Students learning weapons

[SENSEI TERRELL]

I would like to know how long should you wait before student start learning weapons i think it should be on your 3rd belt what ever color it my be i would like your comments

[Draven]

Depends on what I'm teaching; in ninjutsu you won't see any weapons training until about brown belt, in my jujitsu classes it considered "adavnced grade" material.

[john55]

Originally Posted by SENSEI TERRELL

I would like to know how long should you wait before student start learning weapons i think it should be on your 3rd belt what ever color it my be i would like your comments

Why should they have to wait? What is the reason?

[WC_Lun]

In most kung fu systems weapons are part and parcel of the training. The weapons have something to teach a student as well as the empty hand stuff. Of course you aren't going to train a beginning student a weapon like a rope dart, but something like a staff, broadsword, or escrima sticks are all appropriate beginning level weapons.

[Shinobi_Kokujin]

i dont agree with making students wait for a while before you train them in weapons. weapons are extentions of empty handed techniques looking at postures, postitioning, and stances they are the same with or without weapons but some modifications are made to compensate

that your fighting with a particular weapon. speaking of this reminds me of my ninjutsu class last night, we had a new classmate an it was his first time training. his only prior training in martial arts is with the Marine corp

he never held a sword before. but we were going over the omote gyaku technique which is a wrist manipulation throw empty handed, then we started using wooden swords, the same way that you do the technique empty handed you can do against someone who is attacking you with a sword, base ball bat, golf club, knife etc.

an he like many other new people we have was able to jump right into the mix and get the hang of defending against the weapon and using the weapon starting off with the basics.

[Draven]

Shinobi,

But, would teach weapons at a beginning level? For myself, I think that a student should have a solid base in unarmed combat before learning weapons. My students tend to pick up weapon's skills faster; because they have a solid base with taijutsu and the weapon being an extension of the body. So do you think early on weapons training distracts or can distract from observant principles?

[john55]

Originally Posted by Draven

Shinobi,

But, would teach weapons at a beginning level? For myself, I think that a student should have a solid base in unarmed combat before learning weapons. My students tend to pick up weapon's skills faster; because they have a solid base with taijutsu and the weapon being an extension of the body. So do you think early on weapons training distracts or can distract from observant principles?

Why? What if you are training a cop who is there to learn how to defend against guns? or use knives against an attacker? There are so many reasons to train weapons first for some people. I really think it depends on the situation. I mean, I doubt the military makes their soldiers learn hand to hand combat and get to some level before they learn to shoot a gun.

[Gambatte Karate]

Well, I think 18 should be the minimum age for learning how to shoot....But a sword is much more complex to use than a gun, soooo..... :P

[Draven]

Originally Posted by john55

Why? What if you are training a cop who is there to learn how to defend against guns? or use knives against an attacker? There are so many reasons to train weapons first for some people. I really think it depends on the situation. I mean, I doubt the military makes their soldiers learn hand to hand combat and get to some level before they learn to shoot a gun.

Thats true and I make cocessions for specific individuals...
On the military thing, they actually do teach H2H and CQC before marksmanship training. On background info for context; the Army uses Basic/OSUT as a Primer and your first year in the field is still considered part of "basic training" because its to build on that. You'll start off with basic unarmed combat (not the complete H2H system), progress to bayonet training & then marksmanship and reason they do this for the same reason I advocate delaying weapons training.

First of all, basic military training is a primer and its often not as complete as most MA systems. In fact the full docturine of military science draws from many different fields and soldiers are often tasked to specific roles; in my case airassault tasks, small teams warfare and inflitartion. Infantry school taught me basic small teams battle drills, camouflage, etc. And those basics where built into inflitration, guerrilla tactics and small teams warfare. Basically, you have to be expert with an M4 before you'll ever make it to sniper school. Its all crawl, walk, run...

Secondly, lets look at the application of that crawl-walk-run principle in an MA context. The skill sets that are most required to studied and perfected by most martial artists are the building blocks of the system; body positioning, foot work, breakfalls, basic unarmed techniques, etc. A student will work on the aspects that interest them most when they train outside the school. So if I focus on teaching them to crawl they will crawl. Give them too much too soon it distracts them for aspects they need to learn.

