I am a Self-Taught MA Expert

[Omar B]

Would there be any situation Omar you could envisage whereupon a "natural talent" could, with enough empirical testing become a Major League pitcher? Or is that highly unlikely?


Yes! I would too! I think unfortunately those engaged in this kind of activity are the hyper-stimulated game-addicted movie-believing youtube wannabes and not serious "empirical" researchers LOL And but yes I absolutely agree Omar with what you are saying. I am operating purely as devil's advocate in a case of unmitigated martial hypothesis. Thank you

No, wouldn't ever happen. You may know how to throw a ball but is your form right? Are you accurate? Are you fast enough? Ever pitched at a live person? There is a lot that goes into a sport/art than just the mechanics of it, and even the mechanics are a lot more than they might seem from a video. Just liek any sport, a martial art is very much dependent on working in a cohesive and welcoming environment where there is a definite leader and others learning along with you. You can't become Captain Bad-*** by practicing by yourself on a mountain in winter ... no matter what the movies say.

Ever been in class and you are in your stance then Sensei walks by and adjusts you just an inch and suddenly everything perfect? He bends your knee a bit more, or moves a toe point slightly or something else as minute and then suddenly the whole mechanics of what you are doing comes together way better? I've seen toes moved a slight angle and suddenly punching power appreciable increases and torque on your joints drop precipitously.

 

[sgtmac_46]

The question will become, "How do I know that the techniques I am working on are effective?" and "Who is going to call me expert?"

On the first, I suppose you would have to be willing to suffer through the pain of seeing if what you are doing will work or not. Then you are going to have to convince someone to learn from you and let them see if what you have formulated will work or not.


On the second, I am not sure anyone in your lifetime would call you an "expert." There are however exceptions to every rule and it COULD happen.

Of course the same two questions could be asked of someone who is a proclaimed expert in a 'real' system......most especially the first question.

The real hinderance of trying to develop your own way from scratch is that many folks have already done the ground work, and you are trying to reinvent the wheel. It would be more efficient to 'steal' what they have already figured out, and apply it accordingly.

As for who will 'call you an expert'.......who cares? The folks concerned with whether someone else is an expert or not are generally the folks who themselves don't know anything to begin with. There are no real 'experts'..........there are only students who have progressed further than others.

 

[BloodMoney]

One could be an experienced fighter, without any formal training. Martial Arts, however, are a codified system of study, and hence more formal than simply fighting.

+1

Pretty much sums it up in my opinion, nothing more to add

 

[WC_lun]

I've heard the arguement before that there had to be a "first guy" to codify martial arts, and if he could do it, then so could someone else. That arguement is not based on reality. There wasn't a "first guy." There have been thousands of guys over time. Also the originators of the older fighting systems established what they did after already being experienced in the field of battle. That means real world, life and death combat. There just isn't any way for some kid pretending to fight ninjas in his mom's basement to get that same experience.

Jenna, to answer you question. In my opinion, yes, over time, with a training partner and enough experimentation a person might be able to come up with a proper bong sau to defend a centerline punch. Martial arts isn't about one technique though. Its about concepts and principles manifesting themselves through technique. While they might get that oe technique, I find it near impossible for a person to get the who;e picture through solo teaching.

Since you used bong sau as a reference, I will use Wing Chun as one. Wing Chun was created in the mid 1600's. There have been many, many, masters through that time that have added positively to the art. How can one person be expected to create something similiar with only thier own limited experience as a base? Heck, today even with the benefit of those masters there is lots of Wing Chun that is inferior and watered down. I just don't see how a solo person could distinguish the chaff from the wheat enough to be establish anything worth while.

 

[Big Don]

ex·pert

/n., v. ˈɛk

spɜrt; adj. ˈɛk

spɜrt, ɪkˈspɜrt/ Show Spelled
–noun 1. a person who has special skill or knowledge in some particular field; specialist; authority: a language expert.
---
I suppose one could become an expert fighter, and a self-taught BMF (think wallet) but, I'd bet damn few do

 

[Chris Parker]

Hey J,

Wow thank you for these insights. I am grateful for your thoughts and expertise. I would love to post a video of someone self taught as an expert in a form - even their own - of martial art. I am still searching! Thank you all again for your contribution! Jenna xo

Well, I actually could provide that.... see below. Not as an example of an expert, it must be said, and that is in established systems very similar to ones that I am trained in, as well as my actually being rather autodidactic, according to a number of people around me....

For example, I have the entire curriculum for Yokohama Den Asayama Ichiden Ryu Taijutsu, and can passably run through a fair amount of such systems as Katori Shinto Ryu, Kashima Shinryu, Kiraku Ryu, and many more. However, all I know is how I interpret the techniques (for the most part), so I cannot claim to know the arts or systems themselves.

What, in addition to repeated practice of refining your technique Christopher, would it take then to "know" the art?

Well, the systems I listed are classed as Koryu, and absolutely technically, you cannot be practicing the art without being a part of the Ryu itself, even if you are training in the techniques themselves. Part of this is the accurate transmission of the technical syllabus, but another very important point is the amount of imformation/teachings that are not part of the technical kata themselves. This is refered to as Kuden, or oral transmissions, and often are aspects of the kata that are not known or realised just by going through the physical actions.

So, essentially, to know the art is only possible if you are training it within the Ryu itself.

Learning to fight, on the other hand, well, that's easy. Pick a rough bar, go up to the biggest guy there, and suggest that he improperly knows the next biggest guy there. Frequently. Next, check yourself out of hospital, and repeat until the last part is no longer required. Of course, that is just learning to fight, or defend yourself, and is far from learning a martial art...

Why Christopher? What is unique to our definition of martial arts, that the above scenario - repeated enough times to the theoretical limit - would be excluded? Imagine the above scenario were put to a less harmful recursive loop: theorise a defence, test that theory and refine the result. Would it not be possible through empirical methods to eventually given adequate time develop a "proper" codified system all to oneself? Thank you

Basically, because martial arts are not about fighting. In fact, martial arts aren't about self defence at all, frankly (yes, they can be used for it, but that's not what they are about, or designed for). A martial art is a realistically an internally congruent philosophies taught through the medium of combative techniques. Just learning to generate enough power to knock someone out isn't a martial art, it's just hitting someone.

As to whether or not a "proper" codified system could be developed, it could, but it will take many, many encounters such as the one I listed above, and if the entire aim is handling a bar fight, much of what would make it a martial art is missing.

Bet you can't say that fast 5 times........:lfao:

Now to the question.........I really don't know when or how or even why the "ART" aspect came into play, but from the very beginnings, it was about fighting/combat/self defense. But now I'll answer a question with a question...."who trained the first guy that started the whole thing in the first place"?...........

That really depends on the art itself... I would say that the vast majority of arts were not designed for fighting/combat/self defence. That is one aspect of them, but it is not the real aim. The aim is to impart lessons, and the medium used is combative techniques. The technical repertoire is just too removed from what would be required if combative effectiveness is the only, or even primary, aim.

As to who trained the first guy, I'd go with Cryo's version... to a degree. The start was almost certainly effective technical developments (a new move, weapon, tactic etc for combat or hunting.... personally, I believe that hunting was the origin of martial arts, by the way), which would then be passed around. From that, certain groups realised that having these new developments gave them an advantage, so the transmission of such developments would be restricted. But so far we are just talking about technical aspects, and as I said, that is not the real focus of martial arts. The focus is on passing on lessons.

To give an example, Musashi developed his Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu, according to popular belief, and used it to survive and prevail in over 60 duels in his lifetime. However, that is not the actual way it happened. Musashi had some little schooling in his youth, and prevailed through natural talent, strength of mindset, and luck more than anything else. He was 30 years removed from his dueling days when he developed his art. And, although he would probably be thought of as a self-taught person today, he really had a great education in the teachings of various schools, through association, experience in dueling with them, and fervant study of the martial sciences as revealed through the Gorin no Sho. Pure combative effectiveness does not a martial art make.

 

[Drac]

..When I taught in the academy the head instructor would always refer to me as our resident martial arts expert, a term I disliked.."I am NO expert", I would tell him. "You know more about the MA than the other teachers and about 98% of the students, so you ARE an expert, so deal with it", was his answer..

 

[terryl965]

Well I never claim to be an expert at anything, for me too be an expert their would be no room to grow and in any Martial Arts we are growing are techs on a daily basis. I like the term season veteran in the Arts, because I have been doing it so long.

 

[Ken Morgan]

you cannot be practicing the art without being a part of the Ryu itself, even if you are training in the techniques themselves. Part of this is the accurate transmission of the technical syllabus, but another very important point is the amount of imformation/teachings that are not part of the technical kata themselves. This is refered to as Kuden, or oral transmissions, and often are aspects of the kata that are not known or realised just by going through the physical actions.

I actually disagree, but its not worth a debate! You'll write this very well written long post explaining your position, and my eyes will glaze over by the third paragraph and I just won't care anymore.....

Sigh...You or I, and include anyone who has practiced swords for more then 10 years can pick up a schools techniques in no time flat. We just can. We also have the background and understanding of the mechanics to be able to pick up/figure out the nuances of almost any sword school, perhaps not perfectly, but we'll figure it out. There are no secrets.

Oh well off to swing swords!!

 

[jks9199]

Can a person learn to fight on their own, without teachers? Certainly. It'll be painful, and a lot of time will be wasted on inefficient ideas, and truly testing it today would be problematic. Unless, of course, you want to do the development in the Gray Bar Hotel.

Can a person learn a given martial art on their own, without formal instruction? That's a different question. A very few people out there have the combination of intellectual and physical talents that, given good reference material and time, they can learn the motions and many of the principles of a particular martial art on their own. Some arts would be next to impossible; too much is so subtle that it's very unlikely that someone could puzzle it out properly on their own. Other arts are very easy; lots of people, for example, have learned the rudiments of boxing from various manuals over the years.

Can a person become a martial arts expert without formal training? This is yet another question: what exactly do you mean by "martial arts expert?" Is it a person with physical skills or simply knowledge? You can certainly, through reading, interview, and other scholarly research techniques, learn about various martial arts without taking part in a single class. I believe, for example, that the curator of a well known ninja museum in Japan has never trained in any of the documentable ninjutsu ryu. His expertise is for others to judge...

 

[Jenna]

However in that group are people that were instructed by a few, some maybe by one, and originally perhaps just one somewhere responsble for part of your system

I wonder bribius is it possible that you, me or anyone here could be a "one" by putting ourselves through sufficient repetitions and refining of varying training scenarios? Or not? Thank you

The question will become, "How do I know that the techniques I am working on are effective?"

Searcher, can we not ascertain that because those techniques do what they are designed to do? Each technique serves a purpose which apportions its own success. With sufficient iteration and refining would it be possible to design a perfect technique in which you are expert in its deployment? Are there conditions to this happening? Is it an impossibility? Thank you

Ever been in class and you are in your stance then Sensei walks by and adjusts you just an inch and suddenly everything perfect?

Oh of course yes! I appreciate Omar you have given a definitive no to the question and but I wonder could you with your training partner not arrive at the same conclusion with your own independent methodology having worked through sufficient repetition and refining? Or must it be handed down? Or is it simply the case that having technique handed down to us is the most efficient way to learn. Or perhaps it is the easiest? Id o not know I am just asking your opinion Thank you

The real hinderance of trying to develop your own way from scratch is that many folks have already done the ground work, and you are trying to reinvent the wheel. It would be more efficient to 'steal' what they have already figured out, and apply it accordingly.

I totally appreciate the points you have made here sgtmac_46. You are absolutely correct insofar as there is no sense in reinventing the wheel. Basing this on the assumption that the existing martial art in question is indeed the perfectly circular wheel to support your vehicle then of course the wheel is already invented. Some apparent perfect circles though are simply collections of tangential straight lines claiming to be perfect maybe

As for who will 'call you an expert'.......who cares? The folks concerned with whether someone else is an expert or not are generally the folks who themselves don't know anything to begin with. There are no real 'experts'..........there are only students who have progressed further than others.

This is a well worded comment I think. I have never appreciated the teaching of any martial artist who has informed me that they are an expert. For me, it is a paradox that a true martial art expert appreciates what is missing from their knowledge. Thank you

How can one person be expected to create something similiar with only thier own limited experience as a base? Heck, today even with the benefit of those masters there is lots of Wing Chun that is inferior and watered down.

I welcome and respect your comments thank you WC_lun! I understand entirely the reference to an inferior Wing Chun. I think a standard by which to compare a superior and inferior Wing Chun would be necessary then no? If it is inferior by virtue of having no history or by virtue of having no style or integrity then that is superficial inferiority maybe? If it is inferior because it does not work against opponents then that is the only true measure of inferiority no? I do not know if I am properly making the point I am trying to. If you were through you own relentless trial-and-error to divine a technique that could defend against a certain type of WC strike then is that still inferior because there is no history attached to it? Or is it equal because it works? At one point WC techniques were less than the perfectly refined movements they are now no? Apologies if I am not being clear! thank you

I suppose one could become an expert fighter, and a self-taught BMF (think wallet) but, I'd bet damn few do

I agree! Big Don what for you are the differences between an expert fighter and an expert martial artist? Is there ever a possibility do you think for a self-taught expert fighter to match a properly trained martial artist? Thank you

As to whether or not a "proper" codified system could be developed, it could, but it will take many, many encounters such as the one I listed above, and if the entire aim is handling a bar fight, much of what would make it a martial art is missing.

You are agreeing Christopher that to develop a system of perfectly refined techniques is theoretically possible through empirical methodology yes? Would it be possible do you think to bridge the gap between this "fighting skillset" should we say and a "proper" martial art? Or is properness in that case subject to our existing arts having been formed historically in another older epoch?

Musashi had some little schooling in his youth, and prevailed through natural talent, strength of mindset, and luck more than anything else. He was 30 years removed from his dueling days when he developed his art. And, although he would probably be thought of as a self-taught person today, he really had a great education in the teachings of various schools, through association, experience in dueling with them, and fervant study of the martial sciences as revealed through the Gorin no Sho. Pure combative effectiveness does not a martial art make.

So Musashi prevailed because he has a modicum of schooling a natural talent and a perseverence. If you yourself possessed those skills would you be capable of generating a fighting system which to all intents and purposes was a martial art? Thank you

..When I taught in the academy the head instructor would always refer to me as our resident martial arts expert, a term I disliked.."I am NO expert", I would tell him. "You know more about the MA than the other teachers and about 98% of the students, so you ARE an expert, so deal with it", was his answer..

Yes I think that illustrates that perhaps one's expertise is dependent upon whomever is doing the classifying. I wonder if we defeat an opponent or aggressor then that opponent or aggressor will see us as having greater expertise than theirs yes? Do you think it is possible that you would be capable of developing the kind of expertise that your head instructor was referring to by your own empirical methods? Thank you

Well I never claim to be an expert at anything, for me too be an expert their would be no room to grow and in any Martial Arts we are growing are techs on a daily basis

I agree Terry yet compared to me you are an expert in your art. Compared to others in your art you are an expert yes? I wonder do you think you or any of us would be able to achieve expert level [comparable to other experts in other martial arts] by discovering techniques for ourselves through trial and error? Thank you

Sigh...You or I, and include anyone who has practiced swords for more then 10 years can pick up a schools techniques in no time flat. We just can. We also have the background and understanding of the mechanics to be able to pick up/figure out the nuances of almost any sword school, perhaps not perfectly, but we'll figure it out. There are no secrets.

Ken is a degree of formal training necessary in order to achieve this [or any] level of self-teaching capability? You would approximate that at 10yr as an average? Thank you

Can a person become a martial arts expert without formal training? This is yet another question: what exactly do you mean by "martial arts expert?" Is it a person with physical skills or simply knowledge? You can certainly, through reading, interview, and other scholarly research techniques, learn about various martial arts without taking part in a single class. I believe, for example, that the curator of a well known ninja museum in Japan has never trained in any of the documentable ninjutsu ryu. His expertise is for others to judge...

Wow that is a comprehensive answer thank you jks9199. To me an expert in martial arts may be adjudged so relative to those with whom they are engaged. Were you to defeat me in a physical confrontation then it might be argued that you were in possession of a greater fighting expertise. To me you are therefore an expert. My point though is not to be adjudged expert by any arbiter of what is what in an art and but rather I am wondering is it possible to achieve a level of expertise in a martial art [real or invented] by running through sufficient iterations of defensive scenarios. I think you have answered admirably thank you

 

[Jenna]

Thank you all again for contributing your thoughts opinions and insights. I appreciate and welcome these all greatly. I only want to say that I believe most of us act as the autodidact when we engage in any independent training away from the gaze of our instructor. I believe we do iterate a technique and refine it.

Occasionally as Omar B mentions we benefit from the placing of one who is a greater expert than us. I believe though that it is possible to achieve a state of technique perfection and become our own expert in that technique by our own independent [with a partner] refining process. Why? Not to reinvent the wheel and but rather because not all wheels fit all vehicles.

I do believe in matters of martial art we are frequently our own best teacher Jenna x

 

[Omar B]

Oh of course yes! I appreciate Omar you have given a definitive no to the question and but I wonder could you with your training partner not arrive at the same conclusion with your own independent methodology having worked through sufficient repetition and refining? Or must it be handed down? Or is it simply the case that having technique handed down to us is the most efficient way to learn. Or perhaps it is the easiest? Id o not know I am just asking your opinion Thank you

I'm sure you and a training partner could figure out the most efficient and safest ways for the body to do these movements. But that takes knowledge in anatomy, kinesiology, sports science, physics, all disciplines that no one could ever claim to be an expert at on their own. Practicing a punch with wrong mechanics and a bad base does not simply get better over years of practice, most people think they know something (I'm talking about these backyard black belts) and stick with their faulty methodology till somebody solidly thrashes them.

Of you could defer to the expertise on men who have worked on these for generations (many who know these disciplines) to arrive at what we have today.

 

[Omar B]

..When I taught in the academy the head instructor would always refer to me as our resident martial arts expert, a term I disliked.."I am NO expert", I would tell him. "You know more about the MA than the other teachers and about 98% of the students, so you ARE an expert, so deal with it", was his answer..

Gotta love that. Someone branding you an expert because you know more. Kinda like army medics who get called Doc. Definitions shift depending on where you are standing I guess, like how the word "theory means something different to a layman and a scientist.

 

[sgtmac_46]

I totally appreciate the points you have made here sgtmac_46. You are absolutely correct insofar as there is no sense in reinventing the wheel. Basing this on the assumption that the existing martial art in question is indeed the perfectly circular wheel to support your vehicle then of course the wheel is already invented. Some apparent perfect circles though are simply collections of tangential straight lines claiming to be perfect maybe

Allow me to clarify. I don't believe any one system is remotely perfect even for the person who developed it to work for themselves......much less as perfectly applicable to anyone else. However, with many thousands of systems and variations of systems. And with the ability to get exposure to those systems, in this day and age of mass information, whatever any individual is looking for, has not only already been developed extensively, but is accessible to anyone who takes a small amount of time to look. So rather than trying to reinvent the wheel, one should, instead, take, buffet style, from the multitude of arts out there, and patch together what will work for them the best. It will save them tremendous time and energy, and will expose them to new ideas they have never considered.

This is a well worded comment I think. I have never appreciated the teaching of any martial artist who has informed me that they are an expert. For me, it is a paradox that a true martial art expert appreciates what is missing from their knowledge. Thank you

The best teachers always remember that they, themselves, are students.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Gotta love that. Someone branding you an expert because you know more. Kinda like army medics who get called Doc. Definitions shift depending on where you are standing I guess, like how the word "theory means something different to a layman and a scientist.

It's really all relative........to extend your medical analogy, you may have only a few classes in first aid and an educated layman's knowledge, but if you end up with a group of people in a disaster situation, and everyone else knows less, like it or not you have just BECOME the 'expert'.

 

[Omar B]

It's really all relative........to extend your medical analogy, you may have only a few classes in first aid and an educated layman's knowledge, but if you end up with a group of people in a disaster situation, and everyone else knows less, like it or not you have just BECOME the 'expert'.

It's like in Terminator where John Conner's wife is the doctor for the human settlement, even though she's really a veterinarian. Close enough right. Or when old peopel refer to me as a "computer whiz" (gotta love that word, only old people use it). Sure I know my way around a computer, but I'm in no way a "whiz," I just know more than you.

 

[Big Don]

I agree! Big Don what for you are the differences between an expert fighter and an expert martial artist? Is there ever a possibility do you think for a self-taught expert fighter to match a properly trained martial artist? Thank you

The really good fighter might well be a better fighter than a trained martial artist, not everyone likes sparring... Furthermore, everyone has good and bad days, should the fighter's good day match with the Martial Artist's bad day...
The really good fighter will NEVER, imho, be a match as far as knowledge of any given system...
There are Black Belts, at my school, whose techniques and forms look so much better than mine, but, being literally half my size, they'll never beat me sparring...

 

[Indagator]

I remember watching some random MMA stuff on the sports channel in the middle of the night a while back, might have been Strike Force or something. There was a guy competing who (the commentators said) had taught himself jujutsu from magazines and books. However, I took that with a grain of salt considering the fact that if he is competing professionally he'd be training in somebody's stable by now.

As for experts, although I don't follow the Chinese martial arts or their philosophies, a lot of what Bruce Lee had to say still carries a great deal of weight with me, and I remember a quote in which he had stated he wished never to be known as an expert, but only a great student of the martial arts.

Some guys, I suppose, can develop things on their own. Lenny McLean's formidable talents were developed pretty much independently, and he was probably the most skilled boxer in the UK during his prime.

I guess my final comment on it all has to be this:

Wisdom comes not through age, but through experience. In studying a martial art one draws on the experience of not one, but many wise men, stretching back through the ages.
The benefit to this goes without saying.

 

[elder999]

What's "art?'

I'm not being funny-I'm serious. I was taught, years ago now, that the difference between art and craft is that "craft" can be taught, and art cannot. So, while I could learn the techniques of knifemaking and blacksmithing from various sources-including on my own-it wasn't truly "art" until I completed my masterpiece, an expression of myself that could clearly be seen by the discerning eye to be mine. It's the same with the old masters-there is often some confusion between the work of a Leonardo and that of his students, who had clearly been taught the technique of a da Vinci to the point where they could duplicate it, but not to express themselves.

Likewise, Jenna, if you were to come to my dojo, you could learn the techniques of Miyama ryu jujutsu, karate, judo and aikido, and you might even learn a few other techniques if you stuck around long enough, but that wouldn't make you a "martial artist," it would make you a technician.-and, yes, a technician can be self-taught, no matter what people say about not learning from DVDs, or books, or, as others pointed out, experience.

Additionally, you wouldn't exactly have learned the "Jeff Cuffee method," whatever meager insights into techniques and their deeper principles I may have been able to offer, because, well, I'm a 6'2" congenital klutz, and you're what I assume is a somewhat smaller girl, with a modicum of coordination. In the end, I'd be providing you with the material-techniques, strategy and and principles-to arrive at your own expression of those, and, as long it's confined to those techniques, to expressing what I've taught you, it's not a martial art, it's martial craft, and doesn't become "art" until you start to use that technique to express "the Jenna method."

So, for the most part, the self taught are not "martial artists," and what they've learned to do isn't necessarily what they've bought. Heck, it's long been my opinion that most of us aren't "martial artists," we're technicians or craftsmen, and you don't need a teacher to be that.......though it surely does make it easier and better to progress: I spend a lot of my spare time wishing there'd been someone to teach me knife making back in the day, instead of having to do most of it myself.....

I remember watching some random MMA stuff on the sports channel in the middle of the night a while back, might have been Strike Force or something. There was a guy competing who (the commentators said) had taught himself jujutsu from magazines and books

RIch Franklin trained himself for MMA with videos. Of course, he has proper training now, and had a background in wrestling, but that's what the situation was when he brole into the sport.