A first lesson, dialogue...

[Savi]

Let's say a brand new student is in his first class, and knows nothing about the Time Space and Energy paradigm. You have just given a brief lecture on the Four Martial Activities, the Four Ranges of Combat, and the TSE focus of common denominators...

The first question the student asks you is, "What exactly do you mean by Time?"

The second question the student asks you is, "What exactly is Space?"

The third question the student asks you is, "Isn't Energy just power and muscle?"

Apparently, he cannot identify with whatever it was you explained in your lecture. You now have to find a way to describe these things to him as basic as you possibly can while being sensitive to his emotions and experiences. Let's assume the only familiarity he has regarding combat is through watching movies, and a couple of fights as a child. He thinks tournament fighting is the shiznit, but that's about as far as his opinion goes.

I'd like to see how 'you', as the instructor of the student, would answer the FIRST question. Remember, he knows nothing about the TSE perspective. How simple and/or complicated will your answer be?

[Cang Long]

In combat terms Space would be the distance between two combatants (battlefield). Time would be the phenomenon used to measure the speed and force (energy) used to move weapons inside that space (battlefield).

[passing_through]

First, I'd hit the following points in the below and then move into the Time/Space/Energy paradigm:

1) Four Activites - each activity has a different nature. Training methods will vary based on nature, for example:

Entertainment - something that looks good and expresses the nature of fighting without being actual fighting such as a seven-hundred-and-twenty-degree-jumping-spinning-kick. Might not be good for practical application and training takes a while before you can even move like this.

Health/Fitness - Involves moving the body to maximize fitness and calories burned. The actual practicality of the motions is secondary to fitness and safety concerns.

Competition/Sports - In this activity, the practicality of the motion does matter. If you are sloppy and leave openings, you get hit and/or knocked out. The caveat to this activity is that both participants are subject to agreed-upon rules and safety considerations. In this activity, there is a real sense of danger and risk of personal injury.

Self-Defense/Combat - In this activity, not only does the practicality matter but also the fact that neither party is restricted by rules. My goal is to minimize my own risk while delivering the most damage to my opponent as possible. Not only is knock-out, injury or death possible but I might find myself fighting more than one person, or an armed assailant (or assailants).

2) Four Ranges - each range allows the use of different tools, for example:

Kick - approx. 2 steps away - allows use of long-range kicks, requires a lot of room to move. Cannot use hands to support.

Strike - approx. 1 step away - allows use of medium-range kicks, long-range stikes through use of rotation of body.

Trap - approx 0.5 steps away - allows use of short-range kicks, short-range strikes, knees, elbows, control of opponent's limbs, headbutt, joint manipulation, takedowns, sweeps, throws

Grab - approx 0.0 steps away - allows use of chokes, joint manipulation, takedowns, sweeps, throws. Cannot use limbs as impact weapons.

After having communicated, more-or-less, the above, I’d get into the Time/Space/Energy discussion.

"Based on the above two categories, we break all motions down into three factors: Time, Space, and Energy."

Student's basic understanding of martial arts: watching movies, a couple of fights as a child; thinks tournament fighting is great

The first question the student asks you is, "What exactly do you mean by Time?"

"Each motion requires a certain amount of space in which to exist as well as a certain amount of time to travel through the space, which requires energy. For example, compare these two kicks: "
a) demonstrate back-foot, thrusting front kick
b) demonstrate a front-foot, snapping front kick

"Which is the faster kick?" (Should be front-foot, snapping front kick)

"Now, the back-foot, thrusting front kick might be slower than the front-foot, snapping front kick... but which is more powerful?" (If necessary, have the student hold tombstone for you and kick it a few times with each kick so he can feel your power). "The back-foot, thrusting front kick is more powerful because it is traveling a longer distance and I can use more of my body for power."

Have student drill each kick 10-20 times, first doing 20 back-foot thrusting front kick on each leg - total of 40 kicks, and then 20 front-foot snapping front kick on each leg - again, total of 40 kicks.

(As student catches his breath)
"Now, which kick can you do easier and longer?" (should be front-foot snapping front kick).
"Which kick requires the most space?" (should be back-foot thrusting front kick). Think about if you got into a self-defense situation in a bar... could you easily use that kick?" (most people will say no)
"Which kick requires the least space?" (should be front-foot snapping front kick). "You can use this kick to soften someone up, or create the space to use the longer, back-foot kick."

