Claims on the Internet.

[RyuShiKan]

Claims on the Internet.

Lately there has been much dispute over dubious claims made on the Internet and people unwilling to corroborate their claims. Mind you this is not aimed at anyone specific since I have come across several such cases over the last 2 or 3 years.

There are certain folks that think we should overlook dubious claims if the person or persons have the proper ability or skill level in whatever it is they do.

Is it me or does this type of thinking sound a bit off not to mention dishonest.

By their rational I could declare to have gotten a PhD. from Harvard and it wouldn’t matter if I really ever went there as long as I knew my subject matter well enough, and anyone that dare doubt my claim and ask me for my credentials is nothing more than an unhappy trouble maker.

Companies will often ask to see a persons diploma, grade point averages and letters of reference………..why do you think that is?
Maybe they are just part of this big group of unhappy troublemakers that have nothing better to do.
In the martial arts world there are people that have faked or claimed certain credentials when in fact they had no connection to that particular school or teacher. Either way, be academics or MAs it is still committing a type of fraud. If we turn a blind eye to such things are we not also guilty of perpetuating that same lie. Kind of like if you are not part of the solution you’re part of the problem……

People have commented that if you really doubt their skill why don’t you go and check them out.
This has become the all too common “War Cry” for people that are on the defensive from making or being associated with folks that make just such dubious claims. They know it will never happen since most people won’t travel to the next state to do something like let alone visit someone they don’t care for, so they can feel safe in saying such things from the comfort of their chair.

I think, and this is my very limited psychological opinion, that people that claim multiple high (bogus) dan grades are similar to those women that buy lots of jewelry.
Some MA people need all those high dan grades to look, sound and feel more legit and those women that buy too much jewelery do so to make themselves feel more beautiful, and worthy of attention.

Having said that, many MA people that claim all those lofty ranks also make statements like “I have been in xxxx number of real life situations so I know what I am talking about because I have proved it in real life”.
Statements like these also are difficult if not impossible to corroborate.

I hold MA people to a higher level of integrity than non-MA people since MA people are supposed to have the skill and hopefully the responsibility to know where and when to use their art which has the potential to be deadly. Part of the responsibility of knowing a martial art is being a person of good moral character………lying and making fraudulent claims is not what I would call sound moral character.

 

[KenpoDragon]

Very well said,RYUSHIKAN,I agree with you on this matter,but I must say what specific,claims to fame are you referring to??? You have peeked my interest on this matter,I know of some individuals who claim this or that but which ones are you referring to?:mst: :samurai:

With Honor and Respect,
Mr.Tanaka:asian:

 

[RyuShiKan]

As I said earlier it is not aimed at specific individuals.
However, there are several folks out there that claim ranks over 5th dan in no less than 10 arts, some claim to be PhDs, one was is still claiming a PhD from a University he made up and was selling advanced University degrees and got busted for it.

 

[yilisifu]

I don't think RyuShihkan is pointing his finger at any one in particular. But on this board there have been people who claim high dan grades but who cannot or will not back them up, and if anyone questions their claim he/she is labelled as a "troublemaker."

 

[RyuShiKan]

Several people have claimed connections to Asian teachers and were found out to have no connection or at the very most met them for one day.
A few years ago someone claimed they were highly trained in and connected to a style my friend used to belong to here in Japan.
I made a phone call to ask my friend about this individual and come to find out that person had only met the head teacher of that style for one day and never actually trained with him. My friend remembered it well because when that person returned to the US they asked the Honbu he had visited for dan rank!
That same individual claimed rank in a style from Okinawa another phone call and he was proven yet again to be passing himself off as something he was not.

 

[Mike Clarke]

It is a mark of immaturity to claim things one has not earned or been awarded through legitimate means. This has not detured some folks though as we have seen on this board and others.

Claims on the net are often wild due to the space between those making the claims and those who are in a postion to [physically] prove them wrong. Also, one must not forget your point RSK, that even if an individual has some skill, it does not give them the rite to claim endorsment from groups or instructors they have not trained with.

