a saying about teaching the art

[Mark Lynn]

Originally posted by thekuntawman
what i meant to say about the venus sisters, is that their dad was not an expert tennis player, yet he trained them into champions. they became champions, not because of what he taught them, but because they played so many matches, and he studied the way the game is played. so, he learned while they learned.

the martial artist, cannot do this with his students. before he can teach someone to fight (and even to defend his family or his own life) he should already know what he is talking about. somebody's life is depending on the trust the student has for his teacher.

all that, because some people think you can know how to fight, without fighting.

"fight without fighting" is a line in a bruce lee movie, people.

Kuntawman

Again good point with the Venus sisters.

"the martial artist ,cannot do this with his students. befroe he can teach someone to fight(and even to defend his family or his own life) he should know what he is talking about."

I agree, however are you saying that a person can't defend themselves without knowing how to fight? Can a person defend themselves from a weapons attack without having ever stepped foot inside a martial art school or a master's doorway? I disagree. Daily people defend themselves (kids and adults) without ever darkening the doorway of a training hall.

Is sparring a true way to learn how to protect yourself in a self defense situation? I don't think so. While it has it's place it's not the only way. In fact I think it can lead to some bad habits.

1) How many fights have you seen where two people grab sticks and face off with each other?

2) For the BJJ student who gets down on the mat and wrestles for the submission locks (technically they are sparring) but is this good for self defense?

3) The TKD stylists who practice sparring but can't hit to the head (so they don't) is this realistic?

4) The Ultimate fighter in the ring (Pride or Octagon fighting) all bulked up on steriods and pain medication is this the way to train for self defense?

Each way here has it's problem when it comes to self defense training. And yet each one is protrayed as being applicable to self defense and you talk to the instructors or the students and they will try and convince you it is the best way (their way).

Let me clarify the bad habits
1) Padded stick sparring can lead to you not recognizing leagitament hits that without pads you would respect more.
a) same goes for amour

2) BJJ or any submission fighting if you train for submission you could try and apply the same when you need to do something else. Like get loose and get up maybe.

3) TKD olympic style fighting produces great kickers and good endurance, however the not protecting the head to hand techniques I think is counter productive for self defense.

4) And the Ultimate Fighting great sport but the possible drug habits formed (need I say more).

I'm not against sparring. In my karate days that's the majority of what I did at my instructor's private dojo (it's still what some are doing to this day). I understand this side of the discussion, I just see it different now than I use to.

With respect

 

[Mark Lynn]

Everyone

I'm not knocking sparring, nor am I saying that it shouldn't be practiced. It was the point or spirit of the posts that you must be a good fighter to be able to teach that I disagree with.

If you are wanting to be a great fighter than you should seek out the teacher who has alot of experience fighting. However I think for the majority of students here in the states that we might teach, sparring isn't going to be the main reason that they come to class. In fact it could turn them off if it is introduced to early (at least this is the thought in the karate world) (or it was the last time I was looking into it).

What turned me on to the FMA was seeing in one 8 hour seminar more things that I could relate to self defense than I had in 2 years of American TKD/karate training. It was eye opening to say the least and what has started me on an 18 year quest now to study the FMA. In time seeing the connections that existed between my primary system (TKD) and the FMA (and from there about every other system I've looked into) is what has kept me going and trying to learn more about the FMA.

Over the years I trained at my instructor's private dojo, and a couple of commercial schools, as well as taught some classes for a period of time as well. However the majority of my skill and knowledge (TKD related) came from sparring in his dojo (garage) against people who were my seniors and getting my butt kick alot.

Now I was taught my katas and techniques when it was just me and my instructor (when people didn't show up) and I knew them pretty well. The down side to this was that I missed out on a huge part of the TKD system because I didn't learn the skill drills. Therefore when I taught, I taught good basics however I seriously lacked in other areas. Nowadays another instructor and friend of mine and I feel we got left out in a sense being trained this way.