"This is an example of how time, space and energy combine. Knowing that the back-foot thrusting front kick requires more time and more space to use would it be wise to use it as a primary weapon against a fresh fighter?" (answer should be no). "Once someone is tired, or if they are retreating out of a close-range encounter faster than you can keep up, that's when you can use the back-foot kick."

"Another example of Time comes into play in punching. For example," (demonstrate a jab but pull the fist towards you before you throw the punch). "When I move my hand towards me, I create more space. This extra space gives me a longer distance through which to strike, resulting in more power. However, this extra movement also requires more time." (demonstrate with a partner that knows some form of block. Instruct your partner to do the block when he sees the punch coming. Telegraph the punch). "He can stop me every time, not because I am slow - or he is fast but because I am wasting Time by drawing my hand back towards me before I throw it at him. Let's see what happens when I don't telegraph" (demonstrate without the telegraph, you should be able to hit your partner relatively easy. In order to assure ease of demonstration, instruct a few senior students on how to be your partner when teaching class, prior to today's class so you’ll have someone with which you can demonstrate your point. )

"Any time you move without taking into account the Time required to move, the Space through which you move and the Energy required to complete the movement, you might have an opening that you'd never realize. Train for 20 years but have a flaw, you've still got an opening. Remember, when I get hit - it's not because my opponent did something right; it's because I did something wrong."

If the student wants to continue this discussion, start to do partner drills - such as the Chin Na from 1st level. In this exercise you can set up situations to demonstrate certain spaces in which you create more or less time to react.

Whatcha think?

Jeremy R.

[Chango]

I think that is a wonderful answer and is very complete. However I think the question was posted in a fashion as it beng a private question from that particular student. I personally feel that if we give the student so much at once it just might make that particular student a little lazy if we feed him or her to much. I personally would go back and revisit the 4 activities (as you have done very clearly I might add) and the fact that they are very different in intent, goals and objectives etc... I would then address the time, space and energy factor in a very basic fashion as to conserve both my time and the students. maybe give him an example of the fact that a jab has less Time, space, and energy then a cross. This fact then defines a persective from which we approach what is more efficient or not. Maybe allow him/her to hit the bags, equipment etc... with this in mind. I then would drop a hint to him that our focused training does not trade one for the other and is by definition most efficient. If the student is not satisfied and ask for more then I will go into more detail as you have. I would use class time to cover more of the fine details of each weapon and how it fits into our weapon system.

I have had a experience where a student came away with the idea that HFY does not work in the sport and health arena! I later explained that of course you can use HFY concepts etc... in accordance to the rules and drastically improve your tournament activities. Of course HFY offers health/fitness at it's highest levels. This mistake may have been on the part of the student or in the way I presented the four activities and realities information. However in those cases I examine how I could have done things to bridge better to the student regardless of his apptitude. I have to remember I have to first go to them to bring them up to a higher level.


As a teacher through my exeriences I have found that sometimes I give then to much and the student at that point does not apprecieate fau kiu to saan kiu process. I think I was a bit harsh in calling it "lazy". But If they feel that they have "worked thier way through it" it seems to stick better and instill confidence.
that has been my experiences.

Chango

[Steve]

I would have to say its better to combine the two methods of Jeremy and Chango. Use the experience that Jeremy detailed so thoroughly, but also do not use as much explanation. I know Jeremy does not like to talk unless his class is breathing heavily and on the verge of passing out, but he can also be rather verbose when a question is asked. ;)

When I was teaching in the public school systems, I found if I talked too much about any given topic when a question was asked, the students would begin to shut down after a few moments, regardless of their initial interest level. I later adjusted my responses as I learned, experiencing the same thing Chango has, that students retain more knowledge if they are allowed to explore, leanr and think things through on their own. The teacher is there to guide them, not tell them what to do all of the time. There must be time allowed for self-study of various topics rather than just lecture after lecture after lecture.

The first question the student asks you is, "What exactly do you mean by Time?"

