Author Topic: Non-Philosopher  (Read 33292 times)

Offline klaymen

  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 507
  • Karma: +28/-29
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Philosopher
« Reply #220 on: December 18, 2010, 03:23:03 PM »
And I'm tired of people running around doing uncontrolled giant cat leaps and roof gaps and kongs that hurt their joints for a camera and a 'team video', and calling it Parkour. 

I agree.

Flips are just as useful as double kongs and any other Parkour movement

I disagree.

I really don't want this to turn into another discussion about the usefulness of flips with a million "what if's", so I'll just leave it at that.

Offline Chris [.5gibbon] Stevenson!

  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 2112
  • Karma: +72/-36
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Philosopher
« Reply #221 on: December 18, 2010, 04:42:18 PM »
Are you honestly telling me that you think that say, you ask a 12 year old practicing pitching with his 13 year old friend at the local park what he's doing, he replies, "playin some baseball", that you'd consider him to be defining his activity wrong? I think that goes against every ounce of common sense that led us to the point of our lives that we're currently at. I clearly remember telling my parents that I'm gonna go play some baseball with my friends, and we'd just throw the ball and bat the ball and have fun. That was a very clear line of communication there.

i hate to burst your bubble, but...

baseball - a ball game played with a bat and ball between two teams of nine players; teams take turns at bat trying to score runs.

this thread has lost track and i don't think its going anywhere 

"Be like water making its way through cracks.  Do not be assertive,  but adjust to the object, and you shall find a way around or through it." - Bruce Lee

"There are few things graven in stone, except that you have to squat or you're a pussy." -Mark Rippetoe

Offline Adam McC

  • Delicious
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 2381
  • Karma: +209/-43
  • Level 1 Sexability Certified
    • View Profile
    • Lehigh Valley Parkour
Re: Non-Philosopher
« Reply #222 on: December 18, 2010, 06:59:45 PM »
Klaymen: And that's totally cool man! I totally respect your opinion. As long as its founded well, which it seems to be, that's fine! My experience has shown me things about flips that help me, on my path. My path is not yours. We can agree to disagree. :)

Chris: You're missing the point, man. I'm not arguing dictionary definitions. We already have a dictionary definition of Parkour, just as you have supplied us with a dictionary definition of baseball. It's on the APK main site, and nobody's contending it.

•Lehigh Valley Parkour Community Founder
•Level 1 A.D.A.P.T. Certified
•Urban Current Member

Offline DaveS

  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 652
  • Karma: +12/-6
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Philosopher
« Reply #223 on: December 19, 2010, 12:51:42 PM »
Discussion of Freerunning can't get beyond very general principles, because there is no common understanding of what the word means. How about we keep this discussion about Parkour.

You can be training for Parkour without doing Parkour. I really wish the old Parkour.net forums had not been purged. Other people have been through all of these discussions and it was explained so much better than I am probably doing right now.
Parkour.NET hasn't been purged. It's all there, at archive.parkour.net
You can try and train for Parkour without doing Parkour, but it won't be very effective. The whole point of Parkour is that Parkour is the training.

Chris: You're missing the point, man. I'm not arguing dictionary definitions. We already have a dictionary definition of Parkour, just as you have supplied us with a dictionary definition of baseball. It's on the APK main site, and nobody's contending it.
Actually I'm contending it ;)
I think it would be more accurate not to pretend that there is a physical emphasis in Parkour, and to highlight that facing and getting past obstacles is important in the training, not just the end goal.

I believe APK's definition accomplishes an explanation of what l'art du dèplacement means the best.  And if you disagree well...  Sorry, but this isn't about opinion, it is about an objective definition. 
It's important to recognize that APK's definition is simply a merging of several people's opinions. It isn't in any way objective or definitive. The best that can be said about it is that it is popular in parts of the US community, but it would be nonsense to suggest that popularity is the same thing as objective truth.

