UnderGround Forums
 

Scott Sonnon >> Which methods of development?


6/5/02 6:27 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Sonnon
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 05-Jun-02
Member Since: 01-Jan-01
Posts: 260
 
Please distinguish between: 1. PRACTICE 2. TRAINING 3. COMPETITION What are the objectives and goals of each? How are they different and how do they mutually support each other? Fraternal, Scott
6/5/02 11:03 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
spc
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 05-Jun-02
Member Since: 01-Jan-01
Posts: 16
Hi Scott. To me Practice would be working the basics without resistance in order to become familar with the basic concepts,principles,and techniques of that particular art. Training would introduce resistance in order to develop the dynamics of timing,sensitivity, emotional control,etc.. with the mechanics that were developed through the "practice phase".Competion is the highest end of the continum and really has as its greatest value in helping us to deal with high intensity and the unknown. SPC
6/6/02 8:07 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Chuckk
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 06-Jun-02
Member Since: 01-Jan-01
Posts: 28
1 & 2 I hope you don't mind, but why reinvent the wheel? I found this in archives: "TRAINING VS. PRACTICE (Learning developmental tools vs. Development) This is why only daily deepening of one's personal practice lends development through ROSS. Only this. There are NO short cuts. Going to study with a teacher is TRAINING, where one learns more about what one should be doing in daily personal practice. Training does NOT lend development. Training lends the TOOLS for development. Development only happens in personal practice. One's daily devotion to deepening of personal practice is directly proportional to one's development. There are no part-time ROSSafarians. There is also no separate agenda for working within each phase of development. Only one's perception/focus evolves... and this only through daily devotion to deepening personal practice." --Scott Sonnon 3. Once again from archives: (A contest of strength, speed, [attributes] and surprise)-mine-- "for the cultivation of morale in light of full-on friction (great intensity, duration, location, frequency, and volume) of combat multipliers, and on-site improvisation and innovation for achieving strategic objectives."--Scott's Some other relevant notes I found: "Our training only increases the thresh hold of our performance; it certainly does not ensure it. And moreover, the worst one is in training is the best one can hope for in performance." "This refers again back to the ROSS Pedagogical Formula: Exercises x Strategy/Scenario = Improvised Technique. On any given day, in any given situation, one has a particular performance level. There are no "universal" answers - only daily renovation of ancient wisdom to apply to modern moments." "Practice does NOT make perfect. PERFECT practice makes perfect. " "Combat (including competition) is a clash of wills, and he who imposes his will upon the other is victorious. " Each of the a fore mentioned areas of study overlap and support each other. You could not have a competition without "some" training (in whatever discipline). Throwing someone into a swimming competition before they learned a stroke would likely be murder. The same might be said of combat sports. :) You could not train without daily personal practice (although I have had "training" partners and clients that tried--but that is something for another time perhaps). You could not practice unless you knew what to train. Good questions. Peace, Chuck

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.