When I was in another town the big school there was from a former (then current) kickboxer. He brought up a whole group of student's/instructors who knew mainly how to fight but nothing about katas. Imagine my surpise going to a tournament and seeing brown belt forms in black belt division (by 3rd and 4th dans) no one knew anything higher. But they could spar. Later on I watched a belt test where the testers got hurt because they were asked to do breaks they hadn't been taught how to do. But they could all fight, except after they broke their hands.

And sparring for me wasn't real fun, in fact it was almost schiziod. I was use to using almost anything, elbows, knees, sweeps, knees, kicks to the knees etc. etc. However in any school I went to (except my instructors) I had to tone it down. That blew all of my set ups and then it was like relearning how to spar. I adapated however.

On self defense:
I think the FMA has some of the best it not the best methods of teaching weapon based self defense. And many of the self defense techniques won't work when sparring. However they can be trained for in controlled ways after learning the basic techniques. Those basic techniques lead to other techniques which leads to seeing things in a different light (the connections) so to speak. For instance:

1) First time I ever had to disarm a gun (a shot gun and a pistol) (in a aikijjitsu seminar on the spot with no instruction) I used an idea/principle that I learned in disarming a stick several years before.

2) Learning a staff disarm for the first time I applied the disarm I learned in Arnis and was able to teach it to my partner who couldn't do it.

3) Taking different weapons whether real life related (mag lites, wrenches, screw drivers, machetes, canes etc. etc.) or traditional (staff, jo, tonfa, nunchaku, sai, kama, etc.etc.) and applying them to drills or techniques.

As instructors IMHO we are to help the student meet their needs not ours. If their needs are self defense, self improvement, sparring whatever than we are to meet their needs. If we don't then we won't have students.

It's late and I've rambled enough.

 

[thekuntawman]

boarman,
you have good points, but i disagree about the uselessness of sparring. i believe that sparring is the closes test to a real fight that you can get, and it must be done in a strange place with strangers for you to have benefits. sparring with fellow students is to peaceful and comfortable, even when you are sparring hard.

i also feel that yes you can learn to fight without martial arts, and you can figure things out on your own, but you save time when you go to someone who has done it so many times before, and they are an expert at it. other wise you will be re-inventing and re-discovering what has already been learned.

and finally, a teacher is really betrays his students when he has them to depend there life on what he is teaching, when he does not even know if the teaching will save them when they really need it. in a traditional philippine martial arts community, any person you recognize as an expert will sooner or later be invited to show what he knows, and if you gave him false confidence in skills he really doesnt have, it is embarassing to him and your whole clan.

 

[thekuntawman]

Originally posted by The Boar Man
kuntawman



1) How can you be a master of karate with only true knowledge of kata and philosophy?
a) "..if I have been promoted by another master." Does this hold true for the FMA student as well? What makes the FMA any different from any other martial art when it comes to being promoted. If a master of karate promotes a student, and a master of the FMA promotes a student, than is there a difference between the two.

On the karate thought back when Itosu was training it was a hard life. You had to know how to defend yourself and that was how the art/systems were taught for self defense. After he had advanced in years he then decided to make the system available in a format for the educational system. But this didn't mean he didn't know how to fight, just that he had chosen not to. (this was the point I was trying to make)

I would venture to say that the hard training that the masters of old went through in any form of martial arts is what made them what they are. Whether they sparred alot or not.

a few genius men created good fighting styles without fighting, you are right about that. like one is masutatsu oyama with his kyukushinkai karate. here is a guy who studied some karate styles, and used the idea of hard physical training to create superior fighters regardless of the technique they had, if it was superior or not, but they are stronger, faster and more durable than the average fighter. he was not known for fighting with other masters even when he was young (outside of his own classmates). another one i can think of is carlito lanada, the founder of kuntaw ng pilipinas. he had a background in japanese martial arts in a filipino community known for great fighters, but did not participate in tournaments or challenge matches. yet, when he created his own style, he trained some of the best fighters around. and mr lanada bested me in a friendly match when i was in my 20s and he was 60 i think at that time.

