. he was fond of the 'vertical' fist which was more chinese than japanese for example...

he had amazing abilities all round

Joined : 17 Mar 2008 Posts : 22

I have visited various different arts but the things is and i cannot explain it is....... Im looking for something that feels right (sorry if its not clear). I thought i had found it once but after lots and lots of ridiculous training i started to find faults (even though it had worked for me when the sh*t hit the fan). Now im at a loss i do wonder if this is natural as i got more proficient i could only see what i could not do and not what i could do. I did pressure test it often (even though that art does get bad press) and after a while i found that more natural movements came into play (walking was one of them for power generation weird huh?).
I have started to look at grappling properly after all these years (having got my a** handed to me by a friend who has trained in judo and combat sambo nasty leg locks in that art)
Sorry for rambling guys

Dave did the warfields introduce anything into what they did or did abbe hold all the answers

Thanks
Dave