So Let Me Get This Straight-- Why Don't We Have New Arts?

[JKDJade]

Welcome to Martial Talk, JKDJade. Hope you enjoy it.

I'm enjoying it so far. I'm new to forums, but heard great things about this one, so decided to join. I'm a long time martial artist (jack of all, master of none).

 

[JKDJade]

My theory is that people at one point applied their skills and so really knew what they were doing. They actually got to a point where they were prepared to innovate. We don't have much of that anymore, and even most instructors are only really skilled at applying the very specific style they train only in the context of that style. Cops sometimes use their skills in cop contexts, but that's not really a martial arts style. Same with other violent professions.

In MMA there is always a lot of innovation because there is a clear path to application, in a rule set that is not overly restrictive. So, you see a lot of innovation within MMA. Without application and genuine, high level expertise, you have a natural tendency to focus on preservation of tradition. Outside of application, folks fall back on the legitimacy and structure that tradition provides.

Look at it like this, if you don't fight, you aren't learning to fight better.

The chart below is Bloom's Taxonomy. A very simple shorthand for how to train folks to do things. Most martial arts schools get to a comprehension level for fighting skills (at best). They can talk about fighting with confidence. But the skills that they are applying are training skills... forms, sparring, kata, chi sao. If that's what you're applying, that's what you're developing expertise in doing. If your expertise is internal (i.e., you are an expert in a system), you will only ever be able to innovate within that system. And in a traditional martial art style, innovating within the system is not generally encouraged.

Said simply, folks who learn a fighting art but never fight are not well equipped to do more than replicate as faithfully as possible what they have taught. They have no personal experience to help them evaluate their system and improve it.

View attachment 23175

Great points. Its' the old Martial vs Art. Does want to learn movement and theory while getting health benefits, or does one want to learn how to fight.? I started in TKD, which I still think is a great art to learn footwork, speed and getting conditioned. As teenager we moved, and we had no TKD places, so my only option was a Okinawan Karate. I hated it, but stuck with it until the school closed down... after the Marine Corps, I did a lot of kickboxing...spent some time going back to traditional with Shaolin Kung Fu...and the past few years have only focused on JKD.

For my kids, we have a lot of schools near use, they have the pick of litter. But I decided nudge them into Kenpo. Why? Because it's a good overall system that can teach them the basics. I work TKD drills with them twice a week for footwork and once they get into their teenage years, I will encourage them to join a good MMA gym to learn the "martial" part of Martial Arts. The final step in their Martial Arts journey will be JKD.

 

[Flying Crane]

Some of my Karate friends used to help the police work. A Karate guy would sit in the back seat of a police car. When there was a need, the Karate guy would come forward, knocked down the bad guy. The police then put handcuff on the bad guy. Not sure if that is still going on or not. IMO, that seem to be a good way to training MA. One Karate guy told me that He could drop his opponent by just 1 punch (after he had knocked down many bad guys by just 1 punch). Not too sure about the legal issue though.

Agree that only after you have knocked down many guys by 1 punch, you can then say that you have developed your punching power.

I imagine that would be a huge legal liability and probably downright illegal and criminal. I cannot imagine any police department doing something like this. Maybe in the 1970s things were different. Today? Not a chance. Hugely irresponsible and negligent.

 

[Rusty B]

I think it all comes down to perceived legitimacy, and the fact that it probably wasn't questioned or scrutinized anywhere near as much back then as it is now.

If some guy concocted a system a year ago and opened up a club... neither I nor very many others would be interested.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I don't disagree, but doesn't "I know the best people" get debunk really, really, quick when classes start?

Do you feel that statement is akin to a college degree in other venues?

I don't disagree, but doesn't "I know the best people" get debunk really, really, quick when classes start?

Do you feel that statement is akin to a college degree in other venues?