but the differences with these two men and many of the self made teachers we see in all countries, is that first, both masters paid there dues with a master who was already experienced in both fighting and teaching. they also believed in a very important thing which can be a substitute for superior technique, hard physical training. finally, as teachers they are able to modify their philosophy about the martial arts, because they trained many students to fight in competition with other gyms. and, just like the boxing trainer with a poor amature record, he learns from his pupil's experience. but this is such a small number of success out of the number who fail. you have a better chance of training students better when you already know, than if you learn as you go. yes, it can be done, but the chances are very small. if you look at cus damato and floyd maywether senior, it took many years of average students to get a star, when you compare it to angelo dundee, emmanuel steward and adrian davis, who have so many great fighters in his wing.

but you know, being a good fighter doesnt mean you will be a good teacher...:asian:

 

[moromoro]

to the boarman, if you dont spar with the sticks how can you actually say you are good? its like target practice with blanks if you do not spar.....

 

[Mark Lynn]

Kuntawman

Sorry I screwed up not qouting.

Anyway again please understand I'm not advocating not sparring, I was just saying it isn't the only way. What I mean it is one piece of the system (an important piece!) but not the only piece.

Another good example of a good fighter was Jean Yevs Theriult (the ICEMAN) who was a kickboxer back in the 80's. He learned (if I remember right) four simple kicks and dominated the Heavywieght division of PKA for several years. But he earned the equivilent of a Yellow or Orange belt in a karate or TKD system.

Anyway you brought up some good points and I enjoyed the discussion.

 

[thekuntawman]

hello boarman

your example of the ice man was a good one. i think a lot of the great fighters did not get a black belt (steve nasty anderson is one, i think), but you know in the philippine martial arts, they do not traditionally give out a black belt or "certificate". sometimes a teacher will "release" you, or he will say "that is all i have to teach you", or your time to stay with him is up, then its up to you to go and develop yourself. like bart said, most people did not even have a name of there style, just a personal method of fighting.

i dont think sparring is the end of it, but i believe it is something you have to have, yet so many teachers down play the importance of sparring and competition. many people teach "fighting" methods, they reject drills and form, but they still dont believe in sparring. i think this is too much theory. a good idea, but too much theory.

one person, in my opinion, is bruce lee. he had good ideas, good training methods, but his only testing is on his own students. just like a great fighters, like roy jones jr, they have good skills, but unless you put it to the test against the best fighters you can find, you skills will only go so far. bruce lee has access to the best fighters in the country, but he did not take the opportunity to test his jeet kune do/jun fan against them. (i think he sparred chuck norris once, and didnt do so good). now his followers like to quote his students to say what a great fighter bruce lee is, but the best person to ask would be another great fighter who he has fought. in the case of roy jones, he hurts himself when he is only fighting these pancake fighters, and not going after the best.

for the martial artist who has good techniques and strategies, you cannot rely on logic alone to say if you will be effective or not. you must have strangers to test it on. in my school, we usually have a fight night, but guess who comes to it? boxers, wandering martial artist (who do not belong to schools, they just learn a little here and a little there) and very few martial arts friends of my students (usually jujitsu and tae kwon do, who everyone likes to put down). the ones who know me, never show up, (or only to watch) and they never bring students. the martial artist is becoming a scared artist, especially the FMA ones.

 

[Mark Lynn]

Originally posted by moromoro
to the boarman, if you dont spar with the sticks how can you actually say you are good? its like target practice with blanks if you do not spar.....

Moromoro

Sorry I didn't have time to respond yesterday. To a degree I agree with you. I believe in sparring as part of teaching the art or system just not the whole art.

Actually I don't say I'm good (at least I haven't been touting that here that I know of), and I don't have as much experience sparring with sticks as I have with empty hand. In fact I'll be the first one to say I need more experience at it.

