Generalize Before We Specialize?

[Shotgun Buddha]

Heh haven't gotten to post in a long while, been very busy with work and training. But Ive been thinking something over for a little while, thought I'd see what others think of it.
Its occurred to me that martial arts has evolved an awful lot of specialists. The obvious distinction, (and one which is the result of many many wearying debates) is the specialization of striking and grappling etc, being a puncher, kicker, wrestler, ground-fighter etc.
This of course results in the debate about whether its better to cross-train to cover more bases, with the usual rebuttals of "jack of all trades master of none" and then we all lapse into commenting on each others mothers.

The other major distinction, is regarding the focus of training. The main combat focuses that exist are sport, self-defence, military(far fewer people do this than think they do), security, historical, and ahem, recreational.
Once more we have numerous debates about the superiority of which focus, or which focus is best.
I choose to label this debate: My Samurai is bigger than yours.

Now, rather than re-hash all those arguements, Ive been thinking that if we're approching this purely from a combat training point of view, that maybe having that specific focus at first is a bad idea. AT FIRST.
That instead the more logical approach would be to take a general study of combat, to better understand its various focuses and sub elements, to a level of at least basic competency.
And then once we have that competency, specialize from there according to preference.
Much like when studying science, you study it in general before focusing on a specific field.
In the case of both sport and self defence at least, I feel it would be of great benefit to have an understanding and appreciation of both, before deciding on which to devote youself too.
Yes, it would take far more time to study this way. But to be honest, most of us are doing this for a hobby. Time is not that big an issue accept to our egos.
I specify those doing it for a hobby, people involved in security and or military pursuits have obvious enough time retraints.

So what you think? Should we from day one decide to be self-defence strikers? Or should we study around for maybe a year or two, gain an understanding of martial arts itself, so that we can then better appreciate the field we devote ourselves too?
And lets leave the mothers and samurai out of this

 

[Flying Crane]

Very interesting notion and point of view that you are putting forth.

I suspect if one is left to their own devices, it would be more difficult to do this as schools may not be available to cover all the bases, and it could be difficult and awkward to jump around to get all aspects. But if a single school, with competent instructor(s) were in a position to offer the general base, the General Education Requirements, to coin a phrase from academia, that could really have some merit. Even if the Gen-Eds are avaliable at a single school, that same school might only be able to offer a specialty in one or two methods beyond that, but maybe different schools would offer a different specialty, but still be able to provide the Gen-Eds.

I think in the past the arts were more all-encompassing. I believe it is a more recent phenomenon that the arts have splintered into specializations, sometimes to the ultra extreme. Some schools still do offer a more well-rounded education, covering all bases, even if they tend to specialize more in one methodology.

Good thread. We'll see where this goes...

 

[Blindside]

Historical combat arts covered all ranges, unarmed and armed, if you are seriously interested in self defense or combat it seems silly not to cover all of those bases in a modern context.

If you are a hobbiest, then you can do whatever you want.

Lamont

 

[stone_dragone]

Interstingly enough, Blindside, your signature block speaks volumes on this very topic!

 

[CuongNhuka]

Cuong Nhu includes Shotokan (balanced striking and rooted stances), Vovinam (kicking and light mobile foot work), Wing Chun (punching with rooted stanes), Western Boxing (punching with light mobile footwork), Judo (ground fighting), Aikido (takedowns), and Tai Chi (what ever you like). Until you're about a black belt the focus is on gaining a good, well rouded understanding of the various methods of fighting. Latter, you're expected to fight a niche and focus on that. By a niche I mean punching or kicking (as far as striking goes), standing or the ground (as far as grappling goes), and being rooted or being mobile (as far as footwork is conserened).
The focus on building a Jack-Of-All-Trades base, then specializing is what (I feel) makes Cuong Nhu as hard as it is to learn (we like it that way, so you know) and also as effective as it is. Think about it. If at your school there is someone who is near invincable on his back, and you suck on your back. So, you get him to give you some tips. Now, expand that same idea to nearly 60 dojos and over 700 students, and you have a recipe for an amazing amount of skill. Especially when you take Cuong Nhu's amazingly high love of cross training. At a point, it almost becomes required to progress.

 

[Hawke]

Greetings Shotgun Buddha,

There are Martial Art Academies and MMA schools like http://inosanto.com/ that offer all ranges of combat, striking, grappling, weapons, and empty hands. Some of these academies do not offer a belt system, some use a color sash, and a few do offer a belt system.

Check what's around your neighborhood that has a combat focus training. FMA like Petiki Tirsia Kali has a different type of training than sports orientated MA. If you go general than specific you may have to reprogram your muscle memories. Over time in your MA journey you will learn refinements that will make you more efficient. Some learn these refinements quickly, for others this may take awhile.