My experience is that people who talk about how they "they know the best people" often don't put themselves in a situation where they have to prove it. And if you try to hold them to it, they will change the subject. They tend to work well against people who have a desperation in being in the group of those who say. "they know the best people." I've seen that play out so many times in various life scenarios. My cousin is like that with football as he brags about which professional football players he knows with the expectation that some how knowing them will boost his fame.

Here's an example, A retired pro-football athlete lives 2 houses from me. So my cousin wants me to let the guy know he's a fan of football and that he says hello. Not sure how my cousin see's himself but, that many doesn't give 2 cents about my cousin lol. Now one can make the same assumption that, I'm doing the same by bring up that someone like that lives a couple of houses from me. But I would remind that person that not all retired athletes are rich. So you don't have to be rich to live by one, I'm far from being rich and I struggle like crazy just even with a College degree.

Now as to the college degree, that's a dime a dozen and the competition is vicious. I think people misunderstand the value of a college degree. If you want to make more money then it helps to have it. No different than being certified in a skill set. The only difference with college degrees, is that many of those who have them have a high level of exposure to other people, cultures, and thought processes. That you can only obtain in a college environment. That exposure creates "soft skills" right off the bat.

I often find that people who did not go to college often get touchy about people who did, and people who did go to college struggle with college debt and wonder if it was even worth it. People who have masters and doctorates pretty much decide their own salary. If I could afford it I would go for my masters just to make more money and to have the educational papers to show that I've mastered a specific topic. No different in how people strive to get Black Belts or become a Sifu of a particular system.

I can talk all that I want about Jow Ga but I won't have any standing within the community unless I become a Sifu.

Be it "I know the best people" or "I graduated from Yale." People know that there are others who care about that big time and they are willing to game the system without actually putting in the work. Just recently there were some Hollywood Celebs who got caught gaming their system to get their kids into top colleges.

 

[JKDJade]

I think it all comes down to perceived legitimacy, and the fact that it probably wasn't questioned or scrutinized anywhere near as much back then as it is now.

If some guy concocted a system a year ago and opened up a club... neither I nor very many others would be interested.

I'm naturally curious, so I would at least check it out and see what its all about it. About 8 years there was a little martial arts dojo in seaside,ca. I trained there for a couple of months. It was ran by a dude from central america.. his english wasnt good, but his skills were off the charts. It was hybird of TKD, BJJ, and Boxing... he also has 25 set combos adn defense techniques.. pretty cool and good stuff.

Anyways, when I first walked in the door, I was like "what martial arts is this." .... his answer, lol, I'll never forget it, "latin karate, you can call it jungle karate" lol. Normally I would have just walked out, but the the dojo was so old school, I had to try it out. I'm glad I did.

 

[KOKarate]

At the end of the day. There’s only so many different ways you can punch and kick. Everyone has their own unique style even among people in your own school. My primary style is American kenpo. A style that isn’t really know for its kicks but my primary attack has always been as a kicker. I’ve got decent kicks I’ve won fights with head kicks and spinning kicks things that aren’t as common in American kenpo but that’s just my way it’s not the right way or the wrong way. It’s just how I do it. Now as a teacher I combine kenpo with Muay Thai. I teach the standard kenpo system but I also teach the Muay Thai clinch and the wall defense of blocking kicks and things like that. I could say it’s my own style but I just call it kenpo because mostly it is kenpo but it’s my own take on it. Which is what kenpo was always meant to be, the whole point Ed Parker wanted was for people to adapt the system to themselves and make their own changes.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Couple of thoughts.

First, I'm not sure that the creation of "new" arts really has stopped. I don't know that it has even necessarily slowed down. I still semi-regularly find schools teaching some relatively recent eclectic concoction. (I'm not out there canvassing dojos, but when questions come up on this and other forums about "is this a good school?", I take the time to check out the websites.) It's hard to know how often a "new" system is created this way because you mostly hear about the systems which have survived long enough to develop a following and spread a bit.

