So Let Me Get This Straight-- Why Don't We Have New Arts?

Steve

Mostly Harmless
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
21,589
Reaction score
7,108
Location
Covington, WA
Yes, but there's a difference between practice first aid and actual first aid. I did practice first aid. I actually enjoy doing that. I hope I never have to try actual first aid.
So, again, and I'm sorry if I sound like a broken record, your skills are untested and remain theoretical.

Getting back to the topic of this thread, even if you were able to get to application, you are poorly equipped to evaluate your skillset, much less innovate. If first aid were a martial art, how could you be expected to create a new technique, much less a new style?
 

Monkey Turned Wolf

MT Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
11,753
Reaction score
5,740
Location
New York
I'm sorry I used Seymour's language. As I've said a few times, it muddles the discussion with some pretty subjective language.

Last time I looked, the 30 day survival rate for someone having a cardiac arrest outside of a medical facility was something like 10%. This is from memory so I may be mistaken. But as I recall, someone without cpr had something like a 1 in 20 chance while someone who received cpr was like 1 in 10. That's from anyone, including trained pros, IIRC.

So, to the point, have you ever had occasion to apply the skills?

And because this is a martial arts forum, whether you intended to mention teaching or not, it is an intrinsic part of a lot of MA programs. So, I think it's an important point to reinforce.
So I actually hadn't thought about it since it wasn't relevant to my point, but I have had to use first aid skills. Not cpr, but other first aid. When I was one of the asst. Scoutmasters, often only myself and 1-2 other adults would go on trips (at that time parent participation was low). Had to help a 12 year old who'd initially ignored me and as a result ended up with hypothermia, he was fine. Had someone who broke their ankle during a hike, evaluated what happened, and had some scouts run ahead to direct the ambulance (someone called 911) while I helped alleviate the pain and get him to an open space where they'd be able to reach him. And then had to help a ton of people work through panic attacks, if you count that.

And even if it only helps 1% or less, I'd rather be able to offer an additional 1% chance on survival for someone than not offer it.

As for the teaching thing, it shouldn't be an intrinsic part of MA. Most people I know that train don't intend to teach, and I don't understand styles that push that, outside of the owner trying to get franchise money which is a shady business practice IMO. So I don't feel that it's automatically relevant since teaching shouldnt be automatically relevant.
 

Monkey Turned Wolf

MT Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
11,753
Reaction score
5,740
Location
New York
Getting back to the topic of this thread, even if you were able to get to application, you are poorly equipped to evaluate your skillset, much less innovate. If first aid were a martial art, how could you be expected to create a new technique, much less a new style?
Yeah, for the OPs question, I agree with this evaluation. I would not trust myself to create anything new for first aid, and I don't see how I'd be able to create a new style of MA. I don't see how anyone could really do that without experiencing what's wrong with their current style, and I don't see how that's possible without experience. What that experience is depends on the style and the goal.

Ie: if you're creating a new art to be aesthetically pleasing, all you'd need is to perform the art in front of others to find out if it's aesthetically pleasing. If you're creating a new art for health purposes, I'd hope you have some sort of medical degree. For fighting we've already discussed this for multiple pages in the past and I'm pretty sure we agree on it so not going to open those worms now.
 

dvcochran

Grandmaster
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Messages
7,047
Reaction score
2,296
Location
Southeast U.S.
You have to think about it as an emergency thing. So I've got no interest in performing CPR on someone, but I very much want to know how to administer CPR. I would still rather have a medic administer it, but I want to be able to do so if the need arises. Same with other basic first aid. And same with knowing how to fight.

I'm perfectly happy not having to make a stretcher out of two poles and a tarp, or how to make a splint, or do CPR. But I'm sure as hell glad that I know how to do them.
This is a fantastically made point. Why do some people walk to the edge and jump and some people can't? That is not the point that was and is (by you) being made. In simplest terms it is about being prepared (thank you Boy Scouts).
It seems some people (aka Steve) fabricate scenarios to place judgement.
On one side of the coin, "a MA is not a MA if fighting to the death is not taught". On the other side "it is only for physical exercise". In between these extremes is a Ton of great training.
The preparation.
 