It can be [defined], but only something broad and seemingly vague. There is definite purpose to parkour, but defining that purpose in a way that fits practitioners universally is difficult.
It's not that difficult to define Parkour. Parkour is broad, yes, but not vague in the slightest. It's the way of developing yourself by trying to move past obstacles. That fits all practitioners whether they flip or not, whether they want to help others or not, whether they focus on the philosophy or not, whether they focus on the strength aspect of not. It doesn't include moving to express yourself, but that's not a problem since expression is clearly something that people have tried to add in only recently.
~ Dave
NorthernParkour and the British Parkour Coaching Association

Offline Chris [.5gibbon] Stevenson!

  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 2112
  • Karma: +72/-36
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Philosopher
« Reply #224 on: December 19, 2010, 01:33:09 PM »
those are some good points david. it just seems to me that a discipline of "moving past obstacles to develop ones self" is very broad and too unspecific.  i don't see how flipping past obstacles would not fit into this definition if it were for the purpose of developing ones air awareness.. also, where do you draw the line with the word obstacle?  squatting 2x BW is also a physical obstacle as is dodging an opponent in football. both could be considered a form of development of oneself as well.
"Be like water making its way through cracks.  Do not be assertive,  but adjust to the object, and you shall find a way around or through it." - Bruce Lee

"There are few things graven in stone, except that you have to squat or you're a pussy." -Mark Rippetoe

Offline Adam McC

  • Delicious
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 2381
  • Karma: +209/-43
  • Level 1 Sexability Certified
    • View Profile
    • Lehigh Valley Parkour
Re: Non-Philosopher
« Reply #225 on: December 19, 2010, 01:40:30 PM »
Dave, loved your post. And I agree, I also find that one of the problems with a lot of people and even a lot of communities is the "checklist" emphasis. That the ability to achieve a movement, sometimes even just once, and sketchily, is the primary focus, versus the benefits of dedication to a discipline and the betterment of self. The problem is, encompassing those internal aspects into a definition that's clear to the public isn't easy. However, what you said in response to Andy, I like. And actually, may I have your permission to expand on it? I have an idea, a way of presenting it that may be quite awesome. Expect a PM soon.

•Lehigh Valley Parkour Community Founder
•Level 1 A.D.A.P.T. Certified
•Urban Current Member

Offline DaveS

  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 652
  • Karma: +12/-6
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Philosopher
« Reply #226 on: December 19, 2010, 02:59:54 PM »
i don't see how flipping past obstacles would not fit into this definition if it were for the purpose of developing ones air awareness.
I don't think you even have to qualify it with spatial awareness. If you think a somersault might get you past the obstacle, of course, try it. You have to try alternatives. Usually it won't be the best way to get past the obstacle, but there's no problem with experimentation as long as you're still committed to finding the best solution.
There is no issue with trying to use somersaults to get past obstacles. Issues only arise when you practice somersaults to the exclusion of other more useful techniques. Pretty soon in your training you realize that somersaults are not the best way past most obstacles, so if you know this and yet are still spending all your time practicing somersaults it becomes clear that you're not looking for the best way past obstacles. When you're not trying to improve your ability to get past obstacles, you've clearly stopped practicing Parkour.

. also, where do you draw the line with the word obstacle?  squatting 2x BW is also a physical obstacle as is dodging an opponent in football. both could be considered a form of development of oneself as well.
Lifting weights might be a physical challenge but you're clearly not moving past anything if you're staying on the spot.

Dave, loved your post. And I agree, I also find that one of the problems with a lot of people and even a lot of communities is the "checklist" emphasis. That the ability to achieve a movement, sometimes even just once, and sketchily, is the primary focus, versus the benefits of dedication to a discipline and the betterment of self.
That is a commonly recognized problem, but I think that many of the people that recognize that problem in others don't realize that they are the ones perpetuating these problems. We have 'movement tutorials', we have 'technique forums' on websites. The whole community is still focused on learning a set of specific techniques. If we want to solve problems like this one we're going to have to stop being bad examples. We need to stop focusing on the movements and start focusing on the obstacles. We need to show that Parkour contains far too much variety for set techniques.