Secondly, a high percentage of new (or at least newly named) systems are created for essentially political and/or branding reasons. Billy Bob learns JoeBlow-Jitsu from Master Joe Blow. Maybe he even gets a teaching license in that art. But then he has a personal falling out with Master Blow, who denies him the authority to continue teaching under that name. Or maybe he develops his own approach to teaching the art, but Master Blow insists that JoeBlow-Jitsu always be taught according to his exact dictates. Or maybe he learns elements from other arts that he wants to add, but Master blow insists the art must be kept pure. Or maybe Master Blow passes away and his senior instructors start arguing over who is now the true headmaster of the art. Or maybe Billy Bob never gets a teaching license even though he feels he deserves one. Or maybe he just wants the perceived prestige of being the 10th dan Grandmaster of his own system. Next thing you know, Master Billy Bob is teaching Bobbie-fu, a traditional but modern system which contains all the strengths of JoeBlow-jitsu, but none of the weaknesses, as well as techniques from every other system Billy Bob has encountered over the years, even if was just a single weekend seminar.

(Cynical, who me?)

One bit of influence that MMA and BJJ may have is that in most cases it isn't necessary to declare yourself to be teaching a whole new art if you develop an approach to teaching or practicing which is different from your instructor. My BJJ is not the same as my instructor's and his BJJ is not the same as his instructor's. But I don't have to invent a new name for what I teach. (Also, if I were to have a falling out with my instructor and go my own way, I would still be a licensed BJJ instructor. He doesn't have the authority to revoke my rank.)

 

[drop bear]

Couple of thoughts.

First, I'm not sure that the creation of "new" arts really has stopped. I don't know that it has even necessarily slowed down. I still semi-regularly find schools teaching some relatively recent eclectic concoction. (I'm not out there canvassing dojos, but when questions come up on this and other forums about "is this a good school?", I take the time to check out the websites.) It's hard to know how often a "new" system is created this way because you mostly hear about the systems which have survived long enough to develop a following and spread a bit.

Secondly, a high percentage of new (or at least newly named) systems are created for essentially political and/or branding reasons. Billy Bob learns JoeBlow-Jitsu from Master Joe Blow. Maybe he even gets a teaching license in that art. But then he has a personal falling out with Master Blow, who denies him the authority to continue teaching under that name. Or maybe he develops his own approach to teaching the art, but Master Blow insists that JoeBlow-Jitsu always be taught according to his exact dictates. Or maybe he learns elements from other arts that he wants to add, but Master blow insists the art must be kept pure. Or maybe Master Blow passes away and his senior instructors start arguing over who is now the true headmaster of the art. Or maybe Billy Bob never gets a teaching license even though he feels he deserves one. Or maybe he just wants the perceived prestige of being the 10th dan Grandmaster of his own system. Next thing you know, Master Billy Bob is teaching Bobbie-fu, a traditional but modern system which contains all the strengths of JoeBlow-jitsu, but none of the weaknesses, as well as techniques from every other system Billy Bob has encountered over the years, even if was just a single weekend seminar.

(Cynical, who me?)

One bit of influence that MMA and BJJ may have is that in most cases it isn't necessary to declare yourself to be teaching a whole new art if you develop an approach to teaching or practicing which is different from your instructor. My BJJ is not the same as my instructor's and his BJJ is not the same as his instructor's. But I don't have to invent a new name for what I teach. (Also, if I were to have a falling out with my instructor and go my own way, I would still be a licensed BJJ instructor. He doesn't have the authority to revoke my rank.)

And if someone wants to claim your freaky 10th planet system isn't true jujitsu. You can just go to a comp and fold those guys in to knots.

So there is a lot less guesswork involved.

 

[Flying Crane]

Couple of thoughts.