My problem has been training partners. Because of my job I haven't taught except on the side for the past couple of years, and that has been to some other instructors (karate buddies). And since these guys all live 1 hour away when we get together we work more on drills and the system than sparring since they get together and work on the stuff in between our workouts.

These guys all know how to fight empty hand and they are not really worried about fighting with sticks.

I on the other hand recognize that in this area I do lack and I'm trying to rectify that by trying to get students in my area. Which is why I'm trying to start a FMA class, and then in time I will introduce saprring in some form or another.

However one way I have checked my progress has been to go out and attend seminars and such in different areas on a variety of martial arts (although now mainly FMA related) and test my self in learning new material and applying things that I have learned and meeting new people. In otherwords getting out of my safe zone and trying to work with as many people as I can.

Not having a FMA teacher here as a family member or living in an area where there are actual FMA teachers from the Philippines, I take what I can get. In a sense I put my money where my mouth is and go out to learn whatever I can from genuine FMA (filipino)instructors first, and then the down line students. I tell my friends and have even paid for them at times to go see someone like GM E. Presas because I pale in comparision. I know once they see the real deal than they might be more serious about it.

Which is why I went out on a limb last year and brought him to the area and will again this year. Because people need to see the real deal not just his down line student. Not that you can't learn from the down line student or instructor. Just I think people need to see the real deal.

Sorry again for the long post.

With respect

 

[Mark Lynn]

Originally posted by thekuntawman
hello boarman

your example of the ice man was a good one. i think a lot of the great fighters did not get a black belt (steve nasty anderson is one, i think), but you know in the philippine martial arts, they do not traditionally give out a black belt or "certificate". sometimes a teacher will "release" you, or he will say "that is all i have to teach you", or your time to stay with him is up, then its up to you to go and develop yourself. like bart said, most people did not even have a name of there style, just a personal method of fighting.

i dont think sparring is the end of it, but i believe it is something you have to have, yet so many teachers down play the importance of sparring and competition. many people teach "fighting" methods, they reject drills and form, but they still dont believe in sparring. i think this is too much theory. a good idea, but too much theory.

one person, in my opinion, is bruce lee. he had good ideas, good training methods, but his only testing is on his own students. just like a great fighters, like roy jones jr, they have good skills, but unless you put it to the test against the best fighters you can find, you skills will only go so far. bruce lee has access to the best fighters in the country, but he did not take the opportunity to test his jeet kune do/jun fan against them. (i think he sparred chuck norris once, and didnt do so good). now his followers like to quote his students to say what a great fighter bruce lee is, but the best person to ask would be another great fighter who he has fought. in the case of roy jones, he hurts himself when he is only fighting these pancake fighters, and not going after the best.

for the martial artist who has good techniques and strategies, you cannot rely on logic alone to say if you will be effective or not. you must have strangers to test it on. in my school, we usually have a fight night, but guess who comes to it? boxers, wandering martial artist (who do not belong to schools, they just learn a little here and a little there) and very few martial arts friends of my students (usually jujitsu and tae kwon do, who everyone likes to put down). the ones who know me, never show up, (or only to watch) and they never bring students. the martial artist is becoming a scared artist, especially the FMA ones.

Hello Kuntawman

I just spent an half an hour replying to your post and hit the wrong key (cleaning a hair off of the key board) and lost it. Dang the bad luck.

Oh well long post short.

I thought Steve "Nasty" Anderson was a black belt, I know he fought in the Grand Championships in the Black belt division.

On Bruce Lee: from the instructors that I have met who trained under him he was supposed to be the real deal. He had many fights in Hong Kong rpior to coming to the US, and he did have some fights here I think in Seattle, and in China town in LA or maybe Oakland. Although one instructor that I know told me about another incident between Mr. Lee and another karate guy where he didn't do well. I trust this guy but I have never found verifcation of the story so I don't know.

Other than that I agree with your post, I went into some other stuff before but it's time for bed.