Steve

Mostly Harmless
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
21,589
Reaction score
7,108
Location
Covington, WA
So I actually hadn't thought about it since it wasn't relevant to my point, but I have had to use first aid skills. Not cpr, but other first aid. When I was one of the asst. Scoutmasters, often only myself and 1-2 other adults would go on trips (at that time parent participation was low). Had to help a 12 year old who'd initially ignored me and as a result ended up with hypothermia, he was fine. Had someone who broke their ankle during a hike, evaluated what happened, and had some scouts run ahead to direct the ambulance (someone called 911) while I helped alleviate the pain and get him to an open space where they'd be able to reach him. And then had to help a ton of people work through panic attacks, if you count that.

And even if it only helps 1% or less, I'd rather be able to offer an additional 1% chance on survival for someone than not offer it.

As for the teaching thing, it shouldn't be an intrinsic part of MA. Most people I know that train don't intend to teach, and I don't understand styles that push that, outside of the owner trying to get franchise money which is a shady business practice IMO. So I don't feel that it's automatically relevant since teaching shouldnt be automatically relevant.
Some relevant CPR facts. About half the time, people dont recognize a cardiac arrest, even with training. Also, people with training or with no training can administer cpr with about the same results. In fact, the general consensus seems to be, if you dont know cpr but see someone experiencing a cardiac arrest, winging it is probably going to do more good than harm, so the push now is to actually try and counter the prevailing idea that you must be certified to deliver cpr.

and lastly, if youve never had occasion to give cpr to someone in a real world scenario, the skills you have remain theoretical. The simpler the skills or the more experience you have in related skills, the more likely you will succeed. But like many martial artists, the skills are theoretical, and likely to remain so. So in a thread about inventing new styles, it seems pretty clear.
 

drop bear

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
23,056
Reaction score
7,725
Some relevant CPR facts. About half the time, people dont recognize a cardiac arrest, even with training. Also, people with training or with no training can administer cpr with about the same results. In fact, the general consensus seems to be, if you dont know cpr but see someone experiencing a cardiac arrest, winging it is probably going to do more good than harm, so the push now is to actually try and counter the prevailing idea that you must be certified to deliver cpr.

and lastly, if youve never had occasion to give cpr to someone in a real world scenario, the skills you have remain theoretical. The simpler the skills or the more experience you have in related skills, the more likely you will succeed. But like many martial artists, the skills are theoretical, and likely to remain so. So in a thread about inventing new styles, it seems pretty clear.

Technically you should only be doing CPR on a dead guy.

So hard to make things worse.
 

Graywalker

Brown Belt
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
403
Reaction score
120
Same goes with your ability in the MA, if you have never used it in a real life scenario. No matter how much sparring (sparring to me is anything outside real world danger, yes even sport) you have done, it is still theoretical MA.
 

JowGaWolf

Sr. Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Aug 3, 2015
Messages
13,125
Reaction score
5,317
Same goes with your ability in the MA, if you have never used it in a real life scenario. No matter how much sparring (sparring to me is anything outside real world danger, yes even sport) you have done, it is still theoretical MA.
This depends on what type of sparring that you do. There are many videos out there of people who train martial arts who have actually used it in a street fight "real world danger" If you are only doing touch sparring then yes it becomes Theoretical. But if you are training how to drive power, grapple, and defend against things you don't want to get hit with then it's realistic enough that you can pull it off in a real fight.

I do light to intermediate sparring. What I consider in the range of light sparring sometimes makes people cringe. What I consider intermediate sparring make my worry because it looks and sounds like real fighting. If I can perform my techniques in those activities then there's a good chance I will be ok in a street fight provided that weapons don't get into the mix.

People who do full contact fighting sports. That's real fighting. It's just not fighting in a street environment and there's a ref to save your butt. But people die in full contact fighting events. Boxing may not use all of the skills sets, but if boxing is all you know, then boxing is what you will depend on in a street fight, in an weaponless confrontation in the street.
 

Kung Fu Wang

Sr. Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Messages
13,448
Reaction score
4,199
Location
Austin, Tx/Shell Beach, Ca
Same goes with your ability in the MA, if you have never used it in a real life scenario. No matter how much sparring (sparring to me is anything outside real world danger, yes even sport) you have done, it is still theoretical MA.
Some of my Karate friends used to help the police work. A Karate guy would sit in the back seat of a police car. When there was a need, the Karate guy would come forward, knocked down the bad guy. The police then put handcuff on the bad guy. Not sure if that is still going on or not. IMO, that seem to be a good way to training MA. One Karate guy told me that He could drop his opponent by just 1 punch (after he had knocked down many bad guys by just 1 punch). Not too sure about the legal issue though.

Agree that only after you have knocked down many guys by 1 punch, you can then say that you have developed your punching power.
 
Last edited:

Steve

Mostly Harmless
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
21,589
Reaction score
7,108
Location
Covington, WA
This depends on what type of sparring that you do. There are many videos out there of people who train martial arts who have actually used it in a street fight "real world danger" If you are only doing touch sparring then yes it becomes Theoretical. But if you are training how to drive power, grapple, and defend against things you don't want to get hit with then it's realistic enough that you can pull it off in a real fight.

I do light to intermediate sparring. What I consider in the range of light sparring sometimes makes people cringe. What I consider intermediate sparring make my worry because it looks and sounds like real fighting. If I can perform my techniques in those activities then there's a good chance I will be ok in a street fight provided that weapons don't get into the mix.

People who do full contact fighting sports. That's real fighting. It's just not fighting in a street environment and there's a ref to save your butt. But people die in full contact fighting events. Boxing may not use all of the skills sets, but if boxing is all you know, then boxing is what you will depend on in a street fight, in an weaponless confrontation in the street.
When you change the context, there's always some kind of transfer of skills from one to another. The more similar one context is to another, the easier and more reliable that transfer will be. So, a full contact fighter will more reliably transfer his/her skills to a street fight than someone who spars in class only.

And while the system can support this transfer by creating a context that is similar to the application, this is an individual thing. What I mean is, a person can train in a great gym, but that person's preparation is really up to them.

Issue we have around here is when folks exaggerate the similarities between one context and another. Also, folks suffer from over confidence based on questionable association (i.e., "My instructor was a judoka, so my ninjutsu is legit." "I train with cops, so I have cop experience." "My instructor was a full contact fighter, so I can fight.")
 

Graywalker

Brown Belt
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
403
Reaction score
120
This depends on what type of sparring that you do. There are many videos out there of people who train martial arts who have actually used it in a street fight "real world danger" If you are only doing touch sparring then yes it becomes Theoretical. But if you are training how to drive power, grapple, and defend against things you don't want to get hit with then it's realistic enough that you can pull it off in a real fight.

I do light to intermediate sparring. What I consider in the range of light sparring sometimes makes people cringe. What I consider intermediate sparring make my worry because it looks and sounds like real fighting. If I can perform my techniques in those activities then there's a good chance I will be ok in a street fight provided that weapons don't get into the mix.

People who do full contact fighting sports. That's real fighting. It's just not fighting in a street environment and there's a ref to save your butt. But people die in full contact fighting events. Boxing may not use all of the skills sets, but if boxing is all you know, then boxing is what you will depend on in a street fight, in an weaponless confrontation in the street.

The people have proven their own ability. Not the art or way training.

As for sport...no, as long as it is being done in a safe environment, it is and remains, theoretical.
 

JowGaWolf

Sr. Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Aug 3, 2015
Messages
13,125
Reaction score
5,317
What I mean is, a person can train in a great gym, but that person's preparation is really up to them.
Totally agree. Not sure how, but a lot of people don't understand this, from financial gain to losing weight. When it comes down to it, it's really up to that individual the the quality of work that is put in to achieve that goal. Even if someone is given help or assistance, that individual will still need to put in the work.

lso, folks suffer from over confidence based on questionable association (i.e., "My instructor was a judoka, so my ninjutsu is legit." "I train with cops, so I have cop experience." "My instructor was a full contact fighter, so I can fight.")
When you change the context, there's always some kind of transfer of skills from one to another. The more similar one context is to another, the easier and more reliable that transfer will be. So, a full contact fighter will more reliably transfer his/her skills to a street fight than someone who spars in class only.

And while the system can support this transfer by creating a context that is similar to the application, this is an individual thing. What I mean is, a person can train in a great gym, but that person's preparation is really up to them.

