Skip to main content

Unleaded: Old School Conditioning Volume I: The Pliant Physique--Mark Hatmaker

 


[Below is an excerpt from the Pliant Physique Program. The package is a 65-minute DVD & 12-page booklet detailing the Old School Principles behind and detailing the Four Program Paths tailored to your Combat Athlete needs.]

Pliancy vs. Flexibility, Part One

Let’s start with a definition, as this strict use of the adjective gets to the heart of what Old-Schoolers meant when they used the word “pliant” or sometimes “lissome.”

Pliant: Yielding, as in a willow that bends against the force of the wind and easily returns to its standard posture.

[Keep that willow analogy in mind, we’ll come back to it.]

Lissome: (of a person or their body) thin, supple, and graceful.

We sometimes see this sort of physique or attribute referred to in the old literature as “willowy.”

The Two Attributes of a Pliant Physique

Attribute One-The concept was to foster a yielding-resiliency, that is, the ability to easily and ably return to posture/base after an applied force [wind vs. the willow, the attempted crank of a poorly leveraged double-wristlock, etc.]

Antonyms of “pliancy” include inflexible, rigid, stiff, stiffened, calcified, etc.

Contrast our willows with tree limbs [or human limbs] that do not yield to the force and snap, rip or tear rendering them unable to return to the prior intact form.

Attribute Two—To be Old School “pliant” or “lithe” was also to be graceful, again, willowy.

The goal was NOT to yield without strength.

To yield without strength is a willow broken at the stem unable to stand upright after the applied force. We must have the co-existing attributes of yielding to the force and the resilient strength of returning to the point of posture.

[Note: This program will deal with minor force at the extremes. The Unleaded Strength Volumes also have pliancy + strength built into them at much greater force. Here, we address the base building of strength while yielding.

The goal also was NOT mere “I can bend when I need to”; it was to carry the embodied pliant, lithe grace into each action of the day.

To emphasize, to embody pliancy is to not merely execute by rote the programs that follow, but to educate the mind and body to the ways the Three Primaries [Back/Hips/Shoulders] interact and bolster one another so that we bring lissome grace to our standing, our stride, our rising into and out of seated positions.

This first volume seeks to build that pliant base and begins the journey of “thinking” of the body a bit differently than we do in today’s glut of “exercise science.”

Don’t read that to mean, the Old Schoolers were unscientific, not at all.

Read that to mean, that much of what we “understand” is often diluted through a prism of decades of marketing or single-step approach bias.

Pliancy vs. Flexibility Two

Let’s go back to our willow.

The Old School asks that we need be no more pliant than we need to be.

That is, our reed need be only as pliant as to be able to bend to the ground and back to point of posture.

The reed has no need of scalloping out a hole and “learning” to bend into the hole past what it would be asked to do in a windstorm.

Old School thought dictates that the human body also has no like need of “bending into holes” to achieve pliant and graceful results.

As a matter of fact, to many Old-Schoolers, “stretching” beyond the needs was antithetical to the associated goals of strength and stability. [Much more on these attributes in upcoming volumes.]

“Stretching” in the word itself conjures what was considered the problem with standard flexibility training.

It implies “stretching” a bit beyond current capabilities.

To Old School thought, pliancy was educated to the point of posture.

Strength was not “stretched” for, it was accrued with startlingly easy loads [“easy” being relative]; it was educated and accrued via long-honed skill not forced overtraining.

Pliancy training is likewise based on moving to the “earth” and not “stretching into the holes.”

Often what we ask of our bodies today to reap Old School rewards is eating up our progress and paving the way for accrued injury.

Yes, the Van Damme split between chairs is an impressive stunt, and a few Old Schoolers demonstrated such ability, but this was considered an outlier attribute and not a desirable goal and in no way contributed to the goal of the whole.

Sandow Over Yoga

The educated eye may see some similarity between some of the postures/exercises and what can be found in some disciplines of yoga.

There are two reasons for that…

[For more information and a list of further contents, or to start the Pliant Physique Programs yourself see here.]

Black Box Subscribers receive Unleaded Volume 1 for over 50% off.

For information on The Black Box Subscription Service.

For ears-on support see our Podcast, Rough ‘n’ Tumble Raconteur.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Apache Running by Mark Hatmaker

Of the many Native American tribes of the southwest United States and Mexico the various bands of Apache carry a reputation for fierceness, resourcefulness, and an almost superhuman stamina. The name “Apache” is perhaps a misnomer as it refers to several different tribes that are loosely and collectively referred to as Apache, which is actually a variant of a Zuni word Apachu that this pueblo tribe applied to the collective bands. Apachu in Zuni translates roughly to “enemy” which is a telling detail that shines a light on the warrior nature of these collective tribes.             Among the various Apache tribes you will find the Kiowa, Mescalero, Jicarilla, Chiricahua (or “Cherry-Cows” as early Texas settlers called them), and the Lipan. These bands sustained themselves by conducting raids on the various settled pueblo tribes, Mexican villages, and the encroaching American settlers. These American settlers were often immigrants of all nationalities with a strong contingent of

Resistance is Never Futile by Mark Hatmaker

Should you always fight back? Yes. “ But what if …”           Over the course of many years teaching survival-based strategies and tactics the above-exchange has taken place more than a few times. The “ but what if …” question is usually posed by well-meaning individuals who haven’t quite grasped the seriousness of physical violence. These are people whose own humanity, whose sense of civility is so strong that they are caught vacillating between fight or flight decisions. It is a shame that these good qualities can sometimes stand in the way of grasping the essential facts of just how dire the threat can be.           The “ but what if …” is usually followed by any number of justifications or pie-in-the-sky hopeful mitigations. These “ but what if …” objections are based on unfounded trust and an incorrect grasp of probability. The first objection, unfounded trust, is usually based on the following scenario. Predator : Do what I say and I won’t hurt you. Or

The Original Roadwork by Mark Hatmaker

  Mr. Muldoon Roadwork. That word, to the combat athlete, conjures images of pre-dawn runs, breath fogging the morning air and, to many, a drudgery that must be endured. Boxers, wrestlers, kickboxers the world over use roadwork as a wind builder, a leg conditioner, and a grit tester. The great Joe Frazier observed… “ You can map out a fight plan or a life plan, but when the action starts, it may not go the way you planned, and you're down to the reflexes you developed in training. That's where roadwork shows - the training you did in the dark of the mornin' will show when you're under the bright lights .” Roadwork has been used as a tool since man began pitting himself against others of his species in organized combat. But…today’s question . Has it always been the sweat-soaked old school gray sweat suit pounding out miles on dark roads or, was it something subtler, and, remarkably slower? And if it was, why did we transition to what, and I repeat myself,