I have enjoyed our discussion
With respect

Mark

 

[moromoro]

Because people need to see the real deal not just his down line student

man this is the TRUTH.................A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THIS WEBSITE DISARGEE but i believe you need to learn from the source while the source is still out there................... A lot of down the line students are not worried about fighting ability, and simply care of the size of thier clasess and their "grades" also many have spent little time with thier GM's and also it is never the same as trining with the GM........


well man i think its great what you are doing,

and good luck with your training



terry

 

[John J]

And many of the self defense techniques won't work when sparring.

There is a difference between a "fight" and "self-defense". Therefore, the type, timing and execution of techniques may also differ. It is dependent on the engagement. I define a “fight” as the physical result of two or more individuals who engaged over a dispute. In other words, the verbal dispute is somewhat of a mutual consent. Self-defense is the reaction towards an attack that is for the most part is non-consenting.

The training you do must also be geared towards this distinction but should be easily bridged together. However, a fight can turn into self-defense and self-defense can turn into a fight.

 

[Cruentus]

There have been many conversations and (sadly) arguements on the subject before. I have little time to really discuss this, so I am merely here to state my opinion.

In a nutshell my stance is this:

Sparring and Semi-Sparring is good, and in fact vital to proper developement as a martial artist.

However, we must be realistic at all times. Part of this is realizing that in class sparring, tournament sparring, and things of the like are merely training tools, and not to be confused with REAL self- defense or combat. If you confuse the two and fail to realize the difference, I believe that it could cost you your life if you are ever forced to defend it.

So.... Sparring=good; just always keep reality in mind, that's all.

 

[Mark Lynn]

moromoro

I stated before that I would be trying to bring GM E. Presas to the state of TX this summer. I just received notice that he won't be making it ot the states this year. What a let down, we had a great seminar last year and already I was generating buzz about him coming back. Oh well maybe in 2004.

take care
Mark

 

[Mark Lynn]

Originally posted by moromoro
man this is the TRUTH.................A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THIS WEBSITE DISARGEE but i believe you need to learn from the source while the source is still out there................... A lot of down the line students are not worried about fighting ability, and simply care of the size of thier clasess and their "grades" also many have spent little time with thier GM's and also it is never the same as trining with the GM........


well man i think its great what you are doing,

and good luck with your training



terry

moromoro

I couldn't agree with you more here. Not so much the grade issue but rather learning from the source. This is why I have made it a priority to seek out instruction from the main men themselves whenever I can. There is a big difference in watching and learning from someone like GM Remy, GM Ernesto, GM Toboada, and others than their downline students and instructors.

And I'm not knocking the downline instructors either, I've attended seminars/camps with GM Remy's MOTTs and Jeff Delaney and I've learned from them as well. Likewise I'm planning on attending the symposium that Dr. Barber is putting on to learn from GM Remy's other students. In fact while no one can teach or demonstrate the way GM Remy did, at the 2002 camp I attended the MOTTs did a good job and showed me some different applications of GM Remy's material and since their wasn't any language problem they went into greater detail than GM Remy usually did.

All in all though I take the real masters any day.

Take care
Mark

 

[Black Grass]

Moromoro wrote :
>A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THIS WEBSITE DISARGEE but i believe you need to learn from the source while the source is still out there.

I would disagree some what, but not entirely. Yes I believe that everyone should eventually train with the source ( the GM) eventually.

However, I believe depending on the teacher (GM) it can be more benifical to train with a undeling or as you say 'down the line students'. In some cases the GM can't express accurately what he trying to get across, he can show you, but explaining it is another matter.

An examples that comes to mind is Antonio 'Tatang' Ilustrisimo. I remember watching Tatang and Edgar Sulite doing 'laro-laro' a freestyle give and take drill. Watching I had no idea what Tatang was doing, he was just so fast it was hard to follow. It took Guro Edgars explaination for me to understand the subtilties. I was just a beginning student of kalis Ilustrsimo with Christopher Ricketts (but not a novice at eskrima). At the time if I was to train directly under Tatang I would probably not learned anything other than pain.