Issue we have around here is when folks exaggerate the similarities between one context and another. Also, folks suffer from over confidence based on questionable association (i.e., "My instructor was a judoka, so my ninjutsu is legit." "I train with cops, so I have cop experience." "My instructor was a full contact fighter, so I can fight.")
Yes, I don't know about anyone else, but this is the worst in the U.S. for a lot of things. Things like "I know the best people" seem to get more mileage than it should lol.
 

JowGaWolf

Sr. Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Aug 3, 2015
Messages
13,125
Reaction score
5,317
The people have proven their own ability. Not the art or way training.

As for sport...no, as long as it is being done in a safe environment, it is and remains, theoretical.
People prove their ability with a system that is known to work. Because the system works, there's a known result, based on how much effort you put into your training. For example, you know you can dodge or parry a punch because you do it a lot of times against someone who is really trying to hit you. It's not theoretical any more, I think you are confusing Theoretical vs Probability.

Definition of Theoreetical - concerned with or involving the theory of a subject or area of study rather than its practical application.
If you train to parry punches against someone who is trying to hit you then you have moved into the practical application of things. From this point it's no longer a theory. Now the question becomes. "What is the probability that you can do the same thing in a street fight."

The probability of an untrained person beating a trained fighter in a street fight, 1 vs 1 without weapons, is very low. There's nothing theoretical about that. I'm not sure what you train. But the way that I train and the system that I train, the chances that an untrained fighter will beat me is very low. It's not an ego thing, it's just that my training gives me a set of additional skills that I can use, while an untrained fighter will only have what he is born with.

Here's the difference between trained and untrained. None of this is theoretical


 

JowGaWolf

Sr. Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Aug 3, 2015
Messages
13,125
Reaction score
5,317
As for sport...no, as long as it is being done in a safe environment, it is and remains, theoretical.
i don't know your background, but the punches and kicks that I've taken to my face in a "safe environment" were not theoretical. They landed and there was nothing I could have done to stop it, because if there was I would. The only thing "safe" about the environment was that we were out to cause maximum damage to each other. There's nothing about my sparring partner's strikes that makes me think that he or she could not do the same in a real street fight.

Now I will say one thing that may be theoretical is how one may respond to a street fight. People respond differently when put in that position, but that's a mental issue and not a physical training or physical ability thing.

Some people train their body's for fighting but not their minds. They forget to address that issue. You may see that I often talk about cutting off emotions when fighting. I do this so I don't let my emotions guide my fighting. I don't want anger to fuel my fighting and I don't want fear to enter my thoughts. I know that if I let fear enter then I'm going to have a problem in using my training. As a kid and teen my friends and I had a saying. "your fear will leave after getting hit with the first punch."

Many people think they will "die" if they get hit so that guides their fighting action. As a kid and a teen I had that same fear but after that first hit, the reality that the first punch wasn't so horrible sinks in and then I'm good to go. But as an adult I want to get hit in order to get rid of my fear. Because what if it hurts really bad. So, instead I get rid of my emotions and focus on the task.
 
Last edited:

dvcochran

Grandmaster
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Messages
7,047
Reaction score
2,296
Location
Southeast U.S.
When you change the context, there's always some kind of transfer of skills from one to another. The more similar one context is to another, the easier and more reliable that transfer will be. So, a full contact fighter will more reliably transfer his/her skills to a street fight than someone who spars in class only.

And while the system can support this transfer by creating a context that is similar to the application, this is an individual thing. What I mean is, a person can train in a great gym, but that person's preparation is really up to them.

Issue we have around here is when folks exaggerate the similarities between one context and another. Also, folks suffer from over confidence based on questionable association (i.e., "My instructor was a judoka, so my ninjutsu is legit." "I train with cops, so I have cop experience." "My instructor was a full contact fighter, so I can fight.")
I can agree with that but it isn't all inclusive. I would say it is Much more individual and less to do with an instructor or style. I think some of it has to do with the school and what it offers; ie, can it challenge most people (mine did). I grew up in a rural environment where we fought for 'fun' and I mean fighting until someone was bloodied, that was the rule and it was a hard rule. So I was much more aggressive from day one than the average person and that transferred.