I would most likely answer with something brief and direct the first time a student asks. "Time is equal to space, the more space you have to travel, the more time it takes. In combat the more time it takes you to do something, the more time your opponent has to also do something." Then I would move on, allowing them to think about and digest the information as drilling continues. Later on in class, I would bring up the energy involved in time for them to consider, but in the form of a question with two options. "Now, based on what I said earlier about time and space, which was (let the student(s) answer), how would you describe energy use? Does mroe space use more energy, or less?" From there I would have the students surmise that Time = Space = Energy. The more Time something takes, the more space it involves and from there, the more energy it needs. To make it more real for them, I then point out something that they can relate to, their home. "If you heat/cool a house, the more space in the house, the longer it takes to heat/cool and the more energy it takes to heat/cool. The opposite is true of less space." I would not discuss anything more specifically than that excpet maybe to just touch on efficiency based on the ranges of combat combined with the basic postures of Heaven, Man & Earth by showing brief examples based on what they did in their first class. Then say To Be Continued!

[Savi]

I really enjoy all your responses. It seems as if we are talking the same language (and I don't mean english;)), and on top of that I really appreciate seeing your teaching approaches. But something I noticed in the explanations which I thought would happen...

It seems as though we have to rely on Space and Energy to put Time into perspective. I think that I posted 3 separate questions to see if you could answer the first one without talking about Space and/or Energy, but interesting nonetheless! I don't really know where this discussion is intended to go, but I think we all could steer it anyway we want.



---------------------------------------------------
A thought just came to mind... is there anything wrong with just saying:

"Time... is how long or short it takes for something to happen."

Any thoughts on something as simple as that? Again, that is just for the first question only, so... It is definitely a "how to word" issue that I am pondering. I think when keeping things simple [when teaching] even the words you use have to be subject to simplicity, right?
---------------------------------------------------



Based on the following posts:

1.I can see that Sisuk Jeremy's style clearly reflects Hau Chyun Saan Sau to accomplish the task. I think though his approach is Saan Sau first and Hau Chyun second, kinda...

2. Sibaak Chango seems to preface things a bit more before going into physical activities... being concerned about potential time contraints (no pun intended).

3. Sisuk Steve shared daily life examples and would take both Jeremy and Chango's approaches into one, per se.

4. All three are utilizing Hau Chyun Sau for their approach.

In addition, from what I gather from your posts, I have no doubt that the most important thing to accomplish when teaching a student is not that they only understand what is what. More importantly, that they can identify the logic behind the "what". I think that is when Space and Energy come into the discussion in order to complete the paradigm. Do you agree?

My approach has commonly been to keep the explanations fairly brief, and the physical action quick - with a medium degree of difficulty in order to get a point across, then summarizing/reviewing what the lesson was focused on.

Another interesting thought... In what order would you answer the initial three questions?

1. Space, Energy, & Time
2. Space, Time, & Energy
3. Energy, Time, & Space
4. Energy, Space, & Time
5. Time, Space, & Energy
6. Time, Energy, & Space

I know that so far only instructors have posted on this topic, but I would encourage others to add in as well. I think your input is needed too.

[Bryan Feagin]

Great posts guys!

As a student, here's what I like to hear. A short (maybe 5 minute max) discussion of the concept being drilled, mixing combat theory with the philosophical aspects of the system. I agree with the 'keep-it-brief' approach: HFYWC kung fu is a HANDS ON skill that demands first-hand EXPERIENCE. Theory and explanation are great for further knowledge, but we can theorize/pontificate all day long on a WC concept and still not internalize it through whole body karma. Until you actually experience it firsthand, you'll only understand it from an intellectual level, and that's all. Students need to be given time to work it through, experience, and find much out on their own.

HFY concepts are different in that they do indeed require more explanation/understanding than the average Martial Art/WC out there. But if a student has to sit through a 2 hour lecture on HFY theory without ever doing a drill or touching hands with a partner, then this will most likely result in the student's skill not improving very much or at all. There's only so much some students can visualize...

I personally think the order should be:

1) Space
Who's space? In the beginning, it's SELF-SPACE
Later in training, other spaces become apparent (combat arena, opponent's space, and shared space)

2) Time
Once self-space is mastered, time is introduced by referencing another object (i.e., your opponent) in space (the combat arena or shared sp).

3) Energy
Energetics are approached and drilled once the first two are introduced and understood.

Also, I don't really see these as a progression, more like corners of a triangle that are all inclusive. But I do believe they should be taught conceptually in that order to new students.