Vince
(aka Black Grass)

 

[Rob Wilson]

Howdy,

Here's 2 cents on a really interesting and informative thread:

1.) Teachers: I can learn something from everybody whether it is a concept from a master or a bit of "no way will I do what that guy did unless I want a cracked skull" reality from Joe Average. I try not to confuse great teachers with great fighters but in their own way each contributes and that is all that matters to me.

2.) Sparring: This, to me, is the ONLY way that you can learn to really appreciate how dangerous that stick can be. All the fancy techniques that work so well in front of the mirror are probably gonna go out the window along with a good chunk of your head when you get down to the real deal. (Unless you use them for faking, feinting or set-ups, or follow up.) The truth of the fight with a stick : WHACK WHACK somebody has a busted hand or face and is headed for worse. I think pads are good for beginners and I like gloves a whole lot but for the reality to set in you need pain. Plus nobody in the real world is going to wait for you to put on your gear. I have sparred with padded stick against guys who just don't realize that the shots they are taking would probably kill them without the pads and helmet. When we spar live stick they can't believe the difference- to me, WHAT difference? I don't like pads at all and I don't like pain at all; so I respect the other guy and use my head (but not to block).

Padded stick equals humiliation but live stick equals humiliation and pain- you guess which helps people remember better.

Thanks. Climbing off soapbox now.

Rob

 

[Mark Lynn]

Originally posted by Black Grass
Moromoro wrote :
>A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THIS WEBSITE DISARGEE but i believe you need to learn from the source while the source is still out there.

I would disagree some what, but not entirely. Yes I believe that everyone should eventually train with the source ( the GM) eventually.

However, I believe depending on the teacher (GM) it can be more benifical to train with a undeling or as you say 'down the line students'. In some cases the GM can't express accurately what he trying to get across, he can show you, but explaining it is another matter.

.....At the time if I was to train directly under Tatang I would probably not learned anything other than pain.

Vince
(aka Black Grass)

Vince

I agree with your post. In one of my earlier posts I mentioned how I perfered to try and seek out the GMs or the sources so to speak. GM Remy was a great teacher by demonstrating however his instruction on the fine points of the technique was lacking in areas. Of course the plus side to this was that it really made me think about the techniques and such and I (we) weren't spoon fed. Of course this also led to some confusion as to what the proper way to do the technique was between the students.

However I have gained more instruction about the techniques from his downline students/instructors so it helps to have it both ways.

GM Remy (and others) were (are) so far ahead of their students that watching them gave (gives) others a idea of what to shoot for. And to me that is the main goal of going to see them (seeking instruction from the GMs).

I went to a Akijujitsu seminar with a certain instructor, this guy was incredible. Absolutely did things that seemed magical in a sense with his throws and such. Now not that I could use his techniques, however he left such an impression on me of what could be accomplished with hard work and making an art/system their own. It was like catching a glimpse of the far off mountain in the clearing fog. You knew it was there, but you couldn't see it, now you get a glimpse of it and you can start your journey to it, knowing that someday if you stay the course you'll get there.

And that to me is the real value of seeking the sources even if they don't have the communication skills. You see how the system works at a higher level and what to strive for. And for this reason I try and encourage people to see them.

But I'll learn from anyone.

Mark

 

[thekuntawman]

rob wilson's post was made with a lot of wisdom. especially when he sad that sparring is THE ONLY way to learn the stick. just like riding a bike with no wheels, you only have the concept with out it, not the real thing.

i also agree with paul, about the sparring is not everything with learning to fight. but understand what makes me laugh at so called "filipino martial artist/fighting expert/combat instructors", that when you mention spar or tournament, the first thing out of there mouth is to say how unrealistic it is. you think we dont know that? of course we do, but like a loud can that's empty, you can tell whats in it by the noise it makes....these enemies of sparring and tournaments are afraid to fight, and they probaly cant fight, so they make sparring and tournament look like they are unimportant and harmful to martial arts training. just once i would like to hear FMA people say, sparring and tournaments are necessary part of martial arts training, and thats it. you dont have to tell us its not a street fight, we no that!

