Training for success

[Hubert]

In the recent grappling thread, there was a recurrent mention about "training for failure". I have been thinking about that recently, and decided I didn't like this idea.

Actually, in Shaolin Wahnam, we do the opposite. We train for success.

Whether it's in martial application, or in daily life, we aim and train for success. When I do the pattern "Black tiger steals heart", I do it for success. As a decisive strike. If my opponent counters it, never mind, I have something else. I have a sequence, and I flow along.

In daily life, if I want to achieve a certain objective, I act for success. If something happens that I wasn't prepared for, never mind, I change my actions accordingly. I have a sequence, and I flow along.

Some would argue that "training for failure" is a matter of semantic. I disagree. Words might be provisionary, but they reveal a lot.

[Darryl]

An excellent observation and one that I fully agree with

Short, sharp and to the point

[Daniel]

Well said and congratulations!

[Marko]

re

when I read Hubert's post I remember Sifu's words on Shaolin Intensive Course in November 2004:

We progress, we don't retrogress. 

[Andrew]

Nice, Hubert

Andrew

[Charles David]

Setting Aims and Objectives is a very good example of how we train for success.

Still,

[Jonny Say]

Flow and Intent

Dear Hubert

I agree completely. As we know the intent is very important in training, so we must have success in our hearts.

And as you pointed out we train to flow with any interuptions to our success.

All the best

[Piers]

Great point, especially as training for failure sounds superficially sensible. My training is definitely making me realise more and more that I can expect success (in all sorts of areas of life), rather than assuming failure as a way of protecting myself from disappointment, which is what I often used to do. Now I have confidence.

piers

[Molly]

Ah, tres bien fait Hubert,
A simple, direct, and effective observation I shall take to heart!
Molly

[cnholmes]

Thank you, Hubert, for bringing this up again.

I thought over this on a thread here

http://wongkiewkit.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4927

The fact is that I agree with you completely, and felt a bit foolish for having looked at it otherwise. I went back and reread the thread.

Then something occurred to me I hadn't seen before. As I was looking at it there, "Training For Failure" is a relatively low level concept. Any interpretation of it - 'invest in loss', 'learn from your mistakes', 'coping with failure' - seems to me a stage which must be passed through in developing an art.

The fact is that no matter which way I looked at our kungfu, there was provision for failure - but no! It went beyond that! Our kungfu has been optimised by many generations. It has evolved past the need to "Train For Failure". Perhaps Shaolin Kungfu did go through this stage at some point, but surely any failures have been identified long ago and catered for. Then more recently (but still long ago) the patterns we use, the supporting force training, the tactics and every other aspect have been improved and advanced, as various Masters have explored and deepened the understanding held in the art.

This is one of the benefits of learning from a Master who has learnt from generations of Masters before him. As long as we follow our teachers instructions we can concentrate on training for success, which as agreed is much better for us.

We are lucky to have this legacy to learn from and carry on. We are also lucky to have Hubert to speak up.

Regards,
Chris.

[Simon]

It is strange how a small phase can make such a difference and how small pieces of philosophy can change the way we interpret a whole chunk of what we practice.

It seems to me that this concept is also important in combat sequence practice and may even divide the real kung fu from the 'flowery fists'.
Each pattern in a sequence should be trained as if it is the last 'finishing' move. Once we start to expecting our opponent to counter we are, consciously or not, allowing him to counter.

I think our philosophy can be compared to running somewhere; we may take a stride and realise we haven't arrived, it's no problem, we just take another stride forward and keep running until we do arrive.

Simon