The problem is, encompassing those internal aspects into a definition that's clear to the public isn't easy.
The problem, really, is the perception that any part of this should be easy. Parkour is new, and of course learning how to teach it will be difficult. The concepts are diametrically opposed to the foundations of large parts of the modern word, of course it will be difficult to get people to accept it. Parkour is an internal, individual discipline, of course it's going to be difficult for non-practitioners to understand.

However, what you said in response to Andy, I like. And actually, may I have your permission to expand on it? I have an idea, a way of presenting it that may be quite awesome. Expect a PM soon.
Expand on any point you like, I don't own this discussion. I enjoy seeing other ways of explaining things, but I might not necessarily agree with them :)
~ Dave
NorthernParkour and the British Parkour Coaching Association

Offline Adam McC

  • Delicious
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 2381
  • Karma: +209/-43
  • Level 1 Sexability Certified
    • View Profile
    • Lehigh Valley Parkour
Re: Non-Philosopher
« Reply #227 on: December 19, 2010, 03:23:52 PM »
The problem, really, is the perception that any part of this should be easy. Parkour is new, and of course learning how to teach it will be difficult. The concepts are diametrically opposed to the foundations of large parts of the modern word, of course it will be difficult to get people to accept it. Parkour is an internal, individual discipline, of course it's going to be difficult for non-practitioners to understand.


Right. But while we have to accept that it's difficult, we also have to find a way to compromise to bring people to where we are. Otherwise, we're just an elitist, underground force of people who do something mysterious. And that's how those bad perceptions of what we do are created.

Let me know what you think of the PM I sent you! :)

•Lehigh Valley Parkour Community Founder
•Level 1 A.D.A.P.T. Certified
•Urban Current Member

Offline DaveS

  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 652
  • Karma: +12/-6
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Philosopher
« Reply #228 on: December 19, 2010, 03:38:21 PM »
Oh I wasn't saying that we shouldn't do it. Just that it's difficult.

Difficulty is absolutely no reason not to do something. In fact, it's every reason TO do something.
~ Dave
NorthernParkour and the British Parkour Coaching Association

Offline Chris [.5gibbon] Stevenson!

  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 2112
  • Karma: +72/-36
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Philosopher
« Reply #229 on: December 19, 2010, 04:06:34 PM »
"I don't think you even have to qualify it with spatial awareness. If you think a somersault might get you past the obstacle, of course, try it. You have to try alternatives. Usually it won't be the best way to get past the obstacle, but there's no problem with experimentation as long as you're still committed to finding the best solution.
There is no issue with trying to use somersaults to get past obstacles. Issues only arise when you practice somersaults to the exclusion of other more useful techniques. Pretty soon in your training you realize that somersaults are not the best way past most obstacles, so if you know this and yet are still spending all your time practicing somersaults it becomes clear that you're not looking for the best way past obstacles. When you're not trying to improve your ability to get past obstacles, you've clearly stopped practicing Parkour." -daveS

ok then maybe we should say "It's the way of developing yourself by trying to move past obstacles with efficiency.
"Be like water making its way through cracks.  Do not be assertive,  but adjust to the object, and you shall find a way around or through it." - Bruce Lee

"There are few things graven in stone, except that you have to squat or you're a pussy." -Mark Rippetoe

Offline Adam McC

  • Delicious
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 2381
  • Karma: +209/-43
  • Level 1 Sexability Certified
    • View Profile
    • Lehigh Valley Parkour
Re: Non-Philosopher
« Reply #230 on: December 19, 2010, 04:46:00 PM »
ok then maybe we should say "It's the way of developing yourself by trying to move past obstacles with efficiency.

So reverse vaults, lazysits, palm spins, etc, none of those are Parkour anymore?

•Lehigh Valley Parkour Community Founder
•Level 1 A.D.A.P.T. Certified
•Urban Current Member

Offline DaveS

  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 652
  • Karma: +12/-6
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Philosopher
« Reply #231 on: December 19, 2010, 05:59:17 PM »
I don't think you need to add 'with efficiency' because that's implicit in the idea of an obstacle. Obstacles are by definition things that are near the limit of your ability, and if you're wasting too much of your energies you're clearly not going to have enough left to get past.