Third, going beck to the military thing as an example; in Basic/OSUT you are given an intro course MAC and when you get to the field you learn more, you are given an intro course in marksmanship but when you get to the field that gets expanded. But the goals of the Military and the goals of Dojo are somewhat different, at least for me. The military is trying to mass produce bodies for a "war machine" and the individual skills are regned in by the need to work as a team. A Dojo is trying to create a skilled and knowledgable individual, so it requires a less production-line training platform...

[Shinobi_Kokujin]

Originally Posted by Draven

Shinobi,

But, would teach weapons at a beginning level? For myself, I think that a student should have a solid base in unarmed combat before learning weapons. My students tend to pick up weapon's skills faster; because they have a solid base with taijutsu and the weapon being an extension of the body. So do you think early on weapons training distracts or can distract from observant principles?

naw i dont think it distracts. from the way im looking at it, training with weapons later on is something new that came with the founding of modern martial arts. some schools do it

to stretch out thier training curriculum. but when you dealing with weapons like knife, bo, short stick, sword in addition to empty hand your learning more about dealing with distance, timing, balancing, and targeting

while utilizing these different types of weapons and empty hand that covers the different ranges of combat


looking at the art of Escrima for example, practicioners jump right into weapons first and gradually go on to empty hand or they train both empty hand and weapon simultaneously depending on what particular school and this develops muscle memory

which helps them fight using the same angles of attack and footwork with or without a weapon.

concerning safety, like with the sword it would be best to have a student train with a wooden one first then graudually go on to the live sword.

we used to use foam padded swords, but it didnt quit simulate as effective as planned so we just use plain wooden an from there you can teach proper holding an caution with handling it as though it were a live sword.


looking historically at martial arts training. they didnt have time to have students train empty handed for a while an then go into weapons. you would train empty handed but you would also be wielding a spear or a bow , bayonet-rifle, etc. it was all

compounded an not spread out the way some arts do it today

[Chapel]

Originally Posted by john55

Why should they have to wait? What is the reason?

For exceptional cases such as military or police, then weapons should be pretty immediate, but that is mostly because you aren't going to move onto anything more advanced. Military and police need to know what to do and how to do it quickly.

For general population you should focus on building a solid base of unarmed techniques (against both unarmed and weapons) so that weapons can be build upon something so that more and more advanced techniques can be built up. Most of this general population isn't doing martial arts out of necessity for a career, just a hobby or fun. (Same reason why Kindergarten math doesn't start with Field Axioms.)

For kids, which is what my school generally does, teaching weapons will only result in injuries because kids are immature little brats when you first get them. If they have no respect for the weapon and how much damage it can do there will be accidents, law suits and shutting down of programs. For kids, you can then also use weapons training as a reward for show maturity and perseverance.

[Gambatte Karate]

Originally Posted by john55

Why should they have to wait? What is the reason?

We require students to wait for a while in order to get some of the basics down first. A lot of the empty hand basics transfer over to the weapons as well. If they have crummy empty hand basics, then they will carry that over to their weapons as well in most cases.

[WC_Lun]

In many cases training with a weapon will reinforce body movements. Certain weapons only are efficient with certain movements. So when training the weapon, you are also training basics and empty hand ideas that make that weapon work as well. It is important to know what weapon to teach to what level student though. If you hand a monk spade or kwan do to a person who cannot even work a staff, you do more harm than good.

When it comes to children, that is a fine line. You must consider thier safety above all else, but I've noticed that kids are who get the greatest benefit from training with weapons.

[ladyfighter]

Weapons and kids? I think it should be based on their level of maturity and commitment to the weapon/training.

As far as adults if they show positive signs in training, I have no problem with teaching them the bo staff or escrima sticks, but we usually don't teach sword until after they have worked with some other weapons first. JMO, that when it comes to teaching sword, it's easier if they have already learned how to use a bo/skicks/kamas/etc.

[redranger]

at the ATA school i go to, you can start using weapons at white belt, when you get to black belt you have to do weapons for midterms. i personally think you should have to wait until you at least on belt earned to do weapons