Watering Down The Arts

[tellner]

One could say with more justice that a typical five year program to black belt is a watered down self defense course.

You can turn someone into a ring-ready Thai boxer in a year and a half. He will go through most striking art black belts with three or four times the years. That would argue that it's the "traditional" martial arts which are watered down. Something must be diluting the combative efficiency of the TMA and acting as filler if it takes so much longer to get to the point where you can fight effectively.

The TMABB will argue "But once you get past that learning curve you get so much further. Our ten and twenty year veterans move like magic."

Maybe. Usually not. And even if it is true, so what? Someone who is interested in self defense wants useful skills in a realistic time frame, not belts and certificates and the fortune cookie philosophy that infests most martial arts schools. For someone with a life outside the dojo it's generally about the goal, not the journey, and if he or she can achieve that goal wasting less valuable time, so much the better. On the other hand, if you want an engrossing hobby and martial arts fills that void, then by all means do TMA. But I bet there will be other parts of your life where you'll go for what gives you what you want, not what enthusiasts say you should appreciate.

I don't care about the Sacrality of the Zen of Motorcycle Maintenance. I just want the damned thing to run.

[jks9199]

One could say with more justice that a typical five year program to black belt is a watered down self defense course.

You can turn someone into a ring-ready Thai boxer in a year and a half. He will go through most striking art black belts with three or four times the years. That would argue that it's the "traditional" martial arts which are watered down. Something must be diluting the combative efficiency of the TMA and acting as filler if it takes so much longer to get to the point where you can fight effectively.

The TMABB will argue "But once you get past that learning curve you get so much further. Our ten and twenty year veterans move like magic."

Maybe. Usually not. And even if it is true, so what? Someone who is interested in self defense wants useful skills in a realistic time frame, not belts and certificates and the fortune cookie philosophy that infests most martial arts schools. For someone with a life outside the dojo it's generally about the goal, not the journey, and if he or she can achieve that goal wasting less valuable time, so much the better. On the other hand, if you want an engrossing hobby and martial arts fills that void, then by all means do TMA. But I bet there will be other parts of your life where you'll go for what gives you what you want, not what enthusiasts say you should appreciate.

I don't care about the Sacrality of the Zen of Motorcycle Maintenance. I just want the damned thing to run.
I think the reality is that any competent instructor, with motivated students, should be able to produce effective fighters in a matter of months -- if that's the only concern.

They'll be able to rock & roll -- but that's about all. Unless they then spend time afterwards in developing the deeper skills.

It's a question of what the student and instructor want.

[Andrew Green]

what "deeper skills"?

[Danjo]

One could say with more justice that a typical five year program to black belt is a watered down self defense course.

You can turn someone into a ring-ready Thai boxer in a year and a half. He will go through most striking art black belts with three or four times the years. That would argue that it's the "traditional" martial arts which are watered down. Something must be diluting the combative efficiency of the TMA and acting as filler if it takes so much longer to get to the point where you can fight effectively.

The TMABB will argue "But once you get past that learning curve you get so much further. Our ten and twenty year veterans move like magic."

Maybe. Usually not. And even if it is true, so what? Someone who is interested in self defense wants useful skills in a realistic time frame, not belts and certificates and the fortune cookie philosophy that infests most martial arts schools. For someone with a life outside the dojo it's generally about the goal, not the journey, and if he or she can achieve that goal wasting less valuable time, so much the better. On the other hand, if you want an engrossing hobby and martial arts fills that void, then by all means do TMA. But I bet there will be other parts of your life where you'll go for what gives you what you want, not what enthusiasts say you should appreciate.

I don't care about the Sacrality of the Zen of Motorcycle Maintenance. I just want the damned thing to run.

"Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof..." II Timothy 3:5 (KJV)

What you're talking about is the missing application aspect of the TMAs as they are largely practiced today. All you're left with is the empty form without the power behind it. TMAs are like a Zip File, where a lot of info is compressed into forms and techniques, but requires unzipping software to be able to open it and extract the information from it.

Toshiro Ohsiro said once, "On Okinawa, we learn that there are two forms of martial arts. One is real and teaches the true fighting applications of each move. The other form is false, called meikata (dance), and teaches only the shape of the techniques, hiding the real application within the form."

The idea that practicing the forms without practicing the applications with a partner in both pre-arranged sequences and free-form Kakadamashi contests was considered merely an athletic endeavor akin to gymnastics or dance. Unfortunately, many of the Karateka that came over from Okinawa after they got out of the military only had the forms to impart. Shotokan also, had been largely reduced to a college course and sport with much of the application left out. So what we have today is mostly the outer form without the true fighting applications.

With the strictly self defense systems, the people do tend to learn how to fight more quickly and efficiently. It's all application. No forms to unlock or "un-zip". Hence many who are interested in seriously being able to defend themselves go this route because it realistically trains one to defend onself.

However, there are built in limitations to this approach. The self defense systems are generally basic and require a good deal of athletic ability to pull off at their highest level. Size tends to matter also with these systems as does age. There are very few 60 year-old Muy Thai practitioners that can still move very well.

In properly taught TMAs, size is reduced or eliminated as a concern and one tends to get better with age at least until the time one becomes infirm. The techniques are not unrealistic due to the fact that they were created over many years by those who honed these skills in actual combat. Military or LEO hand-to-hand training, Women's self defense courses etc. all have a place as do athletic arts like boxing and Muy Thai. But TMAs, if taught properly, give a person more tools in their toolbox than the strictly self defense systems do. Whether that matters to you and your needs is a question that you have to ask and answer for yourself.

[Flying Crane]

Something must be diluting the combative efficiency of the TMA and acting as filler if it takes so much longer to get to the point where you can fight effectively.


I believe that modern society as a whole is a big factor in the dilution of traditional arts. It is actually pretty easy these days to go thru your entire life without ever having to defend yourself. Not even on the playground as a kid. Society has changed. Overall, we have less tolerance for personal physical violence. We believe the best way to deal with conflict is to call the police. We have a legal system that prosecutes those who like to visit violence upon others for no good reason. Because of law enforcement, communication technology, and the legal system, we just don't often need to defend ourselves, by ourselves. So we practice TMA on a very theoretical level and seldom, or never, get to actually test it out for real and find out what works and what doesn't.

A few generations ago in places like China, the average schmoe was literally on his own. He lived in a rural area with little or no ability to communicate over long distances, little effective law enforcement, and a legal system that cared little for the peasantry. So for his own personal protection, he trained his martial arts LIKE HE MEANT IT. And he probably had more than just a few chances to try it out for real on some jackass that wanted to hurt or kill him and steal his flock of chickens. People trained differently, and they used it frequently.

Today, we train for fun, we sweat and work hard, we develop some understanding of fighting, and we develop some technical ability. But for most of us, we have no reason to ever use it outside the dojo or the tournament. That lack of real-life experience is very telling, and the overall level of TMA becomes degraded, because as a whole, we have lost sight of its real purpose. It just isn't as necessary as it once was.



Someone who is interested in self defense wants useful skills in a realistic time frame, not belts and certificates and the fortune cookie philosophy that infests most martial arts schools.

I've really never encountered a school that spouted fortune cookie philosophy. People often comment about this, but I just don't tend to see it. I wonder if it is as prevalent as some seem to indicate.



I don't care about the Sacrality of the Zen of Motorcycle Maintenance. I just want the damned thing to run.

a reasonable position to take.

[Danjo]

I believe that modern society as a whole is a big factor in the dilution of traditional arts. It is actually pretty easy these days to go thru your entire life without ever having to defend yourself. Not even on the playground as a kid. Society has changed. Overall, we have less tolerance for personal physical violence. We believe the best way to deal with conflict is to call the police. We have a legal system that prosecutes those who like to visit violence upon others for no good reason. Because of law enforcement, communication technology, and the legal system, we just don't often need to defend ourselves, by ourselves. So we practice TMA on a very theoretical level and seldom, or never, get to actually test it out for real and find out what works and what doesn't.



Better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.
http://www.kutv.com/content/news/topnews/story.aspx?content_id=cec6ae98-4e6b-48fe-830a-69f2d23a48dc (http://www.kutv.com/content/news/topnews/story.aspx?content_id=cec6ae98-4e6b-48fe-830a-69f2d23a48dc)

[Flying Crane]

Better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.
http://www.kutv.com/content/news/topnews/story.aspx?content_id=cec6ae98-4e6b-48fe-830a-69f2d23a48dc (http://www.kutv.com/content/news/topnews/story.aspx?content_id=cec6ae98-4e6b-48fe-830a-69f2d23a48dc)


Yes, it's certainly true that violence does happen and there are definitely times when one must defend himself. But it is, I believe, far less frequent on the whole, than it once was a few generations ago.

[Doc]

"Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof..." II Timothy 3:5 (KJV)

What you're talking about is the missing application aspect of the TMAs as they are largely practiced today. All you're left with is the empty form without the power behind it. TMAs are like a Zip File, where a lot of info is compressed into forms and techniques, but requires unzipping software to be able to open it and extract the information from it.

Toshiro Ohsiro said once, "On Okinawa, we learn that there are two forms of martial arts. One is real and teaches the true fighting applications of each move. The other form is false, called meikata (dance), and teaches only the shape of the techniques, hiding the real application within the form."