Put simply, you can't somersault over a wall you can only just climb up. Difficult tasks force you to take an efficient path.
~ Dave
NorthernParkour and the British Parkour Coaching Association

Offline J. Gabriel Alvarez Manilla

  • Patas
  • ***
  • Posts: 238
  • Karma: +2/-1
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Philosopher
« Reply #232 on: December 19, 2010, 06:27:40 PM »
Slightly (way) off topic, but

Seriously, without exposure to Parkour, would you be climbing walls and vaulting rails?
I kid you not, I would, just without so much dedication, and no conditioning aspect to it.

As for the Yamakasi, hit em up on Facebook. I've got them added. They're quite willing to Facebook chat and send messages.
I tried looking for them just now, but there's so many of them. Which one is the right one?
The Great Way is universal,
it can apply to the left or the right.
All beings depend on it for life,
and it does not refuse.


Offline Adam McC

  • Delicious
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 2381
  • Karma: +209/-43
  • Level 1 Sexability Certified
    • View Profile
    • Lehigh Valley Parkour
Re: Non-Philosopher
« Reply #233 on: December 19, 2010, 06:38:12 PM »
Yann Hnautra, Chau Belle, and Lorenzoo Chocolat (Hahaha I love Laurent) are the names you want to search. Also, I've chatted with Stephane Vigroux about this stuff. (Andy Keller and I even got to shoot some pool with him! Haha. That's how chill he is.) He's said some very wise words on the subjects we're all discussing.

•Lehigh Valley Parkour Community Founder
•Level 1 A.D.A.P.T. Certified
•Urban Current Member

Offline Skills

  • Patas
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
  • Karma: +3/-1
  • Elemental Movement
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Philosopher
« Reply #234 on: December 20, 2010, 07:42:16 AM »
I must say that this topic has enriched alot of peoples understanding.Thanks alot to Dave and Chris and all of the others that have contributed their thoughts to this discussion, and special thanks to those who said "go train" ;D

The fact is,
Parkour is related to Direct Movement, this means that you are trying to overcome obstacles.
Freerunning on the other hand is associated with more Indirect Movement, your training (mental and physical) is expounded upon and you and your movement have a more intimate connection.

With Parkour your approach would be slightly different from Freerunning. In a Direct Movement state of mind you are thinking about a forward flow. In an Indirect Movement state of mind it would be more connected to the interaction with the obstacle, cherishing the movement and the details. The intricacies and explorative values are more present in the Freerunninig state of mind.

If you read this make sure you do 50 push-ups, sit-ups, squats and a whole bunch of exersises to balance your mental and physical training!!

Train Safe
-Joseph Best
"Obstacles are found everywhere, and in overcoming them we nourish ourselves."

Offline Chris [.5gibbon] Stevenson!

  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 2112
  • Karma: +72/-36
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Philosopher
« Reply #235 on: December 20, 2010, 07:45:29 AM »
So reverse vaults, lazysits, palm spins, etc, none of those are Parkour anymore?

i don't see the developmental difference between a palm spin/reverse vault and a back flip. all are good training, but none are practical.  if you consider one parkour then you should consider it all parkour.

I don't think you need to add 'with efficiency' because that's implicit in the idea of an obstacle. Obstacles are by definition things that are near the limit of your ability, and if you're wasting too much of your energies you're clearly not going to have enough left to get past.

Put simply, you can't somersault over a wall you can only just climb up. Difficult tasks force you to take an efficient path.


that is not true. stepping over a curb is considered an obstacle. anything in your path is an obstacle not just the hard ones.  if parkour is about developing oneself through overcoming obstacles then why is doing a flip over a curb not parkour if your goal is developmental?  
"Be like water making its way through cracks.  Do not be assertive,  but adjust to the object, and you shall find a way around or through it." - Bruce Lee

"There are few things graven in stone, except that you have to squat or you're a pussy." -Mark Rippetoe

Offline Adam McC

  • Delicious
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 2381
  • Karma: +209/-43
  • Level 1 Sexability Certified
    • View Profile
    • Lehigh Valley Parkour
Re: Non-Philosopher
« Reply #236 on: December 20, 2010, 08:26:57 AM »
i don't see the developmental difference between a palm spin/reverse vault and a back flip. all are good training, but none are practical.  if you consider one parkour then you should consider it all parkour.


