Dance Study: Open vs. Closed Skills, and Representative Design (Patreon)

• LMA Curriculum

[Note: For the full experience, look at all the units through a web browser, not the Patreon app.]

In "Basketball Study: You Can't Stop One Move Done a Million Ways," we discussed the concept of open vs. closed skills.

A closed skill is a skill that is performed in a stable, predictable environment where the conditions do not change during the execution of the skill. Rather than decision-making and problem-solving, closed skills require memorization and choreography. It does not adjust to conditions or demands.

In contrast, an open skill is a skill that is performed in an unpredictable, dynamic environment where the conditions may change during the execution of the skill. The performer must constantly adapt and make decisions based on the changing environment and demands to successfully execute the skill.

An example would be playing Dance Dance Revolution (DDR) vs. dancing at a club or a freestyle dance competition.

DDR is a closed skill. It requires memorization of intricate, complex, and fast-moving choreography. But being good at DDR does not translate to dancing well at a club or freestyle dance competition where the dancing is contextual and improvisational. It is not just about speed, stamina, and memorization.

But what is the actual task or activity you are trying to get good at? If it's being good at freestyle dancing, then DDR alone will not accomplish that task. It can, however, help with motor control and stamina. If you already have solid motor control, then DDR is not scaled to your abilities. It might challenge you, but not in the ways you need to be challenged. Just because something is challenging does not mean it's developing you.

A popular trend on social media is people hitting a punching machine that registers the power of their punch. But what is the skill being shown? It's a closed skill where you are punching in an isolated, controlled, stable, and fixed environment. You will never hit this hard in a live fight or spar because the conditions are always in flux. You know someone's action capacity for punching but no clue about their ability to apply that capacity.

Yet in martial arts and combat sports, we often train closed skills even though it's nonrepresentative of actual live events, which are open-ended.

Martial artists and fighters love to say, "Boards don't hit back," while still continuing with nonrepresentative training. Boards not hitting back means this type of practice does not represent the actual task demands of a fight or live situation.

Do we apply this principle of representative training to anything other than sparring or toxic masculinity contests of who's actually been in fights or prizefights—suggesting everyone needs to become a fighter, whether on the streets or in a competition? Rather than be toxic, oppressive, and ableist, why not improve your training methods so no one needs to sacrifice to get good at martial arts and combat sports?

Consider how we hit pads or approach any other training exercise. What is being developed? Is the training meant for conditioning and action capacity, or is it supposed to be representative training? If it's representative training, then how we approach these training tasks has to be completely altered.

Representative design means creating practice conditions that closely resemble the demands of the actual task or activity. This involves designing practice environments that mimic the physical, cognitive, and perceptual demands of real-world situations. The goal is to help participants get good at the task they are trying to get good at.

There is a transfer of skill from practice to the live situation, so you want as much of the practice skills to carry over to the live event. That means training has to closely resemble the live event.

However, the actual live event is the worst place to improve. The event is meant to be the culmination of your training, not the testing ground to explore improvements.

Are you training for DDR or for an unpredictable, ever-changing task? If what you do in the training space carries over into the open world, then the skills you develop in training should be open and adaptable.

– Sam