The idea that practicing the forms without practicing the applications with a partner in both pre-arranged sequences and free-form Kakadamashi contests was considered merely an athletic endeavor akin to gymnastics or dance. Unfortunately, many of the Karateka that came over from Okinawa after they got out of the military only had the forms to impart. Shotokan also, had been largely reduced to a college course and sport with much of the application left out. So what we have today is mostly the outer form without the true fighting applications.

With the strictly self defense systems, the people do tend to learn how to fight more quickly and efficiently. It's all application. No forms to unlock or "un-zip". Hence many who are interested in seriously being able to defend themselves go this route because it realistically trains one to defend onself.

However, there are built in limitations to this approach. The self defense systems are generally basic and require a good deal of athletic ability to pull off at their highest level. Size tends to matter also with these systems as does age. There are very few 60 year-old Muy Thai practitioners that can still move very well.

In properly taught TMAs, size is reduced or eliminated as a concern and one tends to get better with age at least until the time one becomes infirm. The techniques are not unrealistic due to the fact that they were created over many years by those who honed these skills in actual combat. Military or LEO hand-to-hand training, Women's self defense courses etc. all have a place as do athletic arts like boxing and Muy Thai. But TMAs, if taught properly, give a person more tools in their toolbox than the strictly self defense systems do. Whether that matters to you and your needs is a question that you have to ask and answer for yourself.
That was so very well said sir.

[Danjo]

That was so very well said sir.

Thank you. That's how I've always felt about your posts. But then you know that. :)

[Matt]

What you're talking about is the missing application aspect of the TMAs as they are largely practiced today. All you're left with is the empty form without the power behind it. TMAs are like a Zip File, where a lot of info is compressed into forms and techniques, but requires unzipping software to be able to open it and extract the information from it.



I think you make a great point, and unfortunately, many folks think they will spontaneously download 'unzipping' software in the heat of battle.

Well stated in general (the whole post).

Matt

[Danjo]

I think you make a great point, and unfortunately, many folks think they will spontaneously download 'unzipping' software in the heat of battle.

Well stated in general (the whole post).

Matt

Thanks. I guess I should say that the "software" is the instructor.

[Doc]

I believe that modern society as a whole is a big factor in the dilution of traditional arts. It is actually pretty easy these days to go thru your entire life without ever having to defend yourself. Not even on the playground as a kid. Society has changed. Overall, we have less tolerance for personal physical violence. We believe the best way to deal with conflict is to call the police. We have a legal system that prosecutes those who like to visit violence upon others for no good reason. Because of law enforcement, communication technology, and the legal system, we just don't often need to defend ourselves, by ourselves. So we practice TMA on a very theoretical level and seldom, or never, get to actually test it out for real and find out what works and what doesn't.

A few generations ago in places like China, the average schmoe was literally on his own. He lived in a rural area with little or no ability to communicate over long distances, little effective law enforcement, and a legal system that cared little for the peasantry. So for his own personal protection, he trained his martial arts LIKE HE MEANT IT. And he probably had more than just a few chances to try it out for real on some jackass that wanted to hurt or kill him and steal his flock of chickens. People trained differently, and they used it frequently.

Today, we train for fun, we sweat and work hard, we develop some understanding of fighting, and we develop some technical ability. But for most of us, we have no reason to ever use it outside the dojo or the tournament. That lack of real-life experience is very telling, and the overall level of TMA becomes degraded, because as a whole, we have lost sight of its real purpose. It just isn't as necessary as it once was.



I've really never encountered a school that spouted fortune cookie philosophy. People often comment about this, but I just don't tend to see it. I wonder if it is as prevalent as some seem to indicate.



a reasonable position to take.
Astute and well stated observations, as usual sir.

[jks9199]

what "deeper skills"?
A quote would have helped; I recognized my own words -- but not the context.

What I wrote was this:

I think the reality is that any competent instructor, with motivated students, should be able to produce effective fighters in a matter of months -- if that's the only concern.

They'll be able to rock & roll -- but that's about all. Unless they then spend time afterwards in developing the deeper skills.

It's a question of what the student and instructor want.

I thing it's rather self evident what the deeper skills I referred to are; the refinements of technique, strategies over simple assortments of techniques, the reasons and the stuff that separates a martial art for simple defensive tactics or street fighting.

No, I'm not implicitly saying kata or bunkai -- but I am referring to the more complete understanding of what powers and supports the brute fighting skills. The "science" in the "sweet science", if you will.

[Andrew Green]

No, I'm not implicitly saying kata or bunkai -- but I am referring to the more complete understanding of what powers and supports the brute fighting skills. The "science" in the "sweet science", if you will.

Which is a boxing reference, so I am assuming you are not saying comabt sports are shallow compared to traditional styles, which is what I initially thought you meant?

[jks9199]

Which is a boxing reference, so I am assuming you are not saying comabt sports are shallow compared to traditional styles, which is what I initially thought you meant?
I said that you can rapidly teach someone to fight -- but that, to do so, you won't be focusing on anything beyond fighting. For some people, that's all they want. Nothing inherently wrong with that, either.

But there is more to martial arts. Otherwise, as Tellner suggested, anything beyond that is simply marketing gimmickry and watering down the essentials of fighting. I don't personally believe this is the case... but then, I've spent more than 20 years of my life studying martial arts.

You can learn to brawl effectively pretty quickly. But you can't learn much more than "cleaned up" brawling. (Yes, most good police DT programs are just that... effective brawling.) A little longer, and you can delve a bit deeper into the hows and whys. Spend even more time, and you can start to find out a lot more...

[Danjo]

Which is a boxing reference, so I am assuming you are not saying combat sports are shallow compared to traditional styles, which is what I initially thought you meant?

Well, I would say that. It's the "Compared to" that makes me say that. That's not to say that combat SPORTS are bad or ineffective or not sufficient to your needs depending on what those are. It's not saying that a neophyte in boxing will have the same understanding of that combat sport that a Muhamed Ali or Ray Robinson will. But it IS saying that the TMAs are deeper than combat sports. In fact, that's usually the argument AGAINST the TMAs, i.e., "Who needs all that mumbo jumbo?"

Combat sports are to the TMAs what a battle-axe is to a rapier. A battle-axe is a much simpler cutting device. It takes much less time to master and will suit many people's combat needs. If you're young and strong, it will do the job nicely. Now a days folks would probably rather watch two guys fighting it out with axes than rapiers. However, people would be foolish to think that chopping with an axe is as "deep" a discipline as fencing.

[Andrew Green]

You can learn to brawl effectively pretty quickly. But you can't learn much more than "cleaned up" brawling. (Yes, most good police DT programs are just that... effective brawling.) A little longer, and you can delve a bit deeper into the hows and whys. Spend even more time, and you can start to find out a lot more...

For example? I'm around that 20 year mark too, I've yet to see anything beyond "cleaned up" brawling. Although part of cleaning up your brawling involves understanding those hows and whys.

So I guess what I would like to know is what depth you see in traditional arts that cannot be found in arts that focus on fighting?

[kaizasosei]

i value the ability to take someone out without hurting them or without doing that much damage. also i believe, the spiritual aspect are really important and equally valuable if not more valuable.

[Hand Sword]

I think both ways are a means to the spiritual end, or can be. Even Martial Artists start off with the feelings of "I wanna Kick some butt!!" Eventually, through time, it lessens. Boxers too start off with the same feelings, and keep it for awhile. In the end, they too get sick of the smell of the training room, look to the ref. to stop a fight so as not to hurt an opponent too bad. They also develop a deeper way to box without taking too much damage, and dishing out enough to stop a fight--just like martial artists. They too, will like to continue training, and not participate. Just like Martial Artisits. It's unavoidable, it's the evolution of a person through training. Martial artists may get there faster, but in the end both can get there. There are just as many martial artists as there are boxers that never get it either.

[Andrew Green]

i value the ability to take someone out without hurting them or without doing that much damage. also i believe, the spiritual aspect are really important and equally valuable if not more valuable.


Any sport stylist should be comfortable doing that, especially MMA, Wrestling & Judo. But even a boxer can keep from getting hurt and tie a person up.

[kaizasosei]

boxing is a good martial art i believe. if you want to learn how to fight, take boxing or some hardcore karate or mma. - so then the quetion would be, how fast can a human being be? physically speaking. how much endurance, resistance to pain or stress, how strong can the body become? technique also plays a large role in whatever martial art you are practicing because it is unavoidable. why do we need names for techniques even. mostly just because it helps us to learn and remember new things.


if one wants to try to learn some kind of mindcontrol or exercising of spiritual power, then take nlp, reiki(concentrating on various religions thereof) or practice chigung or yoga?
questions are, how strong can a persons willpower become? can one truly develop ones aura? how sensitive can a person become for both physical and psychological influences? the most internal of all things is the place where the external is coming from? i think this is really logic. if one were to directly focus on that aspect and know how, also through ones own movement, it translates or ocilates back to the physical.
ultimately, it becomes a study of strategy and a study of weakness as much as it is a study of power.

the question really is, to what great hights is the human being capable of reaching if they put their mind to it???
spiritualy speaking, one could even include all kinds of things like health, socialskills, illness or accidents as part of the scheme of internal/external totality.

j

[jks9199]

Well, I would say that. It's the "Compared to" that makes me say that. That's not to say that combat SPORTS are bad or ineffective or not sufficient to your needs depending on what those are. It's not saying that a neophyte in boxing will have the same understanding of that combat sport that a Muhamed Ali or Ray Robinson will. But it IS saying that the TMAs are deeper than combat sports. In fact, that's usually the argument AGAINST the TMAs, i.e., "Who needs all that mumbo jumbo?"

