Quote:
Bill Danosky wrote:
...the most important thing I am trying to underscore here is that IF you have ANY impracticality in your technique, it's the dojo's solemn obligation to make sure you know. That's how we find our "limiting factor" (s) and improve. And when I say "we" I mean our practice group.
I would prefer no one finds any insult in that, but if they do I think it's worth it to deliver that message. We ALL have weaknesses. Myself included, but I am working hard to define and eliminate them. Please make sure your's don't take you by surprise. You never know when trouble will find you.
|
I would agree it's important to have and convey realistic expectations as a teacher...crucial to the task, even.
A problem is that so many people have different ideas on what constitutes "sufficient." By my low-level reckoning, my movement is sufficient enough to generally handle your average person, but against a well-fought individual I'm
hopeful to get lucky enough to create space for me to run before I take a hard hit or are otherwise solidly locked into grappling range. What that set of words means is still going to vary from person to person based on their perception of what seems "average." When we add comparisons of study it gets even stickier.
As for waza I think of as likely to present itself, I like atemi, sankyo, kotegaeshi, and juji nage, but when I'm training with the mindset of being "strong against" an attacker I'm usually just cutting (kiri) and thrusting (tsuki) and thinking of "filling" my structure (how to make "everything irimi" when I move)...and slipping/entering (footwork) to the rear. If I can get there, I usually have more time/options.