A Complete System: Is There Such A Thing?

[Chris Parker]

I was going to enter into this, and got this major feeling of deja vu... so here's my take on the topic: http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?89855-Complete-martial-arts (page 2 and 3 mainly....). Feel free to take from there is there are any questions of my take on things (this was just easier than typing it all out again!).

 

[Omar B]

Respectfully, doesn't Seido come from KK?

To your question; I have trained for 3 decades non-stop. I hold a 3rd (soon to be 4th) degree BB in Karate and a 2nd degree BB in Daito ryu Aikijujutsu Roppokai. I have instructor level Tai Chi Chuan experience, and was a BB candidate in Shorinji ryu and Okinawan Kobudo but had to leave for the Navy before my test was complete. I have studied BJJ for the last 15 years and trained with some of the best in the world. I have trained with military and contract specialists for a long long time. I have been VERY fortunate to study many different arts under the top in the world during my life time.

Don't think I created Shamar system for the wrong reasons please. Shamar doesn't charge so it wasn't for money. Shamar doesn't use traditional ranking systems so it wasn't to be ranked. I only teach Shamar instructors so it wasn't for fame or anything either. The reason I founded Shamar is to reach further after the goal of the men and women who taught me. I created Shamar to have a free and open space to truly push the limits without politics and without barriers. I created Shamar for many reasons honestly.

Yeah Seido comes from Kyokushin. But lets just say my cards are all thrown in with the Seido group. Joining a Kyokushin dojo as a kid was always a second or only option when there was no Seido ... I moved a lot.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I would say Chuck Liddell is a perfect example of this. I believe he does have a grappling background, however, it seems he prefers to keep his fights standing.

Exactly. Liddell preferred to keep his fights standing and win by knockout. He was able to do this largely because he was a Division I wrestler and had both top-notch takedown defense and the ability to stand back up when opponents did manage to score a takedown.

 

[K-man]

Ok - I think the only "complete" system is the one that evolves and melds to the individual. This is the reason I created my own system, www.shamarsystem.com . I have spent 30 years training multiple styles and in multiple schools. The instructor always made the difference in each of those not necessarily the style itself. Bruce said it best when he said loosely quoting here "when you make a rule you leave something out." There really is no way to draw a complete circle around an incomplete expanse.

Why would a style that prides itself on keeping traditional fighting methods from hundreds of years in the past be relative to reality in fighting now? I am not the same person I was when I was twelve, I have grown and changed and I believe "systems" should do the same to remain useful. the only other reason to me to train a style is because you have historical interest in the art, like Civil War re-enactments. How silly would it be for those Civil War buffs to go around thinking that what they "practice" is somehow making them prepared for battle today?

Enjoy your styles, I still enjoy styles - but make your own way and judge for yourself what is right by what works for you (my 2 cents).

I know the system I teach is not 'complete' in many areas. I don't teach weapons and we do little grappling. However, against other Goju systems, I reckon we do a lot more. I looked at your site and although you claim to have the complete system, there is nothing there to support your claim. So, I ask, what is it about your system that you think makes it 'complete'.

And, BTW, I completely disagree with your assertion that fighting methods developed over hundreds of years are not relevant now. Your analogy of the civil war is totally inappropriate as that is an armed conflict and weapons have changed. Surely unarmed combat is the same now as it was a hundred years ago. :asian:

 

[jasonbrinn]

I know the system I teach is not 'complete' in many areas. I don't teach weapons and we do little grappling. However, against other Goju systems, I reckon we do a lot more. I looked at your site and although you claim to have the complete system, there is nothing there to support your claim. So, I ask, what is it about your system that you think makes it 'complete'.

And, BTW, I completely disagree with your assertion that fighting methods developed over hundreds of years are not relevant now. Your analogy of the civil war is totally inappropriate as that is an armed conflict and weapons have changed. Surely unarmed combat is the same now as it was a hundred years ago. :asian:

Good day K-man,

Right off here I actually said "Ok - I think the only "complete" system is the one that evolves and melds to the individual." That is your answer as to what I think makes my system complete - it is the fact that we recognize there is no "complete" only evolution and the processes and programs I put in place to help and ensure that continual personal evolution specific to each individual that trains it. Shamar system is about the individual primarily and everything else second. There were literally NO SACRED COWS during the formation of the system and we honestly and without apology pursued EMET.
Believe me, it was not fun and we suffered many (I still do) critics as to our ideas and tests when the only thing we were searching for was truth. The website really doesn't have anything up yet to be honest. Very soon I will have the pictures edited for the book on Shamar system. When I am done it will be offered for FREE as is everything having to do with Shamar system. If you are truly interested then I encourage you to check it out and maybe consider the correspondence program as well. Just be prepared to have a lot of conventional ideas challenged by the results you will get if you try what we teach.