Combat sports are to the TMAs what a battle-axe is to a rapier. A battle-axe is a much simpler cutting device. It takes much less time to master and will suit many people's combat needs. If you're young and strong, it will do the job nicely. Now a days folks would probably rather watch two guys fighting it out with axes than rapiers. However, people would be foolish to think that chopping with an axe is as "deep" a discipline as fencing.

I like that analogy.


For example? I'm around that 20 year mark too, I've yet to see anything beyond "cleaned up" brawling. Although part of cleaning up your brawling involves understanding those hows and whys.

So I guess what I would like to know is what depth you see in traditional arts that cannot be found in arts that focus on fighting?

I think you're locking in on the word "deeper" and finding a meaning I didn't intend. I don't personally seek spiritual development from martial arts, other than spirit in the sense of confidence and drive to overcome challenges, which you can learn in almost any sport as well. But there's a difference in simply focusing on the bare needs of fighting and martial arts. It's the difference, I guess, between a headline, a news summary, and an investigative report. Each is delving deeper into the subject; the headline is simply slugging it out. The news summary tells a little more about what's going on, like a DT class or self-defense course. The investigative report gets into the details, and corresponds to "martial arts training."

There's gotta be something that's keeping you training after 20 years...

[Andrew Green]

COnsider it a pet peeve, I'm not sure this is what you are saying, but I do get tired of having traditional stylists claim that combat sports, such as wrestling or MMA are shallow and lack depth, being only about strength and athleticism with basic technique.

That is definately not the case, in my mind they are just as deep as any other art can be, it's a personal issue as to how deep into it you go. Yes, there are fighters that perhaps have a shallow understanding of things and rely heavily on athleticism, but then there are also traditional stylists that have been training for years and lack any depth of understanding to the motions in their forms as well.

It's not a one has depth and the other doesn't, Boxing, for as simple of system as it appears on face value, has a ton of depth too it that most people will never see, but it is there.

I've heard the claim many times now that something like MMA lacks important pieces that traditional styles have in terms of depth of understanding to the techniques. That it develops fighters fast, but can't take them to "the next level", yet I've never come across anyone that could justify that claim. Just some that couldn't see any depth when they watched it on tv, and assumed there was none.

[kaizasosei]

just the same, most people would not believe what power(physical included) can be achieved through internal arts.

[Monadnock]

What are the highest levels, deepest depths one can achieve in the MMA? It is a sport, correct?

[Blindside]

What are the highest levels, deepest depths one can achieve in the MMA? It is a sport, correct?

Can you give some examples of what the "martial arts" offer at the highest levels or deepest depths? Just so we have some point of comparison.

Lamont

[kaizasosei]

i think it would be a little pointless if mma became a mere sport. it's too close to reality for that. however, the same could be said for boxing and it is a sport but i think it is also an art.
although outsiders from different more traditional ma, look at the mma as fighters more than artists, i think this is not the case.

it is natural that any fighter from any system will rely more on internal forces and principles as he gains experience and knowledge. so, i would assume that if the mma are practiced enough, eventually someone might take it there.



i

[Flying Crane]

Astute and well stated observations, as usual sir.

thank you sir.

[Flying Crane]

Here's a question for you Andrew, and this isn't in response to anything specific that you have said, but rather I would like to see your viewpoint on this. For someone who trains and actively competes in hardcore things like MMA competitions, how long do you think they will last in this endeavor. It seems to me that the focus on competition, with the pounding and beating that I suspect the body takes both in training, and in the ring, at some point there will be an accumulation of injuries that makes one consider retirement as a real option. Maybe at this point he can still practice for fun, and/or coach others, but his own involvement may be drastically reduced. What do you think of these thoughts?

I don't train for competition. I'm just not interested in it, and I am sure I would not do well in it, especially something hardcore like MMA. Instead, I train for self defense, and more strongly, just because I enjoy it. The pounding that my body takes in training is probably much much less than an actively competing MMA guy. But I am confident of the self-defense skills that I have, so I'm not interested in comparing myself to an MMA guy. I recognize that for the duration of their active careers, they are tough dudes, but I also don't believe that the average hooligan out there who might try to mug me is a highly trained MMA guy in the prime of his career. I just don't believe that is the kind of guy I need to worry about defending myself against.

But I also believe that I will be able to be active in my arts well into old age, if I so chose, because I expect to avoid most of the chronic and acute injuries that I suspect an MMA guy experiences. So in this way, I see a TMA as a better choice for long-term, and a perfectly reasonable choice for self-defense provided it is taught by a competent instructor.

I'm interested in your thoughts on this. thanks.

[Monadnock]

Can you give some examples of what the "martial arts" offer at the highest levels or deepest depths? Just so we have some point of comparison.

Lamont

I'm still waiting...

[kaizasosei]

i consider these skills right up there. for example, to be able to evade attacks or even everyday dangers, by feel alone.
to be able to psychologically overwhelm an opponent with either motion or stillness, to the point of freezing them.
the strengthening of ones own nervous system. teachings exist on the varying methods of understanding the energy and essence within the human body' the benifits of flexibilty and range of motion is areas of training.
no contact knockout only relying on certain things like kiai(not necessariy very loud) and disruption to the targets system through projection of one energy to special areas.
to be able to communicate with people or animals from medium/long/short distances through body language. the ability to sense what is about to happen, be it sensing of anothers intention or the actual premonition of external events.
to be able to act justly or exercise some kind of spiritual influence even in the most violent and inhumane situation. the ability to be fearless, through understanding of self and others. so that fear is only there when it is needed.

i know there are way more possibilies, but these are some that i consider right up there and i focus mainly on polishing or attaining although it probably would require some more training to speed things up.

j

[Andrew Green]

But I also believe that I will be able to be active in my arts well into old age, if I so chose, because I expect to avoid most of the chronic and acute injuries that I suspect an MMA guy experiences. So in this way, I see a TMA as a better choice for long-term, and a perfectly reasonable choice for self-defense provided it is taught by a competent instructor.

I'm interested in your thoughts on this. thanks.


Competing full contact in any martial art will eventually lead to many accumulated injuries. Judo, TKD, full contact karate, full contact stick fighting, etc. Only so long you can really do any of those before age will start effecting you.

But like all other systems training in MMA does not require you to get in a cage. Most people that train probably will never get in a cage and fight.

MMA is no different then other styles in how long you can train, but like all those other arts the way you can train at 20 will be different then the way you can train at 60.

[Flying Crane]

Competing full contact in any martial art will eventually lead to many accumulated injuries. Judo, TKD, full contact karate, full contact stick fighting, etc. Only so long you can really do any of those before age will start effecting you.

But like all other systems training in MMA does not require you to get in a cage. Most people that train probably will never get in a cage and fight.

MMA is no different then other styles in how long you can train, but like all those other arts the way you can train at 20 will be different then the way you can train at 60.

Fair enough observations. Thanks.

[kaizasosei]

posted by flying crane :
But I am confident of the self-defense skills that I have, so I'm not interested in comparing myself to an MMA guy.

if you are confident then it's definately a very positive thing. i still think that it might make you even tougher.

although i also agree that there is a higher chance for injury.

[Blindside]

I'm still waiting...

Actually, so am I.

I don't know what "martial arts" offers that "martial sports" do not. So I am asking for an example of what "martial arts" offer as you said "at the highest levels or deepest depths," presumably you view MMA as "shallow" or "low" given the terminology that you use to describe it.

Lamont

[Monadnock]

Actually, so am I.

I don't know what "martial arts" offers that "martial sports" do not. So I am asking for an example of what "martial arts" offer as you said "at the highest levels or deepest depths," presumably you view MMA as "shallow" or "low" given the terminology that you use to describe it.

Lamont

I was asking about what these high levels and deep depths were because of this post:


COnsider it a pet peeve, I'm not sure this is what you are saying, but I do get tired of having traditional stylists claim that combat sports, such as wrestling or MMA are shallow and lack depth, being only about strength and athleticism with basic technique.

That is definately not the case, in my mind they are just as deep as any other art can be, it's a personal issue as to how deep into it you go.

So I am wondering what makes the MMA deep. Please clarify on how I "presumably you view MMA as "shallow" or "low" given the terminology that you use to describe it." I haven't described them at all. I'm still waiting...

[Andrew Green]

So I am wondering what makes the MMA deep. Please clarify on how I "presumably you view MMA as "shallow" or "low" given the terminology that you use to describe it." I haven't described them at all. I'm still waiting...

Technically complex, to the point where there is always more too learn.

[Flying Crane]

posted by flying crane :

if you are confident then it's definately a very positive thing. i still think that it might make you even tougher.

although i also agree that there is a higher chance for injury.

I'm not sure what you are saying here. Are you suggesting that if I train like an MMA guy, it will make me tougher?

[Andrew Green]

I'm not sure what you are saying here. Are you suggesting that if I train like an MMA guy, it will make me tougher?

Nah, that just depends on how you define tough and who you train with. There are definitely some traditional schools with really frightening exercises.

I also wouldn't say there is a higher chance of injury, that just depends on how you train.

[Monadnock]

Technically complex, to the point where there is always more too learn.

And that is a good point. I think that some MMA's are more technical than some TMA's.

But I think that the physical is only one layer of an art. When I think of depth, generally I think of mental/spiritual aspects of a TMA, not MMA. (I'm not directing this to Andrew or anyone in particular, just laying out some thoughts...)

[Flying Crane]

And that is a good point. I think that some MMA's are more technical than some TMA's.

But I think that the physical is only one layer of an art. When I think of depth, generally I think of mental/spiritual aspects of a TMA, not MMA. (I'm not directing this to Andrew or anyone in particular, just laying out some thoughts...)

well, personally I think mental and spiritual aspects are separate things and cannot be considered as one.

I think all the martial arts have a mental aspect. It's focus and concentration and creative thinking and whatnot.

Not all arts, including TMA, push a spiritual aspect. Not everyone wants that, even if they train a TMA. In my experiences, if you want that aspect, it may be available if the instructor is into it, but it seems like usually you need to specifically pursue that. I haven't seen it pushed on anyone much.

[Monadnock]

well, personally I think mental and spiritual aspects are separate things and cannot be considered as one.

I think all the martial arts have a mental aspect. It's focus and concentration and creative thinking and whatnot.

Not all arts, including TMA, push a spiritual aspect. Not everyone wants that, even if they train a TMA. In my experiences, if you want that aspect, it may be available if the instructor is into it, but it seems like usually you need to specifically pursue that. I haven't seen it pushed on anyone much.

Sure, in the end, it all comes down to the school and teacher. To me, the term "MMA" is just a name given to a sport, which are games that have rules to keep people safe while they play. While the risk of injury is there, in the end your playing field is the ring, while the arena trained for in the TMA is the battlefield.

How you train will vary, of course.

[Andrew Green]

Battlefield? No, very few martial arts that are practiced are battlefield arts. Unless you're training primarily weapons and considering battlefield tactics, it's either a self-defence system, a personal health system, or a dueling system.

[kaizasosei]

the highest thing i would consider to be awareness. awareness of oneself, ones body and movement, awareness of the others.

not to train like a mma guy or a tma guy or a supermarket guy- not even to train against them. most important i think is to try stay open for any constructive training. i think it would be good to train with all kinds of people to get more awareness and skill.
you mentioned that you do not want to compare your an mma guy. who said anything about comparing. competition and sparing is also educational.

of course, people train in different ways, some more destructive or unaware as others. but even with skilled practitioners, accidents can happen. so if you strictly controll how and who you spar with and who you don't, then that is natural to a certain degree. however, as far as selfdefense goes or dangerous fight situations, one cannot always have the luxury of choosing ones attackers.

but if you train with all kinds of people including people you barely know, then you can be certain that things will escalate and the chance for injury drastically rises. even when it is agreed not to go wild, it does tend to escalate if there is one or more things like competition, hatred or disrespect for self or others, unawareness... and because almost every person and many martial artists have not completely understood how to integrate these facts(that we are all internally a bit competitive, resentful or hateful at times), accidents happen. not only accidents, even some kind of harsh inconsiderate training can also lead to damaging ones body rather than protecting it.

so what is the 'big' difference anyhow, there will be all sorts of masters and all sorts of beginners out there.
i would understand if a master of one art would be scared of a master of another art. but i sense that there is competition and fear ingrained in this issue-so if one is confident with his art. i don't see why one would have to fear a mma that is a beginner. but that is what it looks like. mma is art just like anything else.. internal and external are just different starting points. most of the time, the internal and the external end up meeting each other somewhere in the middle.



j

[Monadnock]

Battlefield? No, very few martial arts that are practiced are battlefield arts. Unless you're training primarily weapons and considering battlefield tactics, it's either a self-defence system, a personal health system, or a dueling system.

I respectfully disagree. If it is a "martial" art, it has something to do with a military.

A martial way is derrived from a martial art, and is generally practiced to preserve combative traditions and includes those nice little bennies you mentioned like health and fitness.

All the American sports and self defense systems really have nothing to do with TMA's other than they wear belts and "kiai."

Self defense really has nothing to do with the martial arts. But that is another thread, eh?

[kaizasosei]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Green http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?p=915111#post915111)
Battlefield? No, very few martial arts that are practiced are battlefield arts. Unless you're training primarily weapons and considering battlefield tactics, it's either a self-defence system, a personal health system, or a dueling system.

I respectfully disagree. If it is a "martial" art, it has something to do with a military.

A martial way is derrived from a martial art, and is generally practiced to preserve combative traditions and includes those nice little bennies you mentioned like health and fitness.

All the American sports and self defense systems really have nothing to do with TMA's other than they wear belts and "kiai."

Self defense really has nothing to do with the martial arts. But that is another thread, eh?

ok, im stuck. don't want to get into philosophy...
you've succeeded in confusing me. i will have to think more about these ideas of battlefield vs.duelling vs selfdefense.

but i guess the very nature of a fight i think includes all. when a person fights, they are in some way defending themselves. also, in the case of a war with battlefield, it could be considered a duel between nations.

[Andrew Green]

I respectfully disagree. If it is a "martial" art, it has something to do with a military.


"Martial" is a English word, Taken from the Japanese "Bu". Which got applied to civillian arts like karate later on. When you take into consideration the role of martial arts in Japan at the time, through the Dai Nippon Budokai, the situation becomes even fuzzier.

But really at the end of the day, most of the hand-to-hand arts have descended from civillian arts, not military. Military arts use weapons. This is with the exception of Koryo systems and the like.

However even in Japan at this time the military aspects where more or less removed, at least in technical terms. Judo, Kendo and others where put up as physical education and sport, Karate in Japan followed that basic path as well in order to get into the DNB.

However a case could definately be made that the goal was to train military mindset through these arts, to prepare people for military service. Which is largely why the US shut it down after Japan surrendered.

Of course I would hope that building a nationalistic attitude and preparing the young for military service through training is no longer the goal of most clubs...

But you would be hard pressed to trace most open hand arts back to military origins, especially in a battlefield sense. As a way to train a aggressive mindset and "fighting spirit" maybe, but then BJJ falls into that as well, as does boxing and wrestling, which are all used by the US army, and I don't think that is the claim you are trying to make.



Self defense really has nothing to do with the martial arts. But that is another thread, eh?


If you like.

[Danjo]

I respectfully disagree. If it is a "martial" art, it has something to do with a military.

A martial way is derrived from a martial art, and is generally practiced to preserve combative traditions and includes those nice little bennies you mentioned like health and fitness.

All the American sports and self defense systems really have nothing to do with TMA's other than they wear belts and "kiai."

Self defense really has nothing to do with the martial arts. But that is another thread, eh?

I agree. Let's drop "Martial" Arts, and go back to calling them "Manly arts"

[tellner]

I agree. Let's drop "Martial" Arts, and go back to calling them "Manly arts"

Bad idea as a bunch of female MTers may be willing to point out to you.

[tellner]

"Martial" is a English word, Taken from the Japanese "Bu". Which got applied to civillian arts like karate later on.
Or the Chinese "Wu" which has slightly different connotations, or so the knowledgeable tell me. (I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just muddying the waters even further.)

Martial arts don't start and end with Japan.


But really at the end of the day, most of the hand-to-hand arts have descended from civillian arts, not military. Military arts use weapons.
...

But you would be hard pressed to trace most open hand arts back to military origins, especially in a battlefield sense. As a way to train a aggressive mindset and "fighting spirit" maybe, but then BJJ falls into that as well, as does boxing and wrestling

"They were infused by the spirit of Wu" from an old Chinese book quoted in Draeger's Comprehensive Asian Fighting Arts. Martial arts is a fuzzy, squishy term. But it's what we're stuck with, and for the most part we all know what we're talking about except for people who want to distinguish themselves for marketing purposes or want to toss others out of the Super Secret Budo Club out of spite :wink2:

[Xue Sheng]

Or the Chinese "Wu" which has slightly different connotations,

one of which is the number 5 another is a family name another is...etc etc etc.

Wu – Pick one

鋙, 兀, 嗚, 屋 巫 悪 於 汚 烏 誣

[tellner]

*sigh* Chinese. A million idioms and no grammar.

[Danjo]

Bad idea as a bunch of female MTers may be willing to point out to you.

Sarcasm: noun. A mode of satirical wit depending for its effect on ironic language.

[MJS]

Folks,

These posts were split from this (http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=58944) thread. They didn't really pertain to the other topic, however, this is a good discussion, so I wanted to give it its own section.

Thanks,

Mike

[MJS]

So, I guess the question begs...why do people find it necessary to water something down? I mean, if the goal is self defense, which I'd assume that anyone who trains, that should be the main goal, you would want to learn something effective, not something that has little chance of working.

[exile]

I respectfully disagree. If it is a "martial" art, it has something to do with a military.

A martial way is derrived from a martial art, and is generally practiced to preserve combative traditions and includes those nice little bennies you mentioned like health and fitness.