First, I'm not sure that the creation of "new" arts really has stopped. I don't know that it has even necessarily slowed down. I still semi-regularly find schools teaching some relatively recent eclectic concoction. (I'm not out there canvassing dojos, but when questions come up on this and other forums about "is this a good school?", I take the time to check out the websites.) It's hard to know how often a "new" system is created this way because you mostly hear about the systems which have survived long enough to develop a following and spread a bit.

Secondly, a high percentage of new (or at least newly named) systems are created for essentially political and/or branding reasons. Billy Bob learns JoeBlow-Jitsu from Master Joe Blow. Maybe he even gets a teaching license in that art. But then he has a personal falling out with Master Blow, who denies him the authority to continue teaching under that name. Or maybe he develops his own approach to teaching the art, but Master Blow insists that JoeBlow-Jitsu always be taught according to his exact dictates. Or maybe he learns elements from other arts that he wants to add, but Master blow insists the art must be kept pure. Or maybe Master Blow passes away and his senior instructors start arguing over who is now the true headmaster of the art. Or maybe Billy Bob never gets a teaching license even though he feels he deserves one. Or maybe he just wants the perceived prestige of being the 10th dan Grandmaster of his own system. Next thing you know, Master Billy Bob is teaching Bobbie-fu, a traditional but modern system which contains all the strengths of JoeBlow-jitsu, but none of the weaknesses, as well as techniques from every other system Billy Bob has encountered over the years, even if was just a single weekend seminar.

(Cynical, who me?)

I recently moved to the Sacramento CA area and I periodically just practice my google-fu and look to see what martial arts are in the greater area. What you are describing above, I see all the time in this area. I look through the websites and one of the first things I look for is the history of the teacher, what did they train and for how long and with whom, and what do they claim to teach? Many of them fit your description. What they are teaching is clearly a composite of what they had trained, under their own style name, and they are often claiming high rankings/sokeships/Grandmaster status that they clearly bestowed upon themselves.

One bit of influence that MMA and BJJ may have is that in most cases it isn't necessary to declare yourself to be teaching a whole new art if you develop an approach to teaching or practicing which is different from your instructor. My BJJ is not the same as my instructor's and his BJJ is not the same as his instructor's. But I don't have to invent a new name for what I teach. (Also, if I were to have a falling out with my instructor and go my own way, I would still be a licensed BJJ instructor. He doesn't have the authority to revoke my rank.)

As it should be. This is so inherently obvious to me that I frequently have to do a double-take when people suggest otherwise. Nobody can take from you what you have learned. Nobody can stop you from showing it to someone else. I guess they can stop you from using their name for the system if they have it protected by copyright.

But if you honestly state “I earned X ranking from Grandmaster JimBob and he authorized me to be a teacher and I was the head teacher in his school for ten years before we had an argument and we separated ways and now I can teach you material based on what I learned from Grandmaster JimBob.” If all that is true, he can’t stop you even if you can’t call it the same thing.

 

[lklawson]

Here are some names:
Bruce Lee- JKD
Ed Parker- Ed Parker Kenpo
Bart Vale- Chinese Kenpo
Tony Leo- Shuri Shindo Ryu
Freedie Lee- Freedie's Modern Fu
Al Tracy - Tracy Kenpo
Jeff Speakman -Kenpo 5,0
Helio Gracie- BJJ
Steve Mohamad- Black Karate Federation
Gary Dill- Bushido Kempo/SDS
Chuck Sullivan- Karate Connection-Kenpo
Sifu Anderson- Anderson Martial Arts
Hwang Kee- Tang Soo Doo
Al Moore- Shou Shu Kung Fu


Do you guys know what all these people have in common? Well, they all took one, two, or three arts, kept what they like and added what they thought it needed.

They they rebranded it as a new art. In some cases, this was evolutionary, in others revolutionary. Why are some revered, and others not?