Just my 2c,

[Cang Long]

It seems as though we have to rely on Space and Energy to put Time into perspective. I think that I posted 3 separate questions to see if you could answer the first one without talking about Space and/or Energy, but interesting nonetheless! I don't really know where this discussion is intended to go, but I think we all could steer it anyway we want. In combat terms Space would be the distance between two combatants (battlefield). OK how is that ;)

[dmilner321]

You guys are all a whole lot better instructors than me. I'm just starting to practice thinking like one. Savi thanks for throwing out the question and getting me to think.

I think I would use the opportunity of the first question and subsequent questions to answer the question about time by providing some kind of fau kiu exercise for the student to answer the question themselves. Perhaps pairing them up for a punch / pak sau drill, first starting with the punch originating from a foot away from them inside mun jong range, then outside. I would tell them to think about time on the battlefield while practicing.
After that I would ask them what they had discovered and what they perceived about controlling time on the battlefield from the drill.

Sometimes myself I think it's like the difference between Siu Lim Tau and Siu Nim Tau. I can sometimes grasp the little idea, but mostly need the little drill first before I understand.

[Steve]

Sorry, the post is the one below.

[Steve]

I like Bryan's point regarding the order of the questions. What do we actually need to address first? Time, Space, or Energy?

The first question the student asks you is, "What exactly do you mean by Time?"

The second question the student asks you is, "What exactly is Space?"

The third question the student asks you is, "Isn't Energy just power and muscle?"
Savi posed the questions in the above order, and I think as a teacher this is where experience comes into play. I think a simple redirection of the order of the student’s questions should be done first. Something along the lines of “Time and Energy are connected to Space, so you first need to understand Space in terms of combat.” Then begin the discussion of what exactly is meant by space, but keep it brief for the beginner. In this way, the teacher is able to answer the questions individually, keeping them separate when defining


So what standard should be used for defining space?

Cang Long writes it as 'the distance between two combatants.’ Some of us have made the three components integral, touching on all three when answering a question about one. This may prove to be too overwhelming for the beginner student to handle. However we also need to give a concise definition regarding “What exactly is Space”? The dictionary defines it as ‘the unlimited three-dimensional expanse in which all objects are located.” That is a huge thing to consider for anyone. If we give that as an answer, I think the Beginner may run out the door. Cang’s definition is simple enough, but is it inclusive enough? Maybe instead of using distance, ‘area’ should be used, “The area between two opponents. Using ‘distance’ may not evoke the proper concept of three-dimensional, and result in a linear understanding. There is nothing wrong with that, but with some modifications in wording, I believe that the definition can be simple enough for the Beginner to understand, and convey the three-dimensional understanding. “Space is the area between two points.” This is general enough, yet also somewhat specific. It can include the area inside the arms, from the fists to the torso, between the legs, between the combatants, etc.

Thoughts or input?

[Bryan Feagin]

Steve, you bring up some great valid points. The definition of 'space' for the beginner is a tricky one, because as we more experienced HFY practitioners know, the definition of 'space' changes based on the *context* in which it is discussed. Much like the Tin Yan Dei concept expresses multiple dimensions of T/S/E simultaneously.

The challenge is, which definition of space is most acceptable for the beginning student, while also leaving some 'wiggle-room' (as Jeremy is fond of saying) for more expansion? How do you keep it from being too narrow or too broad? In our Cinci classes, Sifu Lambert likes to suffice any statement or definition with a phrase something like:

"<some explanation of concept here>...and there's more. that's just one definition... don't get hung up on just one interpretation, as many other interpretations/layers will become apparent later on."

Again, I think the real paradigm shift occurs for the beginner (at least it did for me) when you realize that the most important space to be concentrating on in the beginning is SELF-SPACE. A beginner will naturally want to immediately talk about combat space (the external), not realizing that external space is meaningless if you haven't yet mastered your own self-space. A beginner first thinks that as they are doing the Siu Nim Tau form, they are hitting an imaginary opponent's reference (target) points... the first paradigm shift occurs when they realize that they are actually addressing their OWN reference points, and the opponent is completely irrelevant to their own self-space and structure.

But, of course, you want the student to figure this out for themselves and not spoon-feed/force-feed it to them but allow them the actual experience of finding it out.... so how do we not give away too much info?

Thoughts?

[jaymz]

Jaymz, I moved your post to the "Level One Test Questions" thread.

Thanks for your response, and welcome to the forum!

-Savi.