If possible play with other people from different styles. See how they deal with strikes, take downs, and look at their foot work. So many MA say they are combat, but you will have to check them out yourself (not all instructors are the same even if they teach the same art). All real MA have something to offer in foot work, power generation, leverage, pressure points, structure, dealing with multiple opponents (ie, 3 or more at the same time) timing, etc. Having a solid foundation before branching off will help you compare all these factors when playing with others.

Taking Flying Crane's analogy of academia, medical doctors have to take GE's, get their bachelors, go to med school, intern at a hospital to specialize, then finally get their license, and forever take continuing classes to keep up to date in their field.

May your journey bring you insight, joy, and peace.

 

[MJS]

Heh haven't gotten to post in a long while, been very busy with work and training. But Ive been thinking something over for a little while, thought I'd see what others think of it.
Its occurred to me that martial arts has evolved an awful lot of specialists. The obvious distinction, (and one which is the result of many many wearying debates) is the specialization of striking and grappling etc, being a puncher, kicker, wrestler, ground-fighter etc.
This of course results in the debate about whether its better to cross-train to cover more bases, with the usual rebuttals of "jack of all trades master of none" and then we all lapse into commenting on each others mothers.

The other major distinction, is regarding the focus of training. The main combat focuses that exist are sport, self-defence, military(far fewer people do this than think they do), security, historical, and ahem, recreational.
Once more we have numerous debates about the superiority of which focus, or which focus is best.
I choose to label this debate: My Samurai is bigger than yours.

Now, rather than re-hash all those arguements, Ive been thinking that if we're approching this purely from a combat training point of view, that maybe having that specific focus at first is a bad idea. AT FIRST.
That instead the more logical approach would be to take a general study of combat, to better understand its various focuses and sub elements, to a level of at least basic competency.
And then once we have that competency, specialize from there according to preference.
Much like when studying science, you study it in general before focusing on a specific field.
In the case of both sport and self defence at least, I feel it would be of great benefit to have an understanding and appreciation of both, before deciding on which to devote youself too.
Yes, it would take far more time to study this way. But to be honest, most of us are doing this for a hobby. Time is not that big an issue accept to our egos.
I specify those doing it for a hobby, people involved in security and or military pursuits have obvious enough time retraints.

So what you think? Should we from day one decide to be self-defence strikers? Or should we study around for maybe a year or two, gain an understanding of martial arts itself, so that we can then better appreciate the field we devote ourselves too?
And lets leave the mothers and samurai out of this

What an interesting thread! :ultracool

You bring up an interesting question. I've always felt that before someone joins a Martial Arts program, they should have a basic idea as to what they expect and want from it. Its no different than going to college. Do you want just a general study or do you want to focus on something, such as law, medicine or business?

As you said, most do this for a hobby, so time isnt a huge factor. The study of an art can be a lifetime worth of training. I feel that if the goal is self defense, you shouldn't have to wait 10yrs. before being able to understand how to do that. Its often said that once you reach black belt, that is the time when you're really starting the journey, the time when you really sit back and look deeper into the material.

I dont know, part of me says yes, experiment with both, then make your decision, but the other part says, decided on your goal beforehand. The more I think of it though, I tend to still lean towards the latter. While time may not be an issue, you can devote more time to what you really want, rather than spending 2 yrs in something you really have no interest in.

 

[Mei Hua]

You bring up an interesting question. I've always felt that before someone joins a Martial Arts program, they should have a basic idea as to what they expect and want from it. Its no different than going to college. Do you want just a general study or do you want to focus on something, such as law, medicine or business?

As you said, most do this for a hobby, so time isnt a huge factor. The study of an art can be a lifetime worth of training. I feel that if the goal is self defense, you shouldn't have to wait 10yrs. before being able to understand how to do that. Its often said that once you reach black belt, that is the time when you're really starting the journey, the time when you really sit back and look deeper into the material.

I dont know, part of me says yes, experiment with both, then make your decision, but the other part says, decided on your goal beforehand. The more I think of it though, I tend to still lean towards the latter. While time may not be an issue, you can devote more time to what you really want, rather than spending 2 yrs in something you really have no interest in.

These are some good points.

Ideally, you should research the school/style/instructor of whatever you're interested in, see what they're about, what they teach, how they train, what their goals are.

As for the thread topic, concerning style/training wise , I think it's best to generalize first and get a taste of what is offered and see where your skill base lies, then specialize in that to build a strong foundation for a while then cross train in other skill sets that your specialty lacks so that you improve your foundation and become more adept. Whether you train to be a fighter or just for fun/hobby doesn't really matter, just as long as you enjoy what you do and get the most from your training.


As for myself, I pretty much did the same, I generalized, chose my specialty in Striking and worked that for a number of years and then added Grappling/Groundfighting/Takedowns/Submissions to my game and then specialized in them as my core foundation of Striking was solid by then and adding the other skill sets greatly improved my game and versatility.

That's how I teach in my school, whether someone wants to be a fighter and compete MMA or they just like Kung Fu and want to train CMA for fun/hobby, I allow my students to pick their goal and intent and offer them the choices they seek, IMO that's what a good school should do.

 

[qi-tah]

Hmm, but where would you get such generalised training if you are just starting out? Often undergrad "generalist" courses are highly structured and standardised, the opposite is pretty much true of the various MA, as each one will have their different methods etc. And often ppl who start a MA are swayed in their choices by either a particular school or a particular art, not by deliberately seeking out a broad fighting education. It's only after aquiring a bit of knowledge about what they are doing that they can start to identify gaps in their training and look around for training to supplement their knowledge. (and there are just about always going to be gaps!)

So i guess i see the average person's MA evoloution as being:

a) start a specific art (for whatever reason) knowing nothing or very little
b) gain a bit of knowledge in that base style and start to identify gaps in their training
c) cross-train to gain information that helps to fill those gaps
d) re-evaluate their base style in the light of new information (often requiring a more intensive examination of basic training!)
e) repeat steps c and d ad infanitum

To take a bit of a side step...

I realise that this wasn't the way martial arts were taught traditionally... in CMA traditionally you would start with an external style like Long fist and only be taught internal styles like xing yi, ba gua and taiji once you had mastered that. It was informal, but there was a bit of a curriculum across different styles. Now we can skip the foundations and enrol in Taiji without the proper knowledge and bodily conditioning that gives the art it's power. And yes, i am one of those poor saps who is just starting to realise just how much i don't know...!

 

[Shotochem]

So i guess i see the average person's MA evoloution as being:

a) start a specific art (for whatever reason) knowing nothing or very little
b) gain a bit of knowledge in that base style and start to identify gaps in their training
c) cross-train to gain information that helps to fill those gaps
d) re-evaluate their base style in the light of new information (often requiring a more intensive examination of basic training!)
e) repeat steps c and d ad infanitum

I might add:

f) If after C&D, one is still not satisfied or you bored beyond belief and sick to death of original art, switch to another and repeat process.

-Marc-

 

[Em MacIntosh]

I don't think we're born with much, if any, idea what we're good at and to put yourself into the position of a kick fighter just because you have long legs or as a wrestler because you have low hips and naturally strong limbs doesn't make sense. Perhaps the guy with long legs would be better at boxing. I think it's important to be exposed to the ways the body moves (the way it doesn't move...) concepts, psychology and everything else you can think of. I don't think you can go too wrong with learning how to breath, footwork and conditioning (push ups, stretching etc.) for a start. Every one of has to or had to learn how we, personally, move. How our psychology and intellect work (aggression, compassion, despiration, willpower etc.). You are a much better fighter when you are fighting like you. Nothing can be assumed based on the obvious (build, attitude etc.) and only through testing theory does it cease to be theory and become knowledge. Knowledge you can act on much more confidently. I stay jack of all trades because I still don't really know how I fight (except I have no qualms about biting...) and don't want to concentrate my effort until I figure out where it is best spent. I cannot commit to one area because I'm not confident I would choose the right one.

 

[Shotgun Buddha]

Very interesting notion and point of view that you are putting forth.

I suspect if one is left to their own devices, it would be more difficult to do this as schools may not be available to cover all the bases, and it could be difficult and awkward to jump around to get all aspects. But if a single school, with competent instructor(s) were in a position to offer the general base, the General Education Requirements, to coin a phrase from academia, that could really have some merit. Even if the Gen-Eds are avaliable at a single school, that same school might only be able to offer a specialty in one or two methods beyond that, but maybe different schools would offer a different specialty, but still be able to provide the Gen-Eds.

I think in the past the arts were more all-encompassing. I believe it is a more recent phenomenon that the arts have splintered into specializations, sometimes to the ultra extreme. Some schools still do offer a more well-rounded education, covering all bases, even if they tend to specialize more in one methodology.

Good thread. We'll see where this goes...

I think this tendency towards specialization is simply because combat training these days IS a hobby, unlike in previous times where if you were training for combat, it was because well, you were going into combat. Necessity would have dictated a need for basic skills that could be learned quickly, and an ability to adapt to different situations.
More than likely, martial arts have their roots in a bloody basic fighting style that was a mix between striking, wrestling and bludgeoning with a rock. Whatever let you return to ARMED combat the fastest.
However come peace time, people were then free to further develop and specialize these skills, as rock bludgeoning ability is no longer a priority.
And eventually we get to the point where we have specializations of specializations, arts which focus primarily on kicking out of the striking range, or joint-mainipulation out of the grappling range.

I feel that building a foundation in the various elements of combat will aid a martial artist greatly, simply by allowing him to better understand the martial arts themselves, and the evolution of the various styles.
To me, one of the key aspects of being a martial artist is not just the understanding of your own art, but the appreciation and interest in all martial arts, and all that involves.
Just my feelings on it though. Will reply to more posts later, work beckons. Grrr.