All the American sports and self defense systems really have nothing to do with TMA's other than they wear belts and "kiai."

Self defense really has nothing to do with the martial arts. But that is another thread, eh?

I want to muddy the waters even further. One of our members, Langenschwert, supplied the extremely interesting observation that


The first extant literary use of the term "Martial Art" in the English language refers to an Italian art, namely rapier fencing. The work is the 16th Century English rapier manual entitled "Pallas Armata" which refers to the "Noble Martial Art of Fencing". Please note that the term fencing refers to fighting in general, not the use of the sword alone. There's not much philosophy in a back-alley rapier fight, but it's certainly a martial art, and an exacting one at that.


Note further that rapier duelling was not a characteristic battlefield tactic in the 16th century. I think this particular fact illustrates the general problem: we use the term 'martial art' because we've heard or read other people using the term, who in turn have heard/read other people using the term... and when you trace it back to the 'root' source, the use turns out to have been much more general than our current conception of what martial denotes.

In that sense, the way we use the term martial art(s) can't be derived by combining what we currently mean by 'martial' and what we currently mean by 'art'. It sounds to me as though 'martial' basically meant 'fighting' in its 15th c. usage, and 'arts' certainly meant 'skills'. So the term we use originally meant 'fighting skills'—encompassing streetfighting, formal dueling , battlefield combat techs... the lot.


So, I guess the question begs...why do people find it necessary to water something down? I mean, if the goal is self defense, which I'd assume that anyone who trains, that should be the main goal, you would want to learn something effective, not something that has little chance of working.

My guess is, a lot of people who study martial arts cannot actually visualize themselves in the incredibly unpleasant situation of fighting for their lives, literally, physically. They go to classes, they train, but they want to be believe that the training itself will somehow make them invulnerable. The idea that they may actually have to use this stuff triggers something that I would call denial if that word weren't so grossly overused these days. Assessing something as effective vs. ineffective requires however that you realistically picture yourself in a physically damaging violent conflict... so along with the rejection of that possibility goes the abandonment of any kind of appraisal of the tech for realistic effectiveness.

[Brian R. VanCise]

So, I guess the question begs...why do people find it necessary to water something down? I mean, if the goal is self defense, which I'd assume that anyone who trains, that should be the main goal, you would want to learn something effective, not something that has little chance of working.

Absolutely and an amen, brother to that! Why would you? http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/images/icons/icon6.gif

I guess that some people would say that the personal protection skills are secondary to personal fitness, sport, fullfillment and spiritual growth, etc. That is just my guess.

[Monadnock]

Note further that rapier duelling was not a characteristic battlefield tactic in the 16th century. I think this particular fact illustrates the general problem: we use the term 'martial art' because we've heard or read other people using the term, who in turn have heard/read other people using the term... and when you trace it back to the 'root' source, the use turns out to have been much more general than our current conception of what martial denotes.


I agree it does illustrate the problem, but I think one would have a hard time making the case that it all stems from incorrect usage in the 16c. Although swords in the 16th c. were certainly the weapon of choice for standing armies.

It does spark my curiosity as to when the term hit the mainstream in the U.S.

The other issue is translation from foreign languages. From Japanese, the term is Bu, and does specifically refer to military arts and those arts do include empty hand techniques. Kogusoku, I believe is a term for grappling. An interesting read would be Dave Lowery's articles on Karate, which basically state it is not a martial art, in a strict (Japanese) sense of the term.

[exile]

I agree it does illustrate the problem, but I think one would have a hard time making the case that it all stems from incorrect usage in the 16c. Although swords in the 16th c. were certainly the weapon of choice for standing armies.

It does spark my curiosity as to when the term hit the mainstream in the U.S.


Yes... at what point did the term actually enter common usage... anyone have any clues?

[Xue Sheng]

Absolutely and an amen, brother to that! Why would you? http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/images/icons/icon6.gif

I guess that some people would say that the personal protection skills are secondary to personal fitness, sport, fullfillment and spiritual growth, etc. That is just my guess.

Agreed

And there is watering down for reasons that I have seen such as you can fool yourself into thinking you are a great master, just look at all the “forms” I know and there is watering down to gain more students to make more money because real live training can hurt and no one wants to get hurt you know. And of course there are other reasons as well. My main style Taiji is watered down by people not taking the time to actually learn it and combining it with something else or watering down by simple forms collecting for health purposes or dance purposes or again the I am a master because I know so many forms purposes as well.

But, believe it or not, this is leading to a question.

Is CMA watered down by Sanda (non-sport)? I train Sanda (and very traditinal Taijiquan), Sanda is effective it is from a multitude of CMA styles but it has removed the forms and the qigong training therefore would it be considered watered down, or just a logical (or illogical) progression? Or something new as far as CMA is concerned?

[Explorer]

Interesting discussion folks. Statistics may have something to do with the watering down. After our 20s (here in the US) the incidents of personal assault begin to drop. For men in their 40s the line is nearly straight down ... with instances of personal assault dropping ... um ... violently. hmmm.

Anyway. It makes me think that adults with families have statistically fewer needs to defend themselves and therefore, require less stringent training.

All that being said. There are times and places that one might expect that the chances for assault are elevated.

Of course, I train in self defense JUST IN CASE I'm the 50 year old on the wrong side of the stats!

[Hand Sword]

As I see these discussions, and watch the classes of these representatives, I seem to notice one funny thing. Watered down or not, the same strikes, kicks, stances, blocks are taught. It's the focus of these attributes that are different in the schools.

Unfortunately, the arts have achieved soccer mom status here. It's about making money, day care, a good workout, etc... The people and the personalities in the dojos are much different now, and will remain that way. The Genie is out of the bottle.

[exile]

It makes me think that adults with families have statistically fewer needs to defend themselves and therefore, require less stringent training.

This could well be true, although there's always the risk of being...


the 50 year old on the wrong side of the stats!

Still, I suspect that the far greater risk to that 50 year old is cardiovascular disease induced by too much intake and too little outgo. Excess abdominal fat and its systemic correlates have probably killed millions more people than thugs throwing roundhouses at someone else's glass jaw.

But here's a thought that occurred to me recently in a totally different context (reading something about genetics, actually): the phenomenon of heterosis, or 'hybrid vigor', is familiar in biology and seems to be an important constraint shaping human perceptions of sexual attractiveness (I think there was an MT thread which linked to some interesting data on this). The overall idea is that repeated concentration from a limited selection of genes is more likely to lead to the emergence of lethal recessives in a population, weakening the breeding groups possibly to the point where they cease to be viable, an outcome which can be avoided by bringing in novel genes (outbreeding). Purebred domestic animals have notoriously shorter lifespans than mixed breeds for example. Might the same kind of thing apply to martial arts?

My idea is that a certain (maybe small amount of) cross-mixing of techniques amongst MA might well keep the 'root' MA healthier, in the same way that keeping the gene pool open is a mainstay of animal breeders who are going for maximum robustness and longevity—aka general health—of the species in question. Not a wholesale merging of techs, but the systematic informing of techs in one art by considering applications, or setups, in another art. This is one reason why I'm really interested in Combat Hapkido, even though its overall methodology is somewhat different from that of TKD—it seems a really good fit for TKD along the lines I've been talking about.

I don't view this kind of controlled hybridization as dilution, btw, but the opposite—a strengthening of the stock. And after all, the karate that was the foundation of TKD was built—in Okinawa—on precisely this kind of synthesis of techs. I'd love to bet high that any effective MA you look at has precisely the same kind of mixed hybrid ancestry. Going obsessively for technical 'purity' at this late stage of the game seems both futile and shortsighted.

[Brian S]

The watering down is due to what the general population wants. They don't don't want real karate. They want an afterschool program with lots of goodies(belts,trophies,patches,certificates,etc.) to boost little Johnny's self esteem.
If they were given reak karate little Johnny would quit after the first class and the school would go broke. ALL HAIL THE McDoJO's!! They have won,like it or not.

[MJS]

Absolutely and an amen, brother to that! Why would you? http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/images/icons/icon6.gif

I guess that some people would say that the personal protection skills are secondary to personal fitness, sport, fullfillment and spiritual growth, etc. That is just my guess.

And unfortunately, when those types get paired up with someone who is more serious, it takes away, IMO, from the more serious student. If those people really have no interest in the arts on a serious level, join a gym.


Agreed

And there is watering down for reasons that I have seen such as you can fool yourself into thinking you are a great master, just look at all the “forms” I know and there is watering down to gain more students to make more money because real live training can hurt and no one wants to get hurt you know. And of course there are other reasons as well. My main style Taiji is watered down by people not taking the time to actually learn it and combining it with something else or watering down by simple forms collecting for health purposes or dance purposes or again the I am a master because I know so many forms purposes as well.

But, believe it or not, this is leading to a question.

Is CMA watered down by Sanda (non-sport)? I train Sanda (and very traditinal Taijiquan), Sanda is effective it is from a multitude of CMA styles but it has removed the forms and the qigong training therefore would it be considered watered down, or just a logical (or illogical) progression? Or something new as far as CMA is concerned?

Good points. Unfortunately it seems to me, that sometimes its hard to avoid. You have teacher A that learned the art in its true form. He teaches student B who removes a few things. He then teaches student C, who is now missing things that B removed. D, E, F, G remove bits and pieces, so by the time it gets to student X, whats left?