Due to the nature of the net I doubt this problem will ever be solved? And due to the nature of some human beings, I doubt this problem will ever go away either? But you know such things are not new nore exclusive to the net.

I recognize people for what they are as I see them, not what they tell me they are. I observe them and make my own judgment. I expect others to do the same towards me. The certificates and deplomas I have been awarded over the years, I take as my teachers endorsment of my character and abilities, but I don't expect anyone else to automatically agree with them.

When people come to know me and see how I live and train, they will make their own minds up about me. Their opinion may or may not agree with that of my teachers, but as I'm concerned only in the views of my sensei, then I can live with other peoples opinions [either way] without concern.

Mike.

 

[Matt Stone]

RyuShiKan and I both knew an individual in Japan whose martial arts training and skill were at the very best dubious. His methods, techniques and claims to lineage and rank were more akin to a comic book than traditional martial arts.

I knew another person who claimed to hold 5th dan or higher in 9 different arts. He was 23.

While they were both very kind people, what concerns me the most about what they do is the fact that people who are ignorant of the effectiveness of any particular martial art will train with them, achieve a rank at some point, and think they are empowered with their skills and training to be capable of defending themselves against attacks.

When people either create their own art from arts they have studied (often not long enough to realize that what they think they are contributing to the MA community already exists in various forms in all of the arts they previously studied), or create their own art out of thin air, they do the public a huge disservice. They are presenting themselves as purveyors of material that is dangerous - not to the attacker, but to the consumer.

It is for reasons like this that there are laws against committing fraud. And fraud is exactly what it is.

Sure, a person can study multiple arts. Sure, a person could possibly achieve rank in multiple arts. But sometimes you have to admit that enough is enough.

"Instructors" who are of dubious background and training, who either cannot or will not come clean about the reality of their background (I have heard it told that Olaf Simon of Temple Kung Fu fame never studied martial arts a day in his life... ), are doing nothing more than stealing the fees from their unwitting students, and it is no less a theft than if the money were conned from them in a hundred other ways.

I disagree with organizations for a lot of reasons, but one good reason for them is to ensure standards are maintained and that people are unable to say they are something that in fact they are not.

Just my humble and devalued 2 yen...

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

 

[James Kovacich]

Originally posted by Yiliquan1

When people either create their own art from arts they have studied (often not long enough to realize that what they think they are contributing to the MA community already exists in various forms in all of the arts they previously studied), they do the public a huge disservice. They are presenting themselves as purveyors of material that is dangerous - not to the attacker, but to the consumer.

It is for reasons like this that there are laws against committing fraud. And fraud is exactly what it is.


Gambarimasu.
:asian:

I do not agree at all. Fraud is fraud. But just because some people choose to walk a differant path does not mean that is pure crap and not work.

I beleive it "can be" crap or fake but is not automatically crap. Bruce told my Sigung that his fighters were competent within 18 months. At that time, that was unheard of in the martial arts. He did not learn a complete system. Was he afraud? Did he teach material that was dangerous to the consumer.

No to both questions.

 

[Matt Stone]

Akja -

Two things -

#1: If you are going to quote me, quote all of what I say so that things will appear in context. You failed to do so in my reply, and the excerpt you quoted was linked intimately to the sentence that followed it.

#2: If a person studies something only partially, and decides after said partial study that they belive the field of study to be lacking in certain particulars, how do they know that said particulars do not simply exist within the portion they have yet to study?

Brucie only studied part of what Wing Chun had to offer. His education in it was lacking. If it was a question of mobility, then perhaps rather than discounting Wing Chun's effectiveness in that area he could have delved further into it to discover in what ways Wing Chun does away with the perception of weakness in that area.

Or he could just make up his own thing instead.

Much easier to go the second route for most people, especially those who are bent on defrauding the public in order to pay the bills and feed their families. Noble motivations, surely, but the deed remains criminally negligent.

Did Brucie's experiment work? Dunno. I've never fought a JKD person. My teacher was a JKD chapter leader at one point, and his opinion is that JKD blows goats. Dunno. I've never trained in JKD. What I do know, however, is that in only a few well publicized and documented instances, making a call regarding a particular arts lack of something is often done either far too early, or with too little information.

Karate doesn't have joint locks or throws.

Jujutsu doesn't know how to punch or kick.

Taijiquan is just slow motion forms without any real fighting skill.

Wing Chun just stands still.

Arnis has no powerful kicks or punches.

Kenpo never hits you solidly, they just slap you to death.

All of these are assumptions that could be made readily from a knowledge of the above mentioned styles that is sorely lacking in depth (as all of the above statement are, at least in great part, false).

Finally, if I study two arts, both of which I state to be deficient in some particulars, then I create my own style, from whence does my "new and improved" style stem? If I never learned anything of sufficient worth, how then do I create something out of the blue that is somehow better than the sum of its parts?

Can't be done.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

 

[James Kovacich]

Originally posted by Yiliquan1
Akja -

Two things -

#1: If you are going to quote me, quote all of what I say so that things will appear in context. You failed to do so in my reply, and the excerpt you quoted was linked intimately to the sentence that followed it.

#2: If a person studies something only partially, and decides after said partial study that they belive the field of study to be lacking in certain particulars, how do they know that said particulars do not simply exist within the portion they have yet to study?

Brucie only studied part of what Wing Chun had to offer. His education in it was lacking. If it was a question of mobility, then perhaps rather than discounting Wing Chun's effectiveness in that area he could have delved further into it to discover in what ways Wing Chun does away with the perception of weakness in that area.

Or he could just make up his own thing instead.

Much easier to go the second route for most people, especially those who are bent on defrauding the public in order to pay the bills and feed their families. Noble motivations, surely, but the deed remains criminally negligent.

Did Brucie's experiment work? Dunno. I've never fought a JKD person. My teacher was a JKD chapter leader at one point, and his opinion is that JKD blows goats. Dunno. I've never trained in JKD. What I do know, however, is that in only a few well publicized and documented instances, making a call regarding a particular arts lack of something is often done either far too early, or with too little information.

Karate doesn't have joint locks or throws.

Jujutsu doesn't know how to punch or kick.

Taijiquan is just slow motion forms without any real fighting skill.

Wing Chun just stands still.

Arnis has no powerful kicks or punches.

Kenpo never hits you solidly, they just slap you to death.

All of these are assumptions that could be made readily from a knowledge of the above mentioned styles that is sorely lacking in depth (as all of the above statement are, at least in great part, false).

Finally, if I study two arts, both of which I state to be deficient in some particulars, then I create my own style, from whence does my "new and improved" style stem? If I never learned anything of sufficient worth, how then do I create something out of the blue that is somehow better than the sum of its parts?

Can't be done.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

I left off the "or" part of the sentence because thats how I readit as being "either or".

Second no 2 JKD's are the same. So your Sifu's experience can't reflect all.

Ca Yili be judged that easily?

 

[fringe_dweller]

Originally posted by Yiliquan1
Akja -

Finally, if I study two arts, both of which I state to be deficient in some particulars, then I create my own style, from whence does my "new and improved" style stem? If I never learned anything of sufficient worth, how then do I create something out of the blue that is somehow better than the sum of its parts?

Can't be done.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

That is a great question.....

A question for you Yiliquan, how long do you think you need to study/train in a system before you can come to a point where you realise that what you are looking for is not going to be found within the system you are learning?

Respectfully,

 

[A.R.K.]

Fringe,

I would venture a minimum age of 22 and at least 3 years in a discipline would qualify an individual to have enough information to begin a new system.

'Claims on the internet'? Well how would one actually substantiate a claim to everyone's satisfaction. If the requirement is to belong to a certain organization...many would fail I think. Is it having a certain name on a certificate? I don't think anyone would say this. How about a certain lineage? No, I don't think that would say anything at all. The true test is skill, experience and perhaps teaching ability.

If individuals with Dan's in other systems seek you out to be trained by you, that is another validation point. Paper??? Doesn't mean a thing if it can't be backed up with action, at least at some point in the individuals life.