Further, why don't we have more blending and progressing of older arts? How come new martial systems/styles pretty much stopped in the mid 1990s. I would say from 1960s-1990s there was a marital art explosion in the US that led the creation of the aforementioned styles, some trace their lineage to older mixed/blended arts before the 1960s like Tang Soo Doo

Now we have mma.. pretty much kick boxing with BJJ. The question is their room for regrowth of traditional martial arts? Can these arts continue to expand? Will ever see new arts created? Or we stuck with striking and grappling= MMA

Ohh and since we are talking about it... can we someone go ahead and create Cobra Kai Karate lol

Let's discuss

I guess if you want to go that far, there hasn't been any new martial art since Cain bashed in Able's skull because, frankly, humans break in the same way that they always have. There's nothing new under the sun.

As an example, I really like these guy's kung fu staff work. Is it southern?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Graywalker]

i don't know your background, but the punches and kicks that I've taken to my face in a "safe environment" were not theoretical. They landed and there was nothing I could have done to stop it, because if there was I would. The only thing "safe" about the environment was that we were out to cause maximum damage to each other. There's nothing about my sparring partner's strikes that makes me think that he or she could not do the same in a real street fight.

Now I will say one thing that may be theoretical is how one may respond to a street fight. People respond differently when put in that position, but that's a mental issue and not a physical training or physical ability thing.

Some people train their body's for fighting but not their minds. They forget to address that issue. You may see that I often talk about cutting off emotions when fighting. I do this so I don't let my emotions guide my fighting. I don't want anger to fuel my fighting and I don't want fear to enter my thoughts. I know that if I let fear enter then I'm going to have a problem in using my training. As a kid and teen my friends and I had a saying. "your fear will leave after getting hit with the first punch."

Many people think they will "die" if they get hit so that guides their fighting action. As a kid and a teen I had that same fear but after that first hit, the reality that the first punch wasn't so horrible sinks in and then I'm good to go. But as an adult I want to get hit in order to get rid of my fear. Because what if it hurts really bad. So, instead I get rid of my emotions and focus on the task.

Everything you said, involves sparring with a person that you know, and that person is not trying to kill you.

I agree that it's a safe alternative, but there is more to fighting, than getting over your fear of getting hit.

 

[isshinryuronin]

First, I'm not sure that the creation of "new" arts really has stopped

It depends on your definition of system or style. A new name or packaging does not a new system make. Parker's kenpo had lots of guys break away and start their own organizations (Not really a new style - 95% was still EPKK.)

Taking one style and adding a couple of throws or chokes does not a new system make. It's just the old style with a couple of borrowed moves. If I get a chocolate cake and then add a cherry on top, it's still a chocolate cake. IMO, a new style just does not have newly borrowed moves, but new concepts. In Isshinryu, our founder studied under Kyan (Shorin-ryu founder) and Miyagi. (Goju founder). He combined these two distinct styles into his own style. But he didn't stop there - He added new concepts: Vertical fist, snapping punches, thumb on top, blocking with muscled part of forearm, and more mobile stances. Now, here is a new style. The same is true of other true masters who founded a style.

Now, it is hard to develop new concepts unless you really understand your art. Picasso, Monet, Rembrandt, etc., all started their own schools of art. But they were very well trained artists to begin with and studied with others who were masters in their own right - there's probably the rare exception. The late artist, Bob Ross (The guy on TV that can make an entire detailed landscape in 25 minutes.), created his own style of painting using his own unique concepts and techniques - it's almost like magic watching it effortlessly unfold before your very eyes.

In other words, the true masters have "cred," at the highest levels. Not often seen with today's plethora (love having a chance to use that word) of masters, sokes, or whatever. Coming up with new, unique concepts is not easy. So the development of truly new "styles/systems" IMO is rarer as time goes on.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Everything you said, involves sparring with a person that you know, and that person is not trying to kill you.

I agree that it's a safe alternative, but there is more to fighting, than getting over your fear of getting hit.

You can spar with people you know or don't know. Either way is fine. The person doesn't need to try to kill you in order for you to validate your skills. Killing and Fighting are not the same thing. A person doesn't have to fight someone in order to kill them.