[MJS]

The watering down is due to what the general population wants. They don't don't want real karate. They want an afterschool program with lots of goodies(belts,trophies,patches,certificates,etc.) to boost little Johnny's self esteem.
If they were given reak karate little Johnny would quit after the first class and the school would go broke. ALL HAIL THE McDoJO's!! They have won,like it or not.

Sad but true. But, the wake up call is going to be when little Johnny tries to defend himself and ends up getting the crap beat out of him. Mom and Dad will most likely be scratching their heads wondering why he didn't do better, and where all their money went after all these lessons.

All I can say is thank God there are still some schools out there that don't have the McDojo mentality and offer fries and a coke with the belt. :)

[FearlessFreep]

You have teacher A that learned the art in its true form. He teaches student B who removes a few things. He then teaches student C, who is now missing things that B removed. D, E, F, G remove bits and pieces, so by the time it gets to student X, whats left?

You know, in music, musicians of each generation take what was done in the previous generation and grow beyond it, building on what they learn and coming up with new ideas and inspirations

Actually, that's true in everything from physics and math to architecture and mechanical engineering to football and baseball. We learn new things, break new records, build things unimaginable two generations ago


Why is Martial Arts seemingly the singular activity in human experience that starts off 'perfect' with one person and goes downhill from there??

[MJS]

You have teacher A that learned the art in its true form. He teaches student B who removes a few things. He then teaches student C, who is now missing things that B removed. D, E, F, G remove bits and pieces, so by the time it gets to student X, whats left?

You know, in music, musicians of each generation take what was done in the previous generation and grow beyond it, building on what they learn and coming up with new ideas and inspirations

Actually, that's true in everything from physics and math to architecture and mechanical engineering to football and baseball. We learn new things, break new records, build things unimaginable two generations ago


Why is Martial Arts seemingly the singular activity in human experience that starts off 'perfect' with one person and goes downhill from there??

Good question, and IMO, you're 100% correct. Every day, things and improved upon. I can only guess that its because people look at something, and feel that its no longer useful in todays world, so it gets dropped. Why train with a bo staff when nobody walks around with one. Good point, however, a broom handle or short stick can be substituted for the longer bo. Many things can also be translated to empty hand. Take Arnis. There are stick vs. stick disarms. Now, I don't walk around with rattan sticks, but those same disarms, with a slight modification, can be done empty hand vs. stick, while keeping the same general idea.

Personally, rather than dropping something, I think those things that are viewed as 'old' should be looked at closer and perhaps modified for what you may find in todays modern world.

Just my .02 :)

[Monadnock]

You have teacher A that learned the art in its true form. He teaches student B who removes a few things. He then teaches student C, who is now missing things that B removed. D, E, F, G remove bits and pieces, so by the time it gets to student X, whats left?

You know, in music, musicians of each generation take what was done in the previous generation and grow beyond it, building on what they learn and coming up with new ideas and inspirations

Actually, that's true in everything from physics and math to architecture and mechanical engineering to football and baseball. We learn new things, break new records, build things unimaginable two generations ago


Why is Martial Arts seemingly the singular activity in human experience that starts off 'perfect' with one person and goes downhill from there??

Some people would argue that Rock and Roll is a watering down of Classical Music, or not even music at all, just noise.

It is an evolution of music that the people wanted but does not necessarily sound like its roots.

[Xue Sheng]

And unfortunately, when those types get paired up with someone who is more serious, it takes away, IMO, from the more serious student. If those people really have no interest in the arts on a serious level, join a gym.

Exactly and I have run into this and it is extremely frustrating. (and again agreeing with Brian as well just being more verbose about it this time)

I will NOT go into that entire long story again but I was working on a 2 person form with a self proclaimed master (by form count) that was much more interested in the dance and self delusion than actual work on application.



Good points. Unfortunately it seems to me, that sometimes its hard to avoid. You have teacher A that learned the art in its true form. He teaches student B who removes a few things. He then teaches student C, who is now missing things that B removed. D, E, F, G remove bits and pieces, so by the time it gets to student X, whats left?

In the case of Police Military (P/M) Sanda you are left with a quick way to learn how to hurt people real bad. But is that to be considered watering down CMA? I do not know. But if for no other reason you are now calling it Sanda not Long Fist or Tong Bei or Taiji or Wing Chun therefore I tend to feel it is not watering it down but I would not be willing to get into an argument to prove that either way at this point.

But in the case of Taiji plus another MA and still calling it taiji I do believe you are watering it down.

[Shuto]

I believe that modern society as a whole is a big factor in the dilution of traditional arts. It is actually pretty easy these days to go thru your entire life without ever having to defend yourself. .

Times have indeed changed. I feel more threatened by heart disease than physical violence.

Also, if I were attacked there's a good chance that I would be confronted by someone with a firearm. Empty hand techniques are OK if that's all you have but personally, I consider them a last resort when going against a firearm.

[Rich Parsons]

So, I guess the question begs...why do people find it necessary to water something down? I mean, if the goal is self defense, which I'd assume that anyone who trains, that should be the main goal, you would want to learn something effective, not something that has little chance of working.


I can teach stick and knife and empty hand techniques for my personal skill set and timing. And if the student walks in and has to react to my timing they most likely will get hit. They will get tired of not "learning" and move on. So as good instructors they break it down and isolate a move. Then they slow the movement down to teach the timing.

The problem lies in that trying to teach many in a line allows for large errors.

We have all seen the one studnet that goes home and trains what they learned and comes back and has it better. They may need further correction or guidance but they are doing "EXTRA" at home to make themselves better. Not jsut riding through the class.

In the sports end you have a lot less people who can clearly qualify to enter the ring. And most of it is around conditioning. If you are not in 110% physical fitness it does not matter how good you are. (* Of course there are exceptions *) A person can be good at an area of stand up or grappling and be ok in the other areas but have a strong will and determination and can take a punch and ignores pain. This person will succeed in the sport aspect of it.

The average person will not. Even with SParring with Gloves and controlled movement, most of these people do not take it to the level of possible injury. Most instructors do not wish to do this either to aovid getting pulled into court. The amount of full contact clubs that closed in the late 70's because of the cost of insurance in SW Mi was a large percentage. And those that survived changed how they trained.

In sports people train for a higher contact and most understand and even expect injuries.

More later.

[Em MacIntosh]

For me, it's simple: Kung Fu means hard work. You get what you put in. This includes the intellectual effort. Train it the way you'll use it. I train for self defense.

[Guardian]

Well, I have seen some very interesting and quite insightful responses here on this one.

The Martial Arts and the other Self-Defense ways discussed here today are two separate entities, I have seen some say that pure Self-Defense is just a watered down version of the Martial Arts, you cannot in my view relate the two together, they have different functions and yet, they have the same functions, one dwelves deeper of course then the other, but is no more or less important then the other one depending on what you want it for.

Bodyguards, bouncers, personal security experts train in their respective fields for what they need it for, the Martial Arts also do this, but dwelve deeper (sometimes) into their arts (traditional). It's not the power or unlocking the software or anything like that in my view (which might be simplistic in nature, but that's how I am).

Each has it's place and each does a function, now what you want from that function, to each their own.

[thardey]

I started my "martial" study as an underweight football lineman. I learned something extremely valuable: technique often trumps strength. Fortunately for me, most of the strong guys didn't realize that. If they had technique and strength, I would have been toast. But they didn't see the need for it, and so they didn't strive for it. For me it was a matter of survival, from my perspective - sitting across from an ape who weighed twice what I did.

Next I did boxing - now weight wasn't an issue, but I had another problem: My knees were shot from football. I couldn't "dance" around in the ring, but had to go toe-to-toe. I learned another principle: Footwork is king, but a quick combination is queen. From both the above, I learned how to take a hit.

Yeah, I could be a pretty mean brawler at that point, but I could only improve so much with that type of training.

Then I got a chance to try classical fencing, I learned that while a boxer can overwhelm his opponent by a good attack, and proper application of strength, it doesn't work with weapons. If you try that with a seasoned fencer - sword, or empty handed, they use that against you and tear you up. You have to have a good, committed attack, but you have to be smart about it, and not to over-commit. This was where I started to cross into the "higher" stuff that was brought up earlier - the transition for me can be summed up in one word: subtlety. Not "detail", boxing is very detailed and precise, as football can and should be. But neither is in the same world is terms of being subtle.

Next I got into (get ready for this:) Ballroom dancing! (My knees were healed roughly about this time.) Now the subtlety moved from my hand work to the control of my weight. I learned how a simple shift of my hip can control where I and my partner could go, how rolling from the inside of my foot the the outside changed my options for movement. Again -- subtle.

After all this, I finally started karate! They said I was a natural, but it was only because I already knew how much of a different the subtle movements make, and how much of a mess the subtle mistakes make.

I'm not talking about fine motor skills, those disappear when adrenalin hits. I'm not talking about details, those get forgotten. There's no other word for it than subtlety, and there's no quick way to train it. There's not even a quick way to explain it. The only way to get is endless hours of repetition, until you've eliminated any unhelpful movement.