I think far to many people worry about what the other person has or claims and use the excuse of it 'damaging' the arts. A BB doesn't mean any more or less than what it means to you.

A low kyu belt might very well hand a sound beating to a high Dan in another style based on practical knowledge, experience in the real world and what is taught in either system. I put far more stock in real world experience than I do things such as kata known, years in service/grade, tournaments participated in/won, degrees of Dan 'earned'. The bottom line is what is done in defense of yourself or another. Not paper.

Yes far to much time and energy is spent in trying to 'keep the arts pure'. That is simply a catch phrase. Everything is subjective and relative. This cannot be denied.

Robert.....what is your Dan and in what style? Now can you 'prove' it to us here on martial talk?

:asian:

 

[fringe_dweller]

Wow.... three years?
I've been studying hapkido for three years now and I'm only half way through the colour belts. I would in no way consider myself ready to start my own style.

I guess when it comes down to it, someone starting their own style doesn't really worry me too much unless they claim that their style has roots in x, y and z. That's when deception kicks in.

Respectfully,

 

[Aegis]

To me, the idea of making up a new system after 3 years training is ridiculous! There is no way anyone is going to be experienced enough to teach their own system fully after three years, let alone make a new, better one. To my mind, three years should be about the point where you can take a full lesson for low grades under the supervision of your instructor. After 4 or 5 years, you might be trusted to run your own club, but would still need to be learning at another club on a regular basis.

I would certainly need a very good reason to even consider training under someone who has created their own system, especially after only a few years training.

 

[MartialArtist]

5th dan in 9 arts?

I've been training in TKD for decades, and it took over a decade to even get to 1st dan.

5th dan, even in McDojos/McDojangs, takes at least ten years. In McDojangs, I see that there's a test every month or so, and some black belt ranks have a point system where you have to get 5 to get a new dan. Even so, it takes a substantial amount of time.

Oh, BTW, I have eight black belts from eight different systems... Technically, I can get a white belt, dye it black, and I can say that I have a "black belt".

Minimum age of 22 and 3 years of experience to formulate a new system? Are you crazy? Almost all the traditional combat styles have hundreds if not thousands of years of refinement, and since human anatomy and physiology has remained the same, there are general principles and techniques found in every system. I don't think 3 years counts. Hell, a three year practitioner has nowhere near the experience or the skill level or the knowledge to develop his own system. No doubt that it will be a half-*** system which will try to "be different and unique" which basically means it will get you in trouble. That kind of ******** will get you killed. No question about it. I don't care how "clever" the "system" may be, if the founder of the system can't even hold his own against his own students, then I won't take it. And when you start a new system, new students as well as experienced students will look for your teachings. The experienced ones will find out sooner or later, and same with the beginners.

And Mya Ryu, you want RyuShiKan to prove his credibility? Why won't you check his sources?

 

[MartialArtist]

Originally posted by Aegis
To me, the idea of making up a new system after 3 years training is ridiculous! There is no way anyone is going to be experienced enough to teach their own system fully after three years, let alone make a new, better one. To my mind, three years should be about the point where you can take a full lesson for low grades under the supervision of your instructor. After 4 or 5 years, you might be trusted to run your own club, but would still need to be learning at another club on a regular basis.

I would certainly need a very good reason to even consider training under someone who has created their own system, especially after only a few years training.

I agree

To me, 3 years would be the end of the "conditioning" era which is more of getting you in shape, toughening you up, and learning a few of the basics and getting them down so you can get to the meat and the bread and butter.

 

[A.R.K.]

Well...

Dr. Jagoro Kano at the age of 22, after a few years training in Ju Jitsu founded the style now known as.....

JUDO

Bruce Lee, who to my knowledge never officially held a 'BB' founded JKD before the age of 30 as another example of ability overriding other considerations.

