Defining "Complete"

[shesulsa]

There has been much hashing and rehashing about what makes arts complete.

What in your opinion makes an art "complete," why, and is your art complete in your opinion?

 

[Andrew Green]

What makes an art complete? Ignoring reality by it's practitioners.

No art is complete, there simply isn't enough time to do everything, anyone that thinks otherwise is not looking outside their own box.

 

[Xue Sheng]

I was once told a Complete martial art is one that covers "Kicking and Punching" "Joint locking" and "Ground fighting or wrestling"

 

[Flying Crane]

I'm not sure I would classify an art as complete, but rather an individual has abilities that are complete.

I guess "complete" means an individual has skills and knowledge to deal with encounters at several ranges: kicking/punching; trapping; grappling; wrestling. Skills include striking, joint manipulation, wrestling, and others.

But is this really "complete"? there are other ranges, as well as other methods. What about firearms? What about knives, pool cues, golf clubs, baseball bats, bike chains, etc.? these are all things that one could face on the street.

What about "internal" vs. "external"? if your training focuses on one to the exclusion of the other, does this also make you incomplete?

What about defensive driving, to escape attack? what about running, jumping, diving, rolling, and rolling to avoid attack? What about fighting in water too deep to stand up in?

Conceivably, all these things and more could be considered important skills that one should have in their arsenal of a "complete self defense system".

But no art contains all this. Most arts that work effectively are built around a few basic principles. They focus on a certain approach to self-defense and fighting, because their principles are designed to work under this certain approach. They don't include every approach because that would take it outside the realm of principle that the very art is based upon. Most arts, when properly understood, can be effective against those who use a radically different approach. But this can require a high level of expertise, beyond which many people reach, if you are facing a skilled opponent.

One can gain skills to fill in the "gaps" that one perceives in their training. If you train an art that specializes in striking, you might want to supplement that by training an art to specializes in joint manipulations or ground grappling, for example. But just because a striking art doesn't contain much grappling, or a grappling art doesn't contain much striking, I don't think that makes the art itself incomplete. You just need to recognize the approach that the art is built around, and decide for yourself if you need something else to go along with it.

The more ranges you are comfortable with, and the more variety that you can handle, the more complete you are, as a practitioner. But I don't think any art, or any person, is ever truly Complete.

 

[Xue Sheng]

I'm not sure I would classify an art as complete, but rather an individual has abilities that are complete.

I guess "complete" means an individual has skills and knowledge to deal with encounters at several ranges: kicking/punching; trapping; grappling; wrestling. Skills include striking, joint manipulation, wrestling, and others.

But is this really "complete"? there are other ranges, as well as other methods. What about firearms? What about knives, pool cues, golf clubs, baseball bats, bike chains, etc.? these are all things that one could face on the street.

What about "internal" vs. "external"? if your training focuses on one to the exclusion of the other, does this also make you incomplete?

What about defensive driving, to escape attack? what about running, jumping, diving, rolling, and rolling to avoid attack? What about fighting in water too deep to stand up in?

Conceivably, all these things and more could be considered important skills that one should have in their arsenal of a "complete self defense system".

But no art contains all this. Most arts that work effectively are built around a few basic principles. They focus on a certain approach to self-defense and fighting, because their principles are designed to work under this certain approach. They don't include every approach because that would take it outside the realm of principle that the very art is based upon. Most arts, when properly understood, can be effective against those who use a radically different approach. But this can require a high level of expertise, beyond which many people reach, if you are facing a skilled opponent.

One can gain skills to fill in the "gaps" that one perceives in their training. If you train an art that specializes in striking, you might want to supplement that by training an art to specializes in joint manipulations or ground grappling, for example. But just because a striking art doesn't contain much grappling, or a grappling art doesn't contain much striking, I don't think that makes the art itself incomplete. You just need to recognize the approach that the art is built around, and decide for yourself if you need something else to go along with it.

The more ranges you are comfortable with, and the more variety that you can handle, the more complete you are, as a practitioner. But I don't think any art, or any person, is ever truly Complete.

What about pointed sticks
...Sorry I couldn't resist the Python reference.

You make a very good point, I agree that is more being a complete martial artist than it is finding a complete martial art.

Frankly I do not think you will find any martial art that covers kicking and punching, joint locking and grappling equally.

It is then up to the martial artist to do, as you said, filling in the gaps in his or her training

 

[Flying Crane]

What about pointed sticks

Alright then, THE BANANA! We haven't done that one, have we!!??