Subtle:
1 a: delicate (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/delicate) elusive (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/elusive) <a subtle fragrance> b: difficult to understand or perceive : obscure (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/obscure) <subtle differences in sound>2 a: perceptive (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/perceptive) refined (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/refined) <a writer's sharp and subtle moral sense> b: having or marked by keen insight and ability to penetrate deeply and thoroughly <a subtle scholar>3 a: highly skillful : expert (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/expert) <a subtle craftsman> b: cunningly made or contrived : ingenious (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/ingenious)4: artful (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/artful) crafty (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/crafty) <a subtle rogue>5: operating insidiously <subtle poisons>

[Steel Tiger]

So, I guess the question begs...why do people find it necessary to water something down? I mean, if the goal is self defense, which I'd assume that anyone who trains, that should be the main goal, you would want to learn something effective, not something that has little chance of working.

This thread has been a very interesting read so far and I thought it was time I contributed something.

Watering down the arts? It a strange idea isn't it? I honestly don't think anybody sets out to 'water down' their art. The effect comes from interpretation and poor teaching. I have had students that no matter how many times you showed them a technique or movement they simply could not get it right. They were just seeing it completely differently to me. If you add to this slip-shod or lazy teaching then you are going to get something quite different to what you started with.

Even the McDojo boys are not going to their syllabus and saying, "we'll take that out and forget that, and we can do without this." Rather, I think what is happening is that they are adding so much peripheral rubbish that there is no room left for the actual content of the art. so its not so much watered down as pushed aside.

Then they run into other problems. Give the people what they want to get more students but, as Rich pointed out, big classes are prone to suffer from misinterpretation and error simply because the teachers cannot give each student enough individual time.

You can then move into the motivation for learning a martial art in the first place, self defence, fitness, sporting achievement, to be part of a group.

If it is for self defence there are two paths. The first is to seek short, quick highly effective techniques (modern?). The second is to work through a longer syllabus and find those same techniques (traditional). Does this lead to a watering down effect? It might, but it more likely that it will lead to a different school.

What about fitness? Such a pursuit does not need a lesser program to fulfill its needs. The focus is different but the content can be the same.

Sporting achievement can cause some seeming reduction of an art. For example, Olympic TKD does not encourage hand techniques at all, so effeciency would dictate that you not practice them. Most TKD, schools do teach them, even those preparing students for potential Olympic competition. So the sport aspect of an art does not have to lessen the art, unless the participants want it to.

Just wanting to be part of a group can have significant effects on an arts content. This sought of motivation does not place any value on what is being taught.

However, there is an important fact that affects all of what I have said above. Its not the quality of teaching or the material, it is the fascility to progress through the art. If the testing and progression system is working properly then some people will get stuck at low ranks because they have the wrong approach or motivation. This is where the McDojos are really causing a problem. It is too easy to progress to a level where you can go off and teach. If its too easy then the dues haven't been paid and the knowledge hasn't been properly processed.

I honestly think that dodgy testing and progression systems are the root cause of the apparent watering down of martial arts. It allows people who should never teach to be in the position to do just that.

I've gone on a bit here but my only excuse is that I find this a very compelling subject.

[Danjo]

This thread has been a very interesting read so far and I thought it was time I contributed something.

Watering down the arts? It a strange idea isn't it? I honestly don't think anybody sets out to 'water down' their art. The effect comes from interpretation and poor teaching. I have had students that no matter how many times you showed them a technique or movement they simply could not get it right. They were just seeing it completely differently to me. If you add to this slip-shod or lazy teaching then you are going to get something quite different to what you started with.

Even the McDojo boys are not going to their syllabus and saying, "we'll take that out and forget that, and we can do without this." Rather, I think what is happening is that they are adding so much peripheral rubbish that there is no room left for the actual content of the art. so its not so much watered down as pushed aside.

Then they run into other problems. Give the people what they want to get more students but, as Rich pointed out, big classes are prone to suffer from misinterpretation and error simply because the teachers cannot give each student enough individual time.

You can then move into the motivation for learning a martial art in the first place, self defence, fitness, sporting achievement, to be part of a group.

If it is for self defence there are two paths. The first is to seek short, quick highly effective techniques (modern?). The second is to work through a longer syllabus and find those same techniques (traditional). Does this lead to a watering down effect? It might, but it more likely that it will lead to a different school.

What about fitness? Such a pursuit does not need a lesser program to fulfill its needs. The focus is different but the content can be the same.

Sporting achievement can cause some seeming reduction of an art. For example, Olympic TKD does not encourage hand techniques at all, so effeciency would dictate that you not practice them. Most TKD, schools do teach them, even those preparing students for potential Olympic competition. So the sport aspect of an art does not have to lessen the art, unless the participants want it to.

Just wanting to be part of a group can have significant effects on an arts content. This sought of motivation does not place any value on what is being taught.

However, there is an important fact that affects all of what I have said above. Its not the quality of teaching or the material, it is the fascility to progress through the art. If the testing and progression system is working properly then some people will get stuck at low ranks because they have the wrong approach or motivation. This is where the McDojos are really causing a problem. It is too easy to progress to a level where you can go off and teach. If its too easy then the dues haven't been paid and the knowledge hasn't been properly processed.

I honestly think that dodgy testing and progression systems are the root cause of the apparent watering down of martial arts. It allows people who should never teach to be in the position to do just that.

I've gone on a bit here but my only excuse is that I find this a very compelling subject.

Yep. I'll go along with what you've said here. We have in this country an educational system that is a mile wide but only an inch deep. Mastery is not required before promotion. Kids are merely exposed to certain concepts before being pushed to the next level. When this happens, memory is greatly lessened and as a result students tend to forget what they have "learned" after a short period of time. So, what we tend to do is to transfer those qualities and expectations to the martial arts and get about the same results as we do with the public school system. How many high school graduates are there now that do not have skills as high as those in the eigth grade 50 years ago?

It all comes down to the basics. If the basics are so solid that they're second nature, then building on them is relatively easy to do. You have a broad and solid base, and thus your tower can be built very high without fear of it falling. If the basics are not there, then you can only go so high without failure.

I think the reason that many find the more strictly self defense systems preferable, is that they have a much more limited curriculum and thus mastery is possible. It's limited due to it's having fewer techniques, but someone that has practiced one kick and one punch a thousand times is going to be better off than the person that has practiced a thousand kicks and punches once.

To master the TMAs is not easy. Never has been. The point is that once it IS mastered (if one ever truly gets there), the results are very impressive.

[Andy Moynihan]

*sigh* didn't I just go over this not even a month ago?

If you have found something you enjoy that is giving you what you are after--keep with it.

If you feel something else offers an area you need but aren't getting--go try it.

You like the locks in that jujutsu class? Go sign up. Wanna go do Capoeira just because it looks like fun? Have at. Want the sparring experience an MMA style bout would give you? Call up a gym, explain your situation and arrange one.

What's hard?




Oh and one more thing: I believe the term "TMA" as it is currently used is used to apply to the wrong situation, as the "TMA" schools and the practices they engage in which led to the "watering down" tellner initially brought up, can by no stretch of the wildest imagination be considered "Traditional". Therefore, as "TMA" in it's current usage has come to mean "McDojo" and not true TMA, the entire MMA/TMA comparison is skewed right out of the gate and is stupid. Thank you.

[Doc]

Here's a question for you Andrew, and this isn't in response to anything specific that you have said, but rather I would like to see your viewpoint on this. For someone who trains and actively competes in hardcore things like MMA competitions, how long do you think they will last in this endeavor. It seems to me that the focus on competition, with the pounding and beating that I suspect the body takes both in training, and in the ring, at some point there will be an accumulation of injuries that makes one consider retirement as a real option. Maybe at this point he can still practice for fun, and/or coach others, but his own involvement may be drastically reduced. What do you think of these thoughts?

I don't train for competition. I'm just not interested in it, and I am sure I would not do well in it, especially something hardcore like MMA. Instead, I train for self defense, and more strongly, just because I enjoy it. The pounding that my body takes in training is probably much much less than an actively competing MMA guy. But I am confident of the self-defense skills that I have, so I'm not interested in comparing myself to an MMA guy. I recognize that for the duration of their active careers, they are tough dudes, but I also don't believe that the average hooligan out there who might try to mug me is a highly trained MMA guy in the prime of his career. I just don't believe that is the kind of guy I need to worry about defending myself against.

But I also believe that I will be able to be active in my arts well into old age, if I so chose, because I expect to avoid most of the chronic and acute injuries that I suspect an MMA guy experiences. So in this way, I see a TMA as a better choice for long-term, and a perfectly reasonable choice for self-defense provided it is taught by a competent instructor.

I'm interested in your thoughts on this. thanks.

Trying to take my job away, or what? OK, you said it first, so I guess I can't say what I wanted now. :)

[Doc]

*sigh* didn't I just go over this not even a month ago?

If you have found something you enjoy that is giving you what you are after--keep with it.

If you feel something else offers an area you need but aren't getting--go try it.

You like the locks in that jujutsu class? Go sign up. Wanna go do Capoeira just because it looks like fun? Have at. Want the sparring experience an MMA style bout would give you? Call up a gym, explain your situation and arrange one.

What's hard?