If you fight with hands then the fear is getting hit, kicked, or put in some kind of lock that breaks a bone or causes you to passout.
If you fight with knives then the fear is about getting stabbed
If you fight with guns then the fear is about getting shot.

Seems pretty basic to me. There's a lot of people who get killed in the U.S. where it goes from argument to gunshots then death. In those situations your hand to hand combat skill may be totally irrelevant.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Taking one style and adding a couple of throws or chokes does not a new system make. It's just the old style with a couple of borrowed moves. If I get a chocolate cake and then add a cherry on top, it's still a chocolate cake. IMO, a new style just does not have newly borrowed moves, but new concepts. In Isshinryu, our founder studied under Kyan (Shorin-ryu founder) and Miyagi. (Goju founder). He combined these two distinct styles into his own style. But he didn't stop there - He added new concepts: Vertical fist, snapping punches, thumb on top, blocking with muscled part of forearm, and more mobile stances. Now, here is a new style. The same is true of other true masters who founded a style.

It's still somewhat subjective as to when you decide something really is a new style. I can give a list of boxing champions whose personal fighting styles are more distinct in terms of technique, physical principles, and tactics than any two karate styles you could name. But they all used the same name (boxing) for their art. MMA has even more diversity.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

The same is true of other true masters who founded a style.

Now, it is hard to develop new concepts unless you really understand your art. Picasso, Monet, Rembrandt, etc., all started their own schools of art. But they were very well trained artists to begin with and studied with others who were masters in their own right - there's probably the rare exception. The late artist, Bob Ross (The guy on TV that can make an entire detailed landscape in 25 minutes.), created his own style of painting using his own unique concepts and techniques - it's almost like magic watching it effortlessly unfold before your very eyes.

In other words, the true masters have "cred," at the highest levels. Not often seen with today's plethora (love having a chance to use that word) of masters, sokes, or whatever. Coming up with new, unique concepts is not easy. So the development of truly new "styles/systems" IMO is rarer as time goes on.

Not disagreeing, but I should point out that there is another process by which legitimate new styles can arise. Rather than being created by a singular "true master", they can evolve through the efforts of a whole community of practitioners.

Using BJJ as an example - Carlos Gracie had no more than two years of official instruction from an expert judoka. Maybe less. As far as I know he wasn't even awarded any rank by his instructor. His brothers learned from him, so they were starting from an even lower point. How did BJJ end up as a distinct, legitimate, effective art? Carlos and his brothers taught a bunch of students. They trained their asses off on the relatively small technical foundation they started with. They sparred their students. They had their students spar each other. They fought a bunch of people (in the ring and in the streets). They had their students fight a bunch of people. They had a whole bunch of kids and trained all the boys to be fighters. They exchanged techniques and training ideas with other martial artists. They swiped any technique or ideas from other arts that they could get to work within their framework. They promoted their art relentlessly to the general public. As that promotion brought new practitioners into the art, those practitioners came up with new ideas, passed them around, and learned from each other. BJJ as it stands now is the result of a huge open-source collective research project.

I don't think BJJ is the only art where this dynamic has played out.

 

[Hanzou]

Here are some names:
Bruce Lee- JKD
Ed Parker- Ed Parker Kenpo
Bart Vale- Chinese Kenpo
Tony Leo- Shuri Shindo Ryu
Freedie Lee- Freedie's Modern Fu
Al Tracy - Tracy Kenpo
Jeff Speakman -Kenpo 5,0
Helio Gracie- BJJ
Steve Mohamad- Black Karate Federation
Gary Dill- Bushido Kempo/SDS
Chuck Sullivan- Karate Connection-Kenpo
Sifu Anderson- Anderson Martial Arts
Hwang Kee- Tang Soo Doo
Al Moore- Shou Shu Kung Fu


Do you guys know what all these people have in common? Well, they all took one, two, or three arts, kept what they like and added what they thought it needed.

They they rebranded it as a new art. In some cases, this was evolutionary, in others revolutionary. Why are some revered, and others not?

Because the UFC happened and the community at large realized they were being fed nonsense for decades. I remember as a youth Bruce Lee being worshipped as some sort of fighting god. Nowadays, most people acknowledge him as an actor who would get stomped by a boxer or wrestler and that's pretty much it. It's a rather massive shift, but it was the Gracies and MMA that made that happen.

Further, why don't we have more blending and progressing of older arts? How come new martial systems/styles pretty much stopped in the mid 1990s. I would say from 1960s-1990s there was a marital art explosion in the US that led the creation of the aforementioned styles, some trace their lineage to older mixed/blended arts before the 1960s like Tang Soo Doo

Now we have mma.. pretty much kick boxing with BJJ. The question is their room for regrowth of traditional martial arts? Can these arts continue to expand? Will ever see new arts created? Or we stuck with striking and grappling= MMA

Ohh and since we are talking about it... can we someone go ahead and create Cobra Kai Karate lol

Let's discuss

Because once again; The Gracies and MMA happened (c. 1993). When that bomb dropped, everyone searched for the most effective techniques to utilize in that space, and a lot of traditional (and frankly made up) martial arts were deemed to be ineffective or outright fraudulent.

Pretty much any new martial art coming on the scene nowadays has that standard to deal with, and while in the earlier days of this era many styles were willing to do it, at this point many have simply given up and accepted the new paradigm. BTW, this isn't just happening in the US, you're seeing MMA and BJJ spread around the world and push out traditional styles in their own homelands.

While I agree that the martial art scene isn't as "colorful" as it used to be, I would argue that the general effectiveness of martial arts as a whole has improved because of what happened in the mid-90s. Now some styles rightly claim that they're not for fighting, but for spiritual growth, fitness, or indulging in a fantasy of being a 16th century samurai. That's a good thing in my opinion.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

ha ha ha.. I'm going to change your mindset on that. Just as soon as the Covid-19 mess is over. A lot of the students who participated in my sparring classes would have said the same thing as well, but after a few classes with me they learned how to fight without being angry or stressed.

My theory is that fighting should be as close to emotionless as possible. In other words, I don't want emotions to drive my fighting. My other theory about fighting is that in training it should always be done from the perspective of learning and not beating up your sparring partner. These two things make fighting very enjoyable for me and those who train with me. You could hit me with power because I think I can defend myself well enough to take your power shots. Don't get me wrong, I don't want your street fight power hits. I'm talking about your sparring power hits.

The joy that you should be getting is not from hitting people but from executing a technique correctly. If you are focused on hitting people then you are focused on the wrong thing. Out of all of the years of sparring, it was never about me hitting people. It was always about me getting the technique right. I think you would enjoy it more if you made it less about hitting people and more about getting the technique right.

Not saying that this would work for you, but it has worked for me and everyone that I've trained. I've seen the same thing from people with better fighting skills than I have as well. Sometimes they will only use one technique in sparring, because all they care about is getting the technique correct. It more about that, than the hitting.

The problem is that I know hitting someone with force can do damage. So I don’t like doing it. Light, technical sparring is a different thing from fighting, in my mind.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yeah. Interest is subjective. How many fights do you think one needs before one is good at it? How about to teach it?

If I wanted to learn how to change a tire from someone, experience bis required. And I'd prefer to learn from a AAA guy than a person who knew a guy who did it once or twice.

It also depends what you count as doing it. Which is our fundamental difference.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I think it all comes down to perceived legitimacy, and the fact that it probably wasn't questioned or scrutinized anywhere near as much back then as it is now.

If some guy concocted a system a year ago and opened up a club... neither I nor very many others would be interested.

I don’t think most new MA consumers have the knowledge to make those determinations.