 

[Xue Sheng]

Alright then, THE BANANA! We haven't done that one, have we!!??

Now the raspberry

All kidding aside, I think your post, the first one, not the Banana one, may have helped me make a decision about my training.

Thanks

 

[Flying Crane]

Now the raspberry

All kidding aside, I think your post, the first one, not the Banana one, may have helped me make a decision about my training.

Thanks

right-on. What would that decision be?

 

[HKphooey]

Good stuff (as usual ) Crane!

I have to agree with you. What you get out of your art depends on what you put into it. I have heard the saying, "Study one art long enough, and you will learn all the others". Just like in life, recognizing our own dificiencies and correcting them, makes us stronger and wiser. Ignoring or denying them, makes us a fool.

I always enjoyed talking to other martial artists. I have had some of my best training outside the dojo, hanging with people I hardly knew. They were open to my thoughts; as I was to theirs.

 

[Old Fat Kenpoka]

What makes an art complete? Ignoring reality by it's practitioners.

No art is complete, there simply isn't enough time to do everything, anyone that thinks otherwise is not looking outside their own box.

Mr. Green is correct. There is no need for further discussion.

 

[Xue Sheng]

right-on. What would that decision be?

Well I have decided to show people how to defend themselves against anyone who attacks them when armed with a piece of fresh fruit

I got to get this sketch out of my brain.

Actually to diversify, "fill in the gaps", I am currently studying Tai Chi and have for many years, and I started back into Xingyi and I am going to a Bagua class tonight, I studied Bagua before as well. And I started back because I felt something lacking in my Tai Chi. The last time I felt good about my training I was doing all three. But what I failed to remember until recently was I was also doing a lot of sparing with other people of other styles then too. And after your post the word gaps hit me like a ton of bricks as the perfect description.

And since returning from China I have felt that something was very wrong with my training. I have had the putting the cart before the horse feeling, if you will. As well as the feeling that everything is basically the same. And huge holes have appeared in my training over the last few years since I decided to focus on the internal arts only. The reason is that Although different Bagua, Xingyi and Tai Chi, they are truly not all that different. I need to diversify back to an external or an internal/external

I will shoot you a quick PM on the rest.

 

[Flying Crane]

I have heard the saying, "Study one art long enough, and you will learn all the others".

I think this is pretty much on the bullseye.

One problem with our modern society is that we have too many choices. In the martial arts, especially in a city like San Francisco, I can choose between literally dozens and dozens of systems to study, with even more instructors. Some of them are very good, many are very poor, and many are in between, but the choices are there. It can be overwhelming.

This can make it difficult to focus on what we are doing because we get distracted by wanting to see what the other guys are doing down the street, and wondering of they have something that we are missing. If we had fewer choices, it would be easier to stay focused. Staying focused would enable us to concentrate on our skills without these outside distractions, and really learn the art in its deeper levels. Then we could apply it no matter the circumstances, or the approach of our opponent. At this point we would not need to wonder about what others are doing.

But then again, variety can be good. I believe that when you are young in the martial arts, you should study as many things as possible, so long as you don't sacrifice quality for quantity. This gives you a broad variety and understanding of many different approaches in the martial arts. Eventually, as you get a bit older, you decide which art, or which couple of arts, you like the best and work the best for you. From then on you can focus your training more effectively, while maintaining the broad base of knowledge that can serve you well in the future.

I am blessed and cursed with a sifu who knows several Chinese arts. On the one hand, he has a lot to teach and that is great. On the other hand, he has a lot to teach, and it can be overwhelming. He has taught me material from more than one of these arts. Some I like better than others, and some feel more natural for me. I expect that this will work its way out eventually for me, when I finally decide which is best for me and where to focus my energy. In the meantime, I still have much to learn from him.

 

[Andrew Green]

Every art has a focus, and there is crossover, but if the golas are different...

Consider a self-defence art, with a goal of dropping a untrained person as quickly as possible. The attacks and training methods will differ from someone training for a competitive event, even a no rules street fight.

And they will of course be very different hen someones who is in it for the theatrics.

In a sense, a lot of the goals people can train for are contradictory to others, making it near impossible for a single system to cover everything to any level of skill. It would just come out as a jumbled mess of stuff with no sense of prupose or direction.