Email me and I will send you the book directly when it is done if you like [email protected]

As for the Civil War remark; I was saying that I don't feel combat arts created in times hundreds of years ago for the warriors of those times hold much for modern warriors in modern times as it pertains to functional combat. Now, can I kill you with a musket? Sure, I could kill you with a caveman's rock as well. What I mean by the statement is that why would I spend the majority of my time studying to fight with a sword when I can go and grab a Glock? I make a pretty mean samurai with a DeLorean and a Glock.

Unarmed combat hasn't changed? Maybe for some, but isn't that the problem for them. I disagree that it hasn't changed. I think unarmed combat as with anything else changes as perception and knowledge changes. Surely perception and knowledge (such as how our bodies work, etc.) has changed in the last hundred years!

 

[rickster]

A Complete System: Is There Such A Thing?

Yes. In a balance diet of nutrition.



Seriously, not to far off the anology;

Martial Art systems is like nutrition-vitamins-minerals.

You have to get a balance requirement

Too much, not good

Too little, not good

 

[K-man]

Good day K-man,

Right off here I actually said "Ok - I think the only "complete" system is the one that evolves and melds to the individual." That is your answer as to what I think makes my system complete - it is the fact that we recognize there is no "complete" only evolution and the processes and programs I put in place to help and ensure that continual personal evolution specific to each individual that trains it. Shamar system is about the individual primarily and everything else second. There were literally NO SACRED COWS during the formation of the system and we honestly and without apology pursued EMET.

I don't mind the concept of evolution. In that way I look to Krav and Systema to give me ideas to include in my training but the principles in the traditional karate styles from Okinawa cover all those techniques anyway. Realistically nothing in any martial art is going to work against a firearm at three paces. But once you take the traditional elements out of your system, you are relying on your own knowledge to create a new one. Personally, I like what the guys ahead of me developed over hundreds of years. The unfortunate thing is that they forgot to leave the manual.

Believe me, it was not fun and we suffered many (I still do) critics as to our ideas and tests when the only thing we were searching for was truth. The website really doesn't have anything up yet to be honest. Very soon I will have the pictures edited for the book on Shamar system. When I am done it will be offered for FREE as is everything having to do with Shamar system. If you are truly interested then I encourage you to check it out and maybe consider the correspondence program as well. Just be prepared to have a lot of conventional ideas challenged by the results you will get if you try what we teach.

Email me and I will send you the book directly when it is done if you like [email protected]

Thanks for the offer. I may take it up later.

As for the Civil War remark; I was saying that I don't feel combat arts created in times hundreds of years ago for the warriors of those times hold much for modern warriors in modern times as it pertains to functional combat. Now, can I kill you with a musket? Sure, I could kill you with a caveman's rock as well. What I mean by the statement is that why would I spend the majority of my time studying to fight with a sword when I can go and grab a Glock? I make a pretty mean samurai with a DeLorean and a Glock.

Fortunately we don't have many Glocks on the streets in Australia.

Unarmed combat hasn't changed? Maybe for some, but isn't that the problem for them. I disagree that it hasn't changed. I think unarmed combat as with anything else changes as perception and knowledge changes. Surely perception and knowledge (such as how our bodies work, etc.) has changed in the last hundred years!

I think that the Chinese had as much knowledge as to the working of the body in a mechanical way as we have now. I also think that what is taught now in most martial arts schools (especially karate) bears no resemblance to what was handed down, father to son, over many generations.

As I said earlier, I have left out training with some of the old weapons as I don't see relevance. I have no problem with people teaching them out of interest. But my main focus is the old fighting systems that already exist. Many of them could take a lifetime to understand. They are as relevant now as any system when it comes to unarmed combat, and, in that context, each of them is a complete system. :asian:

 

[Chris Parker]

Hmm. Honestly, K-man, unarmed combat has changed quite a lot. The reason isn't about the biology of human beings changing, or being different (although frankly, that's an influence), it's far more to do with the surrounding culture of particular fighting methods. Unarmed combat in Japan was different to Greece, different to China, different to India, different to, well, everywhere else. It is to do with cultural preferences, common clothing (or armour, depending on the system in question), and more. In other words, there's a lot of reasons that Japanese arts are different to Chinese ones, and so on. Today's globalization of the world has lead to a more "homogenized" ideal of unarmed combat, but that's not true of historical combat.

 

[Xue Sheng]

A Complete System: Is There Such A Thing?

phfffft.....What a silly question...of course there is

Anbo-Jitsu "the ultimate evolution in the martial arts"

 

[Flying Crane]

Hmm. Honestly, K-man, unarmed combat has changed quite a lot. The reason isn't about the biology of human beings changing, or being different (although frankly, that's an influence), it's far more to do with the surrounding culture of particular fighting methods. Unarmed combat in Japan was different to Greece, different to China, different to India, different to, well, everywhere else. It is to do with cultural preferences, common clothing (or armour, depending on the system in question), and more. In other words, there's a lot of reasons that Japanese arts are different to Chinese ones, and so on. Today's globalization of the world has lead to a more "homogenized" ideal of unarmed combat, but that's not true of historical combat.

I think these are good points.

This is why I say that you need to understand what you are doing on the principle level. If you chase after technique, then you will always be faced with the dilemma: are my techniques current and relevant? But if you understand the principles, and realize it's not so much about the techniques, then you know that the principles are always current and relevant, and can be used to drive any technique, even if your technique changes over time.

 

[Cirdan]

A Complete System: Is There Such A Thing?

phfffft.....What a silly question...of course there is

Anbo-Jitsu "the ultimate evolution in the martial arts"

But Xue... that art won`t be around for another 300 years or so.

 

[rickster]

As I said earlier, I have left out training with some of the old weapons as I don't see relevance. I have no problem with people teaching them out of interest. But my main focus is the old fighting systems that already exist. Many of them could take a lifetime to understand. They are as relevant now as any system when it comes to unarmed combat, and, in that context, each of them is a complete system. :asian:

Intersting. But would this include methods of conditioning the hands or shins if one was not going into combat often?

 

[Xue Sheng]

But Xue... that art won`t be around for another 300 years or so.

DANG.... I have to stop using the Way Back Machine ot post here

 

[EddieCyrax]

Complete System = being able to handle any situation.

Does this even require MA?

An individual that can effectively defuse any situation prior to physical conflict has a "Complete System"?

"For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill" - Sun Tzu

 

[Omar B]

There is only one complete system, Atomic Bomb.

 

[K-man]

Intersting. But would this include methods of conditioning the hands or shins if one was not going into combat often?

I hadn't really considered that aspect. Ideally yes. We do a bit of arm and body conditioning. I think a lot of the old training can be replaced with modern gym training including bags and pads, and a lot of our training is open hand. Without a dedicated dojo it would be hard to provide the traditional means of conditioning. Good question though! :asian:

 

[rickster]

There is only one complete system, Atomic Bomb.

Is there a martial art system named "Atomic Bomb'?

 

[Black Belt Jedi]

A complete system is a Martial Art that has everything in it to strikes, grappling standing and on the ground and the use of a variety of weapons. Although it is hard to find the complete system in a Martial Art because a system had been watered down throughout the years or that system is still evolving developing new things. Also the thing to take into consideration is that if the Martial Art is meant only for sport to compete against an equally skilled competitor, is it used for the battlefield or is it used for personal self protection.

 

[Omar B]

Is there a martial art system named "Atomic Bomb'?

LOL. Really, you just asked that?

 

[Zenjael]

I feel until one can confidently say they can protect any attack, in any situation, then one is not complete.

I will continue learning, and tightening up the application of what I have learned, until the day I die. That is what being a martial artist is about.

Even the 8th dan in WTF TKD has the other 6 styles still to learn if he has not already.

It's almost a question which borders on the question of perfection, philosophically. I won't get into it, but the two go hand in hand.

I have seen many claim to be perfect, but I rarely see people execute everything perfectly... though excellence, now and again I come across it and its a constant thing then. I tend to keep those people in my martial arts life for as long as I can, and grow. Just today i was working with a brilliant silat practitioner who after just 2 years is gaining the extra perception it takes some martial artists decades to learn.



However...

I have been fortunate to stumble onto a training which allowed me to actually learn fairly well the system of chung do kwan. In the school I first learned Chung Do Kwan, I have come to see that I learned a very traditional form of the style, which looked as much Shotokan as it did Tang Soo Do. That was what was interesting to me, was seeing for the first time in my martial arts career when I entered that school, a tae kwon do school which had effectively adopted handwork, even excelling at it, without having sacrificed kicking ability.

After the school closed, a number of Khan's students began to attend another, where they continued from their chung do kwan education to re-learn the fundamentals of Shotokan, and Okinawan Karate, and implement it back into chung do kwan. Including jiujitsu, and acujutsu, it is interesting to see how this style of TKD is evolving even today. I suspect within a few years it could arguably be recognized as its own distinct TKD style.

There are a few students who have integrated Krav Maga with Chung Do Kwan from this lineage of tutelage. But... they are a handful, and most contemporary Chung Do Kwan practitioners seem to be straying from the traditional elements of its style... which is odd since its hardly over a half century years old.




Now the question comes to how I feel about completeness. I began learning TKD when I was 4, and have never stopped training, or learning new techniques. Today I was working on a 1080 roundhouse. I'll never use it, but it's a new technique to explore which may one day offer me the insight to survive. Unlikely, but I've been swept and able to turn the sudden change of events to a 720 kick. Can't do that without first practicing. I have learned the 7 styles I consider to actually be separate in TKD (two are less differentiating by technique, and moreso by politic and location, so I ignore that). I feel a 4th dan of one of the styles is not completely a master of TKD. To master a style is to master it; completely. Every aspect. I was a 3rd dan in Moo Duk Kwan, and from learning each of the TKD styles, I made it a core tenant when I learned, that I practice that style until it was of equal ability. So I could say to another martial artist with integrity; the Chung Do Kwan I use is of equal ability to the Jidokwan, and Moo Duk Kwan, and Tang Soo Do. I don't like belt counting, but I have seen a couple of my masters do it now and again to illustrate it's point of how petty it is. If I put all my TKD belts together, even the ones I never bothered to test past first dan, but was still trained past that ability level (for what does a first mean when you have a 3rd in two other styles of that system?). If I put all those together I'd be in excess of 10th dan. It means nothing, as a standard, subjective or objective. The first time you put a 6th or 7th dan on the floor, and not by accident, I feel it occurs to people.

For I must make this point; when you are at a 3rd dan, perfection is your goal, in every technique you choose to retain. If a 3rd dan learns a technique from another system or delineating style of their own they will practice and hone it until they either understand it and choose not to implement it, or train it to the same degree of skill as they do their other techniques. If you are learning anything new in that system, I would venture to say the individual does not qualify as a third. 1st is learning, 2nd is re-evaluating, and tightening, and 3rd is for perfecting. 4th and higher I have found I agree with others is solely about politics, and I have no desire for that.

But I loathe the title master, outside of describing usage of the arts. One could argue then, I will never be a master, and never complete.

Why then do so many approach me to ask how it is I look so complete (and I assure you, I have worked to be as much as possible). The video I posted online does not do myself justice, but it wasn't meant to; just to refute people's accusations I'm a mean fighter with no control, and clobbers lessers. I would not have become a head instructor at over 5 schools, of different styles, regardless of my rank within that school, if I did not have an intrinsic worth.

I tend not to give an answer... but this is why; because I decided long ago there is endless amounts of techniques to constantly learn and how to utilize. It's like finding out you have yet another passage in your favorite holy book, and then another after that. Forever, till you die, not until the book ends, for it never will. And when I learned those techniques, I kept in mind that I have the patience to recognize I have a lifetime ahead of me, and with proper understanding, and with practice, even if just once in awhile, sooner or later it will catch up.

I also ask what of those styles which have abandoned techniques, are they now incomplete from what they were?

Is it not strange one can learn a style so much, and yet still not be complete?

That incompleteness gives us room to grow, so we may become more than ourselves and who we were as martial artists.

Bruce Lee was a phenomenal influence on Martial Artists, but he rarely actually fought, and would never concede when he lost. Was he therefor confident, or arrogant? In anyway signs of the martial artist. His techniques, especially in regards to kicking, are consistently sloppy. One has but to look.

But his philosophy of fighting is remarkable in its genius; to stop growing is not to die. But it is as a martial artist.

When you hit a plateau, there is more to climb, and it's up to us to see that.

Maybe we're setting ourselves up for falling short, but unceasing perfection means we have nothing left but to stagnate. Between the choice of perfection, and its inevitable corruption, or to be erred, and always improve.... as an existentialist I'll always choose the latter.