Hahaha, Chris, we are discussing the same thing from different sides? I'm trying to say that flips, with the right mindset and application, are as much Parkour as everything else. Is that what you're saying, or no? I don't see the difference between at all. Indeed all are training, and since Parkour is 'training', I agree with your above statement.

•Lehigh Valley Parkour Community Founder
•Level 1 A.D.A.P.T. Certified
•Urban Current Member

Offline DaveS

  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 652
  • Karma: +12/-6
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Philosopher
« Reply #237 on: December 20, 2010, 08:31:05 AM »
Chris, I don't think you're using the word 'obstacle' correctly. The dictionary definition of an 'obstacle' is something that obstructs or hinders, something that creates a difficulty.

Regardless, the parts of the environment that Parkour is concerned with are the parts that pose a challenge, the parts that are difficult to get past. That's what the word 'obstacle' means in a Parkour context. It helps you get past the difficulties in your life by letting you practice getting past difficulties in your environment.
~ Dave
NorthernParkour and the British Parkour Coaching Association

Offline Chris [.5gibbon] Stevenson!

  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 2112
  • Karma: +72/-36
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Philosopher
« Reply #238 on: December 20, 2010, 09:32:04 AM »
i don't think im using it wrong.  anything as small as a curb or even a patch of dirt can hinder or add difficulty to your path.  not maximum difficulty, but it is going to take some level of physical work to pass it.   if you disagree that a curb is not an obstacle because it is not difficult to get past then how about 3 foot wall?  that is also very easy to get past.  is parkour limited only to maximal effort 14 foot arm jumps then?   the answer is no.  parkour is about overcoming all obstacles in your path big or little for the purpose of development.  this should include flips, handstands, stupid little spinny flowy stuff and even dancing if you are doing for the purpose of development.    that is why i said parkour, as it is, is too broad to be classified as a specific disipline because the end goal is to unspecific.   as it is, the end goal of pakour is development.  if the end goal were efficiency then it would be a completely diffent animal. 
"Be like water making its way through cracks.  Do not be assertive,  but adjust to the object, and you shall find a way around or through it." - Bruce Lee

"There are few things graven in stone, except that you have to squat or you're a pussy." -Mark Rippetoe

Offline DaveS

  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 652
  • Karma: +12/-6
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Philosopher
« Reply #239 on: December 20, 2010, 11:05:32 AM »
A curb can create a difficult situation, but it doesn't always. Likewise, in some situations a 3 foot wall is difficult to get past, but at other times it's not. Sometimes they are obstacles, sometimes that aren't. It's not the intrinsic qualities of the object in question that determines whether or not something is an obstacle, it's the relationship between that object, the person, and the demands of the situation. A 3 foot wall might be easy for you now, but it might be hard for a beginner. Also, if I tied your hands and feet together and asked you to get over it without touching it, it would become a challenge for you too. It's nonsense to say that a 3 foot wall (or even a curb) is either definitely an obstacle or definitely not an obstacle. It's all about the context.

is parkour limited only to maximal effort 14 foot arm jumps then?   the answer is no.
The answer is 'no' only because you put the word 'maximal' into the question. If you asked "Is Parkour limited only to difficult arm jumps?" then the answer would have been 'Yes'.

We can't develop by spending our time completing easy tasks. We have to challenge ourselves in order to improve, it's a physiological necessity. Even if we accept your definition of the word 'obstacle', it's clear that we need to focus on 'difficult obstacles' in order to get better at getting past obstacles.

The goal of Parkour is self-development, true, but although virtually anything can help you develop, not everything is equally effective at helping you develop.
Self-development is a broad goal if you compare it to some activities, sure, but it is still one that is easy to define. Difficult for someone else to observe, perhaps, but so what? Parkour's a training concept to help you develop, not a spectator sport for people to watch and rate.
~ Dave
NorthernParkour and the British Parkour Coaching Association