:asian:

 

[TLH3rdDan]

3 years???? no offense but what are you smoking? and can i have some? ok most arts have a minimum time in grade of 5 years to test for a BB, so 3 years would put you at the intermediate level of say a blue belt or a green belt... how can anyone even begin to think that someone that is that new to the arts can go out and create a new art... its not possible... again how can you think that an art is useless and has nothing to offer if you are only begining? if that was the case i could go out and study any art i wanted for 3 years stop go buy a black belt and a roll of red tape or maybe even a red striped black belt and proclaim my self the high muckity muck grand puba master of all masters and open a school teaching what ever i thought would work... with only a very very basic understanding of that one art and of course give it a new name in the process... its just not right... i would think in order to create a new art you should at least have studied the one art you are in till at least 4th or 5th dan then if you have not found what you are looking for try something different dont try making up a new one yet... cause as it has been stated... there is nothing new when it comes to martial arts... there are only so many ways to punch and kick and only so many ways to combine them effectively and news flash with all the arts that are out there im sure they have all been tried... just my 2 cents

 

[Matt Stone]

Originally posted by fringe_dweller
A question for you Yiliquan, how long do you think you need to study/train in a system before you can come to a point where you realise that what you are looking for is not going to be found within the system you are learning?

How long until you know enough to start your own style/system?

Maybe only a lifetime or two...

Seriously? It really depends... I started training in Yiliquan in 1986. I got the equivalent to my 1st degree black belt in 1998. That was 12 years. I got the equivalent to my 2nd degree black belt in 2000. So 14 years just to get nidan grade... I still have so much to learn before I am competent enough to really feel I have a handle on all there is to learn. I'm not talking about knowing everything, being able to do everything, hell, I'm not even talking about having seen everything!

So for me, if I wanted to do the "Matt Stone-ryu" of Yiliquan, I'd have to put in at least another 20 years before I felt I knew the material I have been exposed to well enough to decide yea or nay on any part of it...

So for me, since I am currently 34, add 20 more years, and when I am in my mid-50s I might feel I am nearly to the point of understanding what I am doing well enough to say what I think should stay or go.

22 years old with 3 years of training? Please! I don't trust soldiers that are 22 with 4 years of military service behind them to know what they are doing well enough to leave them unsupervised, much less to think that someone who has spent 3 years under the tutelage of Sensei Billy Ray at the local Super Discount Karate Dojo just inside the Wal-Mart Super Store entrance would know enough to start their own art! Not trying to be nasty, but that is flatly absurd!!!

Once upon a time, folks spent the bulk of their entire day training, day after day, under the direct supervision of their teacher. After a few years, they were well trained and knew quite a bit about their particular style. That simply isn't the fact with the modern world. The modern reality is that work, family and other activities curtial quite a bit of our training. I work from 0600 - 1700 everyday (including PT in the morning), and with an hour for lunch, a few hours with the kids doing homework, maybe some time for me and the wife, dinner, I am still going to bed around 2400 or 0100. Training gets squeezed in where it'll fit.

So for someone to say that after only a meager 3 years of training, on the average of a few hours a night 3 or 4 times a week (and let's be honest, folks, for most people that is a lot of training - perhaps not for those of us who dream about this crap in our sleep, or who do Naihanchi Shodan while standing at the copy machine, but for the Regular Joe that is a pretty gruelling schedule for "ka-rotty" class), they are ready to start their own style...?

I doubt it.

Average Joe +Average Ka-rotty School X Average Training Time = at least 15 years of training or more before they should even think about teaching, much less "creating" a "new" style. And even then I don't think they are really ready...

But, like anal sphincters, this opinion is mine and imperfect to boot. My teacher started his own style, sure. But not until after he had already spent decades training. And as a gruding nod to MRJ, in the years I have been doing Yiliquan I have seen it go from version 1.1 to 1.5 to 2.0 and we are still evolving and growing. So sure, he created it and unveiled it in 1982, but it has been developing since then... It is 21 years old now, and is beginning to solidify. Time has tested it, and so far it has survived. I have seen too many homegrown styles sprout and die on the vine in just the time I have been a Senior, much less over the years I have been training total.

Just my opinions, though...

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

 

[A.R.K.]

For those that might have missed it the first time

Dr. Jagoro Kano at the age of 22, after a few years training in Ju Jitsu founded the style now known as.....

...JUDO.

:asian: