Hybrid Martial Arts or just scammers ?

[Old Happy Tiger]

Like some of your know, I've been considering joining a Martial Arts school again and while I'm currently waiting because of time and money. For the past two years I've been looking around.
Some of the local schools I've seen, are really great around my area. However... Without "pointing fingers" I have seen a few, that are more towards hybrid styles, although they claim they are traditional.

I have also seen many folks on YouTube stating they are teaching xyz Martial Art, yet they are not honest to their viewers on what they are showing and sometimes teaching live, is a Martial Art that they themselves modified.

I have NO issues with hybrid Martial Arts, but if you have a video on YouTube or even a school that you are teaching.. For example Aikido.. and you are teaching boxing covers, knees and elbows from Muay Thai Kickboxing as a part of your school.. SORRY that's not being honest and ethical. If I am wrong or missing something here, please let me know and correct me.

 

[Flying Crane]

I dunno. I guess I don’t worry much about it anymore.

People are free to do what they want. Things get modified and changed and adjusted all the time. Who gets to decide where the line lies, beyond which something is no longer “X”?

Make your own decisions about where you would or would not train. Beyond that, it doesn’t matter.

 

[skribs]

I'll counter with a question: At what point is an art "locked" that it can no longer be modified?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I have NO issues with hybrid Martial Arts, but if you have a video on YouTube or even a school that you are teaching.. For example Aikido.. and you are teaching boxing covers, knees and elbows from Muay Thai Kickboxing as a part of your school.. SORRY that's not being honest and ethical. If I am wrong or missing something here, please let me know and correct me.

You may look at this from a different angle instead. If you are a MA instructor, but you don't even know how to throw a roundhouse kick, how can you convince your students that your own MA training is complete?

A: The CMA long fist system doesn't have MT flying knee and TKD spin hook kick.
B: My long fist system has both because I have integrated both into my long fist system.

 

[Buka]

Like some of your know, I've been considering joining a Martial Arts school again and while I'm currently waiting because of time and money. For the past two years I've been looking around.
Some of the local schools I've seen, are really great around my area. However... Without "pointing fingers" I have seen a few, that are more towards hybrid styles, although they claim they are traditional.

I have also seen many folks on YouTube stating they are teaching xyz Martial Art, yet they are not honest to their viewers on what they are showing and sometimes teaching live, is a Martial Art that they themselves modified.

I have NO issues with hybrid Martial Arts, but if you have a video on YouTube or even a school that you are teaching.. For example Aikido.. and you are teaching boxing covers, knees and elbows from Muay Thai Kickboxing as a part of your school.. SORRY that's not being honest and ethical. If I am wrong or missing something here, please let me know and correct me.

Sometimes it can be more complicated that that. I think it depends on how your art, your dojo, your organization - if there is one - and how much and what kind of experience you have.

In these types of discussions it always comes down to one important point for me. Say I teach XYZ Martial Arts. Somewhere on my Martial journey somebody teaches me a better, more practical way to do something. It could be anything, an exercise, a method of stretching, a strength exercise, a particular kick, takedown, punch or strike, an escape, a submission or a better set up for a certain submission.

Say they teach me something like that, and after much practice, I understand it and have it down.

If you were a student at the school I was teaching, would you want to ask someday, “If you knew a better way to do that, why didn’t you teach it to me?

How should I answer? “Oh, we don’t teach that here because it’s not how it was done before.”

The way I would teach something, without ruffling feathers, if say, I was teaching in another school or a seminar. “If you run into trouble with that, this is an alternate way that comes from such and such.

The last thing I’m ever going to do is keep something that’s tactically sound from students. Any students.

 

[Old Happy Tiger]

I'm not saying any style can't be modified, and really I appreciate the replies that I got back. Sorry I'm confused a bit...
... Maybe it because I am an older guy I'm not seeing things like I should.

So, again if there is a school that is teaching for example traditional Okinawan Karate AND advertising it as such has a new student that joins that school to learn that style of Okinawan Karate and only ends up on the mat learning and practicing BJJ/grappling in that school, then that is 100% "ok" in today standards? I'm just trying to understand if a school advertises one style then it's ok to totally not be what is really being shown at that school for that style of Martial Art as advertise? Again, I'm 100% ok for hybrid Martial Arts and modifying the same as long as the student knows that what they are learning is a hybrid / modified art from the traditional / original.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

It depends on the starting point and the ending point.

It may

- make sense for a TMA instructor to teach MMA.
- not make sense for an MMA instructor to teach TMA.

 

[Damien]

I think there is a line. In places that might be a bit murky, but others pretty clear.

You say you teach X style, then you'd best actually know that style and you'd best be teaching material primarily from that style. However, learning basic fighting skills and drills is fine. So sure if you teach Ju Jitsu but never actually do Ju Jitsu, that's false advertising. If you teach Ju Jitsu, but also teach people how to punch, kick and move around, I think that's fine.

The trick is to then integrate the two, so you can throw some punches, then use Ju Jitsu as a counter for example.

Something like Aikido is one of those murky areas. The entire principle behind it is to not hurt your opponent in disrupting their attack. If you start teaching people how to punch the opponent in the face, are you really teaching Aikido then? Perhaps better to say that you teach Aikido techniques and Kickboxing together, but you're not an Aikido school.

If you want to be effective in a self defence situation, training the basics of punching, kicking, moving is a must. If you want to train for sport, keep it to that style. If you want to train just for interest, you can keep it to that style, or mix in basics from elsewhere.

Another slightly murky area might be forms. Sure you can modify form X, for a whole host of reasons (weird techniques that don't make sense, things that are too difficult for your students, a better way you've seen another practitioner do etc.) and I think that's fine, within reason. But if you were teaching Karate, and then started getting people to do Mantis forms, and told them it was all the same thing. That's not OK.

I think in all cases the best thing is to just be honest about what you teach. If you bring something in from elsewhere, tell people that is what you are doing. Have a core style and supplement where needed. If anyone is ever lying to you, it's usually for their gain.

Oh, I'm also generally wary of new styles people have made up by mixing and matching this and that. People that have supposedly mastered 6 martial arts and blended them all together.... well either they didn't master them, or their syllabuses were very small. Most martial arts have some core principles that hold them together, if you start mixing wildly you'll end up with some weird thing that never quite pieces together.

 

[isshinryuronin]

I think in all cases the best thing is to just be honest about what you teach. If you bring something in from elsewhere, tell people that is what you are doing. Have a core style and supplement where needed. If anyone is ever lying to you, it's usually for thei,r gain.

Oh, I'm also generally wary of new styles people have made up by mixing and matching this and that. People that have supposedly mastered 6 martial arts and blended them all together.... well either they didn't master them, or their syllabuses were very small. Most martial arts have some core principles that hold them together, if you start mixing wildly you'll end up with some weird thing that never quite pieces together.

Makes sense to me. Be very proficient in the core style and blend some other complementary style that integrates well with the primary one. If you advertise X, teach it faithfully and fully, and then let students know what other stuff you added in so they know where X ends and the other stuff begins. This allows X to be accurately passed on.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

You are a long fist guy and have leaned many long fist forms. Today you teach a Sanda class. Since long fist is where you came from, you like to give credit to your primary long fist system, but you don't teach any long fist form.

Can you call

- your class as long fist class?
- yourself as long fist instructor?

 

[Damien]

You are a long fist guy and have leaned many long fist forms. Today you teach a Sanda class. Since long fist is where you came from, you like to give credit to your primary long fist system, but you don't teach any long fist form.

Can you call

- your class as long fist class?
- yourself as long fist instructor?

It's a Sanda class, so you call it that. You can have a bio on your site or tell people that you learnt long fist, but don't say you're teaching it if you're teaching Sanda. They may be related, and you may bring in some long fist techniques, but they are not the same.

You could just call yourself a kung fu instructor. You could teach multiple things but right now you're teaching Sanda.

Right now I'm teaching a qi gong class, I don't call it Shaolin kung fu, even though that is my primary background, and indeed the system in which I learnt qi gong. I used to run a club that did Shaolin and Sanda, we called one lesson Sanda, another fitness and the rest Shaolin kung fu.

I don't see the point in not being straight with your students, unless you're trying to lie for some form of financial gain (which I of course wouldn't advocate!), muddying the water by calling one thing another doesn't do anyone any good.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

You could just call yourself a kung fu instructor.

Agree that if you just teach the centerline principle, but you don't teach any WC forms, you should not call your class a WC class.

 

[auntlisa1103]

My GM (TKD) told me this story the other day.

When his oldest was about 8, they were palling around with the local Karate GM. He never gave any crap to my GM, but he was giving some trouble to the son. So the son finally has a butt full of it, does one of our yellow belt one steps and reaps this adult karate instructor to the ground. Karate Guy got angry and my GM finally steps in:

Is there a problem?

YES!! Your son…..

Oh no. You started it. You’re just mad an 8 year old successfully put you on your back.

You guys (TKD) don’t do that (reap)!!!

Keep thinking that, bud. Please. Keep thinking that.


I guess my point is, I don’t know that incorporating “other stuff” necessarily violates anything about a given art. If anything it fills out your skill.

In addition to TKD I practice a Korean art called hapkiye. Basically grappling, joint locks and falling, with a high focus on posture and motion. I’ve gained as much or more from it as from TKD. The vast majority of my priprioceptive improvement has come from hapkiye. And that has helped me immensely to learn TKD, including learning how I best learn TKD.

 

[Gyuki]

Depends what you want to learn and why you want to learn it.
If one wishes to study a style or teach it for historical reasons or re enactment then it is indeed blasphemy to mix in anything or modify the way it was done initially.

However, I do not wish that for myself at all and as a Martial Artist, not a martial art re enactor, I feel it is important to know how to actually fight. If one needs or wishes to add things from other arts or different techniques to supplement what they already know, why not?

What is tradition? Why is it even kept? Those are the questions to ask when making such an assessement.

And if indeed something is a mix of 2 or more things, at what point does (as an exemple as I am not practicing these style) a Jiu jutsu practitionner that adds kickboxing to his art, is to not call what he does Jiu Jutsu anymore? What percentage of Jiu Jutsu needs to be present before it is not considered as such anymore?

I take these 2 extreme exemples as they differ a lot. Let's bring it closer. If my main style is Karate, but my kicks are usually Muay Thai kicks as they are based in their principles and method of execution. My blocks and punches tend to be a mix of Karate and some boxing. And I tend to have a Krav Maga mentality of not stopping, using closest limb, moving out of the live side and attack there if/when possible. What am I? A Karateka? A Krav Maga practitionner? A failed Muay Thai fighter? Or simply someone who has their own style and came to their own ways of combat?

Let's pretend I add a more grappling style of combat to that as well and get proeficient in it. If I was to teach this to someone else how should I even label it? It's definitely not Krav Maga, not Karate, not Muay Thai, not grappling art either and it sure is not the usual/main idea people would have of MMA....

If one is practicing for efficiency, in the ring or elsewhere, they will ultimately end up mixing techniques and methods from various styles and make them their own. Maybe Bruce was right.... we are all Mixed Martial Artist in the end. (At least not the re enactors)

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Depends what you want to learn and why you want to learn it.

The issue is many people are proud of themselves that they could keep their MA system "pure".

A: In Taiji, you should always keep your head straight up. You should never bend your head down.
B: As a Taiji master, if there is a $100 bill on the ground, will you bend down and pick it up?

A: In Taiji, you should never use brute force.
B: As a Taiji master, if your wife asks you to take the trash can out, will you use brute force to do it?

 

[Old Happy Tiger]

Thanks everyone for your comments. The main takeaway that I learned here, is it is considered nowadays 100% OK if a school advertises teaching a martial art even if it is not authentic or the vaguely the same as what is being advertised.

 

[Buka]

Thanks everyone for your comments. The main takeaway that I learned here, is it is considered nowadays 100% OK if a school advertises teaching a martial art even if it is not authentic or the vaguely the same as what is being advertised.

I do not believe that is okay at all, in any way, shape or form.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

I'm not saying any style can't be modified, and really I appreciate the replies that I got back. Sorry I'm confused a bit...
... Maybe it because I am an older guy I'm not seeing things like I should.

So, again if there is a school that is teaching for example traditional Okinawan Karate AND advertising it as such has a new student that joins that school to learn that style of Okinawan Karate and only ends up on the mat learning and practicing BJJ/grappling in that school, then that is 100% "ok" in today standards? I'm just trying to understand if a school advertises one style then it's ok to totally not be what is really being shown at that school for that style of Martial Art as advertise? Again, I'm 100% ok for hybrid Martial Arts and modifying the same as long as the student knows that what they are learning is a hybrid / modified art from the traditional / original.

So long as they explain at some point that that particular thing they got from somewhere that wasn't okinawan karate, IMO yes. There's also a bit of difference between teaching a slightly different technique, and teaching a different art entirely. So if I went to an okinawan karate school looking to learn to fight, and learned from them that they incorporate jujitsu into it, I'd be happy about that. If I wanted to learn pure okinawan karate, I'd be sad and probably leave. And both responses are perfectly fine.

 

[skribs]

I'm not saying any style can't be modified, and really I appreciate the replies that I got back. Sorry I'm confused a bit...
... Maybe it because I am an older guy I'm not seeing things like I should.

So, again if there is a school that is teaching for example traditional Okinawan Karate AND advertising it as such has a new student that joins that school to learn that style of Okinawan Karate and only ends up on the mat learning and practicing BJJ/grappling in that school, then that is 100% "ok" in today standards? I'm just trying to understand if a school advertises one style then it's ok to totally not be what is really being shown at that school for that style of Martial Art as advertise? Again, I'm 100% ok for hybrid Martial Arts and modifying the same as long as the student knows that what they are learning is a hybrid / modified art from the traditional / original.

I'll respond from a Taekwondo perspective, because that's what I'm most familiar with.

Kukkiwon Requirements	"Typical" School	All Possibilities
Taegeuk Poomsae World Taekwondo Sparring techniques	Teageuk Poomsae Palgwe Poomsae World Taekwondo Sparring techniques Basic traditional punches, blocks, kicks, elbow and knee strikes Some flashy kicks Basic punch defense, including block+strike or block+grab+take-down One weapon, such as nunchaku	Taegeuk, Palgwe, or other poomsae TKD sparring techniques Traditional TKD techniques Modern kickboxing and Muay Thai techniques Full-on tricking Weapons, including nunchaku, escrima, sword, bo, sai, kama, etc. Comprehensive grappling program, because Master is also a decent Judoka

As long as you meet the bolded requirements, you're doing "Kukkiwon" Taekwondo. You can spend all of class on those two requirements. You can spend 5% of class on those two requirements. You can spend 90% of class on poomsae, traditional technique, and one-step self-defense. Or you can spend 90% of class on kicks, footwork, and sparring.

If you don't include the Teageuks, then you can't call yourself Kukkiwon Taekwondo. But you can still call yourself Taekwondo. If you stray too far from what is generally considered to be Taekwondo, you might want to rebrand yourself. But it's still not fraud.

In your example, you talk about Okinawan Karate. There are multiple styles of Okinawan Karate. Some have grappling.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

... Maybe it because I am an older guy I'm not seeing things like I should.

May be you haven't seen enough.

I have seen someone integrated:

- white crane power generation method into his Yang Taiji system.
- Baji power generation method into his praying mantis system.
- WC centerline principle into his long fist system.
- Chinese wrestling leg skill into his Taiji system.
- ...