Oh and one more thing: I believe the term "TMA" as it is currently used is used to apply to the wrong situation, as the "TMA" schools and the practices they engage in which led to the "watering down" tellner initially brought up, can by no stretch of the wildest imagination be considered "Traditional". Therefore, as "TMA" in it's current usage has come to mean "McDojo" and not true TMA, the entire MMA/TMA comparison is skewed right out of the gate and is stupid. Thank you.

You guys are killing me taking my comments away before I can make them. Man I love this place!

[Andy Moynihan]

Oh don't let me stop you by any means, sir, go right on ahead. :)

[Danjo]

As I see these discussions, and watch the classes of these representatives, I seem to notice one funny thing. Watered down or not, the same strikes, kicks, stances, blocks are taught. It's the focus of these attributes that are different in the schools.

Unfortunately, the arts have achieved soccer mom status here. It's about making money, day care, a good workout, etc... The people and the personalities in the dojos are much different now, and will remain that way. The Genie is out of the bottle.

I agree that it's largely a different breed that takes a martial arts class than did 30 years ago. People actually think they are learning to defend themselves with Tae Bo. etc. The true arts are only sought out by a few and even then they are likely to be lied to by the sellers of the watered down garbage trying to convince them that they are indeed the real deal. Thank God for the internet and the ability to weed out the phonies. Not that there aren't a lot of them on the net, but there is the voice of reason as well.

[YoungMan]

Keep in mind, how you teach and the syllabus used is going to depend greatly on the student body. If you decide you are going to teach children, you pretty much will be unable to teach a traditional class without watering it down, since children are in no way prepared to learn traditional practice and all it entails. They will be able learn elements of traditional practice, but to think you can teach children in a traditional manner is absurd. They will not understand and most likely will be unable to keep up.
The same can be said for any other student body you focus on (college students, housewives, older students, teenagers etc.)-what and how you teach will depend on who your students are.

[Xue Sheng]

People actually think they are learning to defend themselves with Tae Bo. etc.

I have heard that before and although I should not be surprised I am. I have heard the same about those Aerobic classes that include what they call Thai kick boxing as well (it is far from Muay Thai) many who take that feel the same way about their skill and that they are great fighters... God help them if they ever have to actually fight.

[Danjo]

I have heard that before and although I should not be surprised I am. I have heard the same about those Aerobic classes that include what they call Thai kick boxing as well (it is far from Muay Thai) many who take that feel the same way about their skill and that they are great fighters... God help them if they ever have to actually fight.

I always tell them that they better hope they are attacked by a wet paper bag, because that's all they'll be able to fight their way out of.

[Xue Sheng]

I always tell them that they better hope they are attacked by a wet paper bag, because that's all they'll be able to fight their way out of.

I have often wondered about Budokon as well but not enough to actually go check it out.

[shinbushi]

Sad but true. But, the wake up call is going to be when little Johnny tries to defend himself and ends up getting the crap beat out of him. :)
I do think that this happens a lot.


I know an excellent black belt who has transformed his school from adults to kids and now back to adults again. Like me, he had marketed to kids and cloned what the “Big Schools” were doing for character development. He began to pass kids for their “effort” in order to save their “self-esteem.” More and more he found his school had become a kids’ center with hundreds of children yelling “YES SIR!” at all the right moments during a speech.
Never mind that many of the kids really didn't know what they were responding to. They just knew at the end of a question to scream “YES SIR!” He also noticed that his upper-ranks began to look pretty weak. His exams became celebrations of mediocrity with lots of smiles, high fives, and weak technical skills. While passing every kid in exams may be good for retention, that very fact means eventually you are going to have a school full of Pooh Bears. Kids who are soft and nice, but easy targets, despite the color of the belt.
In time, my friend began to dislike his own school. He didn't want to be there. He missed the camaraderie and pride of creating black belts to whom he could teach fighting, without upsetting the student's mommy. Then one day, a threshold event occurred that left him disgusted and ready to make some serious changes. One of his 11-year-old Pooh Bears came running into the school, bleeding and crying. It seems another kid, who was no bigger or older, had popped him in the nose. The student had been standing in front of his karate school, wearing his uniform and his BLACK BELT while waiting for his parents. Somehow he got into an exchange of words with a neighborhood kid who punched or slapped him in the nose.
My friend was sickened. Not only had an unfortunate incident happened in front of his school, but one of his black belts was crying and bleeding. To paraphrase Tom Hanks in the movie A League of Their Own,” there’s no crying as a black belt!”
My friend was humiliated. That's not supposed to happen. When we were students, stories of our school’s black belts defending themselves always ended with the bad guy in the hospital. That event was the catalyst for the end of the student creed and passing exams for merely making the effort to show up. It has taken him two years, but he now is back to nearly as many active students, with only 20 percent under the age of 12--a complete reversal of where he had been when the kid got popped.
He looks forward to going to his school each night and is enjoying running the school with a healthy mixture of personal development and realistic training and expectations.
My friend is one of the best black belts I know. He and I have talked about this new dynamic in the industry dozens of times. The conclusion that I've come to is that the introduction into the classroom of positive character development is a good “undercurrent” for a school. It's the perfect counter-balance to good physical training and self-defense.
But many schools are out of balance. The line that, “We don’t just teach punching and kicking…” has become a cop out for not teaching strong core self-defense and technical skills. Don’t apologize for teaching punching and kicking (or grappling).
Technical execution and self-defense have become an afterthought to personal development. Why? It's a heck of a lot easier to teach a kid to act like a Boy Scout with a belt than to take the time, effort, and honesty required to produce a black belt who can defend himself or herself.
But, as many people have discovered, in time you may be teaching at a school you hardly recognize. You will have students who stand up straight when shaking hands during their “polite greetings” but who have rubber backbones.
Now we have guys promoting that the “Ultimate Black Belt” is earned only when you’ve spent time in a wheelchair to “understand the plight of the disabled” or spent a day blindfolded so you too can feel the pain of someone who is “sight challenged.” I think this is “reality challenged.” This sounds more like a freshman sociology course or the Peace Corps than the martial arts.
It’s important to be OK with the fact that martial arts can’t be all things to all people. The very term martial means military. Military relates to matters of war. This doesn’t mean each class is devoted to killing or war tactics; it means that our foundation is one of peace through superior firepower. It’s a program of self-respect and self-worth that starts with the concept that ‘I am worth protecting. No one will touch me without my permission.’
In a good program, as your skills improve, your sense of contribution, respect, and responsibility increases as well. To me, the ultimate black belt is a noble warrior who uses the martial arts as a method of personal and physical growth. It is a very individual pursuit that is better taken eyes wide open than blindfolded.
These are core attitudes and benefits that were inherent in the arts long before any student creed or “Ultimate Black Belts.”

[Brandon Fisher]

I won't teach kata without bunkai its meaningless without the bunkai. Really as all ready said its a dance. But true kata is not a dance its fighting application and many of the techniques in okinawan kata are devastating but there are different levels that must be taught appropriate for ones rank, ability and knowledge. I teach shorin ryu but not watered down I don't hessitate to show the more effective / devastating techniques to my advanced and some intermediate students.

[meth18au]

I have heard that before and although I should not be surprised I am. I have heard the same about those Aerobic classes that include what they call Thai kick boxing as well (it is far from Muay Thai) many who take that feel the same way about their skill and that they are great fighters... God help them if they ever have to actually fight.


Don't you hate it when they do that!!! My local gym, where I go to lift weights, has night classes called "Body Combat" run by a "fully qualified fitness instructor". I hear they do an 8 week course to qualify for as an instructor. Talk about the easy way. The description of this class is "a cardiovascular based class which includes boxing, kickboxing and Muay Thai- a great workout for anyone". Geez, I've sat back and watched these classes. Absolutely disgraceful, and it really gets on my nerves. I feel it just pimps the arts out, and really waters them down. Now i know how Karate guys must feel when they see McDojo's pop up around the place!!!

:)

[Danjo]

Don't you hate it when they do that!!! My local gym, where I go to lift weights, has night classes called "Body Combat" run by a "fully qualified fitness instructor". I hear they do an 8 week course to qualify for as an instructor. Talk about the easy way. The description of this class is "a cardiovascular based class which includes boxing, kickboxing and Muay Thai- a great workout for anyone". Geez, I've sat back and watched these classes. Absolutely disgraceful, and it really gets on my nerves. I feel it just pimps the arts out, and really waters them down. Now i know how Karate guys must feel when they see McDojo's pop up around the place!!!

:)

Yeah. I always want to walk in and ask, "When do we spar?"

[Xue Sheng]

Don't you hate it when they do that!!! My local gym, where I go to lift weights, has night classes called "Body Combat" run by a "fully qualified fitness instructor". I hear they do an 8 week course to qualify for as an instructor. Talk about the easy way. The description of this class is "a cardiovascular based class which includes boxing, kickboxing and Muay Thai- a great workout for anyone". Geez, I've sat back and watched these classes. Absolutely disgraceful, and it really gets on my nerves. I feel it just pimps the arts out, and really waters them down. Now i know how Karate guys must feel when they see McDojo's pop up around the place!!!

:)

yup

I recently saw the Tae Bo kick bag in a catalog, it looks like one of those blow up things I use to hit as a kid. My first thought was “give me a break” My second was “that is pretty funny”



I do not think the tae bo founder is calling it a martial art but many who do it think it is and I got to wonder how much reality in striking do you actually get from hitting a balloon?