now, about learning from the source. what source are we talking about? source of the guy who is popular? source of the guy on the videotape? so what somebody has the title of grandmaster! most of the people we see as FMA TOTAL authority in the US are not the fighters you will learn the most from. what moromoro is talking about (that makes people so uneasy) is, that, you should also look at people who are not so popular. the ones who actually did the fighting, and dont fly around from city to city giving certificates. you know, before ernesto presas came to the US to do seminars, nobody was interested in him. i even heard a modern arnis teacher (who is on this board) say, that remy is the fighter not ernesto. funny. see in this country, you can buy your reputation or plan it, with your advertising. and this "hype" is what people look for when they decide what is the "best" style to learn. the source? how about go to the source of the philippines and find a teacher, even if you never heard of him. when i was introduced to ernesto and roberto presas, i didnt even know they are related to remy presas until i heard somebody say it (the style was called arjuken and presas style arnis). back then you could not get a foreginer to go into yaw yan, now, everybody want to go to a "yaw yan seminar" (good luck..)

 

[thekuntawman]

Originally posted by PAUL

Sparring and Semi-Sparring is good, and in fact vital to proper developement as a martial artist.

However, we must be realistic at all times. Part of this is realizing that in class sparring, tournament sparring, and things of the like are merely training tools, and not to be confused with REAL self- defense or combat. If you confuse the two and fail to realize the difference, I believe that it could cost you your life if you are ever forced to defend it.

So.... Sparring=good; just always keep reality in mind, that's all.

sorry i had to go.

anyway, i agree that sparring is not as realistic as a streetfight. but my question is, what is? the "realistic" combat experts like to put down sparring and tournament, but what do they think IS realistic training? prearranged technique practice? that is all i see them doing. they even put down full contact fighting and mix martial arts.

well back to my last posting, it is true that many teachers who were fighters are not good at teaching there style or not good in communication. BUT, does this mean you cant learn from him. or does it just mean you cant learn the way you want to learn from him. yes somebody can explain it in a softer way, or show you in a way you understand right away. but believe me the good fighters probably did not learn this way, but they still became good fighters. i learned this way, the hard way. i did not get a lot of explanation and "concept" when i was younger, but in fighting i did learn a lot myself, and i came to understand a lot of concept. some of it i realize it after looking back and talking about it. so which is the superior way to learn, the classroom/quick/right away learning? or learn it by doing? who is the teacher? one of the problems with the martial artist today is, he thinks he knows everything because of what he reads in magazines and on the internet. so now you have a guy walk away from a good teacher, because he is not "getting what he wants" from the teacher, or he "is not learning the way he things he should". arrogance and ignorance.

i would rather learn from a mike tyson, who can do what he is teaching, than one of the seminar muay thai expert who has never been in a fight, but he is "excellent teacher and technician". you guys are trying to learn without fighting, and you only fool yourself.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Originally posted by thekuntawman
. . . you dont have to tell us its not a street fight, we no that!

now, about learning from the source. what source are we talking about?
. . .
how about go to the source of the philippines and find a teacher, even if you never heard of him.
. . .
(good luck..)

thekuntawman,

So, if I choose to train with someone in this country who is Filipino and is not well known, is that good enough for you? Or, do I have to travel to the PI to get instruction even if it may or may not be as good or what I am looking for?

If I show up at your door, I still contend that most will not "PLAY" or spare with me. So, how do I fight? I know you said go to tournaments and ask around. Yet, let me ask, if I have faught with a stick and without a stick, on the matts and out on the streets? Does that count? Or does it have to be a fight that took place in the PI?

I respect pride in one's culture and one's country or heritage, yet I ask these questions out of respect to gain knowledge of your opinion.

Thank you
:asian: