The importance of traditional training

[DeLamar.J]

I study Go Ju karate and I made the mistake a long time ago of teaching someone my personally modified sidekick along with other things of a non traditional manner. I realized that everyone modifies there own art to fit them down the road, but all of modification must come from the same source, or you are not a product of Go Ju any longer, you are a part of this persons modified style, passed down from this other guy who changed this and this other guy ect ect. You must have strong roots, like a tree, if the roots are not strong the whole tree dies (yes I have been reading too many Kung Fu books

). Eventually the style that is being taught looks or feels nothing like it was originally made by the master. Then you are practicing an art with no solid base what so ever. Techniques should only be modified once you reach a level where your traditional basic techniques are muscle memory.
I now only show my personal techniques to people of my style (or other stylists) who have solid basics. Any thoughts? Opinions on this?

 

[TigerWoman]

Well, since we know the tried and true way was taught by the master and handed down and has had the test of time, I would agree that the basics should be taught the traditional way. I know a lot of bad habits creep in otherwise and they can be difficult if not impossible to break once they are ingrained. The other Goju guy 2nd dan in our class, has a sidekick that isn't the typical toe pointing back from the target which TKD is, and he can't break that. It's more like a lift up to the side but since he is a big guy, his reach is good. This easier way to do a sidekick is just that, easier. It prevents the person from working on flexibility, splits etc. to be able to extend that range. This is especially important for smaller, shorter people.
So, I would agree with you. Teach the basics traditionally. They will find their shortcuts later anyway. TW

 

[Andrew Green]

What does lineage have to do with having a strong base? Shouldn't a style be rooted in effectiveness, not paperwork?

But before I can judge you as a person and decide where to place your ideas I need to know your family tree. I need to know whether or not you have a strong blood line with roots in European Nobility and no weak influences, I wouldn't want to deal with someone who's blood is not Pure. Because really, if you don't have strong roots you have no business changing things or coming up with your own ideas.

 

[Drag'n]

Once you have mastered the basics and attained a dan rank, I think its not only natural, but essential to look into variations and improvements in techniques. Cross training in other arts may open your eyes to weaknesses in your style, forcing you to adjust techniques to make them more effective.Its important to then test these adjustments in realistic sparring to be sure that they do work and aren't just theory.
This is nothing new or radical.This is exactly what the original masters did.Thats why there are so many different "traditional" styles.
The argument that something was effective against the fighting methods of 100 years ago, so it will be effective against the fighting techniques of today is very strange to me.
In our modern world we have access to a wealth of information that they didnt have before . We have the opportunity to compare the methods of virtually every fighting method ever created.This has led to a revolution in the fighting arts bringing them to a level of effectiveness never previously possible.Do you think the old masters would not have improved on their methods if they had the same opportunities we do?
To ignore new breakthroughs in fighting methods is against the natural process of evolution and is not in harmony with "the way"
I think some traditionalists allow there style to become something like a religion.Elevating their arts founder to a god like status ,and loosing clear vision of present reality.
I will constantly try to master what I have been taught and to test it and improve on it.When the time comes for me to pass on what I have learned
how could I ignore my experiences for the sake of keeping with tradition?
And I hope my students will do the same.

 

[terryl965]

I believe tradition should always outwiegh new interventions in the Art or style. Of course I'm from the old school of thought, why change what the ancient have brought to the lime light. I do relize some great things have come from some great MAers like Bruce Lee,Remy Preses,Ed Parker, Chuck Norris to name a few but for me it's the old way... tradition means alot in keeping the Art whole foe years to come. My own opion other feel different and that is what is great about the Maers on this forum we can all appreciate each other views... GOD BLESS AMERICA

 

[Gary Crawford]

I have said the same thing in a different way to ma students who are learning a traditional style when they express an interest in JKD.I tell them to establish a good "base " style before moving on to something else.Well established basics can be built on,but teaching advanced "concepts" to a beginer to intermediate student only confuses them.

 

[Andrew Green]

I believe tradition should always outwiegh new interventions in the Art or style. Of course I'm from the old school of thought, why change what the ancient have brought to the lime light. I do relize some great things have come from some great MAers like Bruce Lee,Remy Preses,Ed Parker, Chuck Norris to name a few but for me it's the old way... tradition means alot in keeping the Art whole foe years to come. My own opion other feel different and that is what is great about the Maers on this forum we can all appreciate each other views... GOD BLESS AMERICA

Tae Kwon Do in it's modern form is a very recent creation

Innovation has always been a part of martial arts, the idea of keeping it untouched is modern, not traditional

 

[Blindside]

If an instructor finds something that he/she truly things is an improvement in the technique, then my belief is that it is their obligation to teach it.

An instructors obligation is to teach their students, I teach a self-defense system, my priority is to teach effective self defense. If I teach the "art" at the penalty of effectiveness then I have failed my students. Evolution requires variation, I might be a dead end, but maybe my changes can lead to progress.

To quote SGM Parker "When pure knuckles meet pure flesh, that's pure karate, no matter who executes it or whatever style is involved."

Lamont

 

[DeLamar.J]

To quote SGM Parker "When pure knuckles meet pure flesh, that's pure karate, no matter who executes it or whatever style is involved."

Lamont

Thats not what martial arts is all about. Or karate in general.

 

[Blindside]

Thats not what martial arts is all about. Or karate in general.

Fundamentally, yes it is. The person seeking perfection of character does so through the perfection of technique. And all of the different forms of karate exist because someone was trying to drop someone else faster or more efficiently. All of the variations of karate came about because someone was combining arts or changing ideas about what their karate should be, Chojun Miyagi, Mas Oyama, Tatsuo Shimabuku, Hironori Ohtsuka to name just a few. Fundamentally we study MARTIAL arts, and in war no one wants to play runner-up.

Lamont