The "complete" argument is a weak one, as everyone compares others systems based on what their personal bias tells them is important. (Ground/clinch/standup or empty hand/blade/stick or Kata/Kihon/Kumite or whatever)

We get fights when people THINK what they do is complete, and try to make claims about how it works in areas that it doesn't. Like standup only schools talking about stopping a wrestler with no understanding of wrestling, which seems to be a common one.

Of course it goes in all directions, but lately with grappling being the "trend" that one comes up a lot.

I've also seem guys that don't do stand up sparring tell others to keep their chin up for posture when sparring... a big no no.

Or non-weapons folk completly forgetting that hands are important things to avoid getting hit in.

Or even trying to apply full contact body posture to "health" training, let's face it, the way you stand when someone is trying to hit you is not great posture for relaxing muscles and staying healthy...

 

[Old Fat Kenpoka]

I have heard the saying, "Study one art long enough, and you will learn all the others".

Actually...no. That is nonsense. You will not learn to fight on the ground if you only study Escrima. You will not learn to box if you only study Jiu Jitsu. You won't learn to defend against a weapon if you only study Olympic Tae Kwon Do.

 

[Bigshadow]

My opinion is the art I train is complete. More specifically, I believe it gives the practitioner the eyes to see how to deal with unknowns as well as knowns. I don't believe the scrolls have everything concievable written in them, but the end result is not rote memorization of the kata or scrolls, it is the enlightment to the universal truths (one day I hope I can find MY enlightment :rofl.

 

[Old Fat Kenpoka]

in a city like San Francisco, I can choose between literally dozens and dozens of systems to study, with even more instructors. Some of them are very good, many are very poor, and many are in between, but the choices are there. It can be overwhelming.

...

I believe that when you are young in the martial arts, you should study as many things as possible, so long as you don't sacrifice quality for quantity. This gives you a broad variety and understanding of many different approaches in the martial arts. Eventually, as you get a bit older, you decide which art, or which couple of arts, you like the best and work the best for you. From then on you can focus your training more effectively, while maintaining the broad base of knowledge that can serve you well in the future.

Correct on both points.

 

[Flying Crane]

Actually...no. That is nonsense. You will not learn to fight on the ground if you only study Escrima. You will not learn to box if you only study Jiu Jitsu. You won't learn to defend against a weapon if you only study Olympic Tae Kwon Do.

Maybe I'm mistaken, but the way I understood HKF's comment was more in line with "if you understand one art deeply, and have trained well and thoroughly, it can be effective no matter the circumstances, and no matter what art your opponent studied".

No, you don't learn all arts, but you develop an ability to deal with all arts, on some level. I think there is truth in this, but we are implying a very high level of understanding and skill in the art.

 

[Old Fat Kenpoka]

Maybe I'm mistaken, but the way I understood HKF's comment was more in line with "if you understand one art deeply, and have trained well and thoroughly, it can be effective no matter the circumstances, and no matter what art your opponent studied".

No, you don't learn all arts, but you develop an ability to deal with all arts, on some level. I think there is truth in this, but we are implying a very high level of understanding and skill in the art.

We understand HKF's statement the same way. And we disagree on the statement's validity. I do not believe that you learn the ability to deal with all arts by studying one.

 

[Bigshadow]

Maybe I'm mistaken, but the way I understood HKF's comment was more in line with "if you understand one art deeply, and have trained well and thoroughly, it can be effective no matter the circumstances, and no matter what art your opponent studied".

No, you don't learn all arts, but you develop an ability to deal with all arts, on some level. I think there is truth in this, but we are implying a very high level of understanding and skill in the art.

I agree with that. I believe it comes with understand the universal physical principles that underpin the human anatomy. Of course I believe there is more to it than that, but I believe that is the fundamentals.

However, I don't believe it means that you *know* another art, that would be absurd.

 

[HKphooey]

Maybe I'm mistaken, but the way I understood HKF's comment was more in line with "if you understand one art deeply, and have trained well and thoroughly, it can be effective no matter the circumstances, and no matter what art your opponent studied".

No, you don't learn all arts, but you develop an ability to deal with all arts, on some level. I think there is truth in this, but we are implying a very high level of understanding and skill in the art.

Crane, up know me all too well. Thanks.

If you know my background and read many of my posts, I study many of the arts (and respect all of them). I also did not designate a specific style.

On a side note, study The FMA's long enough, with a good instructor and you will learn groundfighting.

I love all the styles. Learning is the best martial art!