You are overt about your dislike of cops; may I ask why that is?
 

dvcochran

Grandmaster
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Messages
7,047
Reaction score
2,296
Location
Southeast U.S.
Totally agree. Not sure how, but a lot of people don't understand this, from financial gain to losing weight. When it comes down to it, it's really up to that individual the the quality of work that is put in to achieve that goal. Even if someone is given help or assistance, that individual will still need to put in the work.


Yes, I don't know about anyone else, but this is the worst in the U.S. for a lot of things. Things like "I know the best people" seem to get more mileage than it should lol.
I don't disagree, but doesn't "I know the best people" get debunk really, really, quick when classes start?

Do you feel that statement is akin to a college degree in other venues?
 

dvcochran

Grandmaster
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Messages
7,047
Reaction score
2,296
Location
Southeast U.S.
People prove their ability with a system that is known to work. Because the system works, there's a known result, based on how much effort you put into your training. For example, you know you can dodge or parry a punch because you do it a lot of times against someone who is really trying to hit you. It's not theoretical any more, I think you are confusing Theoretical vs Probability.

Definition of Theoreetical - concerned with or involving the theory of a subject or area of study rather than its practical application.
If you train to parry punches against someone who is trying to hit you then you have moved into the practical application of things. From this point it's no longer a theory. Now the question becomes. "What is the probability that you can do the same thing in a street fight."

The probability of an untrained person beating a trained fighter in a street fight, 1 vs 1 without weapons, is very low. There's nothing theoretical about that. I'm not sure what you train. But the way that I train and the system that I train, the chances that an untrained fighter will beat me is very low. It's not an ego thing, it's just that my training gives me a set of additional skills that I can use, while an untrained fighter will only have what he is born with.

Here's the difference between trained and untrained. None of this is theoretical


But the probability of that stat would be based largely on where the stats were logistically gathered from. In some areas of just our country alone are more prone or comfortable with physical contact and fighting. So much so I would give an area like that statistical advantage. In other words, they grew up in an environment where 'street fighting' was a way of life.
 
OP
JKDJade

JKDJade

Yellow Belt
Joined
Sep 23, 2020
Messages
22
Reaction score
6
Location
Los Angeles
I feel there were other Big influencers going on during the same timeframe (60's-90's) that facilitated a lot of it. This was a big peak in the information age. Sharing information became exponentially easier, faster, and frequent. The same can be said for travel. Walls were being broken down politically and geographically. So naturally many, many things including Martial Arts began to coalesce.

I can remember the era when the "ancient Chinese secret" was prevalent in the U.S. Many (including myself) bought into it for a while. Most of us who stuck with their training and continued searching for more information figured it out and learned to apply the new knowledge to our training. Frankly, I hope there is never an end to this.
I think this is the gist of how MMA got started. It stripped out all the traditional parts and left the purely fighting principals from every style out there. Whether that is good or bad is for everyone's own viewpoint. Most of that has to do with age, and intent. If you grew up in the age of MMA or in the age of traditional MA's, well there you go.

As far as another totally new style, I can't say. I think there may be some shrinkage or re-consolidation of styles, remerging into the main styles first. Of the 14 styles you listed at least 6 were a Kenpo variant. Can you see them coming together as one again? Sadly, TSD has seen major shrinkage and I can see it becoming one with TKD in some fashion. These are purely marketing lines that are being held together as much in the effort to make money rather than maintain a certain style, which are one and the same.

To be certain the model of martials overall is changing. Saturation has caused some bad and Very bad things to seep into the models. I do think this is factoring itself out a good bit but bad schools & instructors will always be around. Some of this is from truly good intentions but it still happens.
So I think the elephant in the room is this: What truly different and unique technique, style, system, or instructor have you seen in say the last 15 years? 15 years is the typical benchmark in technology to say parity is found. It is very cool when someone shatters that window. I am probably wrong but I would say the last 15 years has been the golden years of MMA. It peaked in popularity and is in a settling phase. I am certain developers and marketers are hard at work to find the 'next new thing'. I hope many of us practicing a MA are doing to same.

This is a different vein but thought it worth mentioning. There is an organization called Tiger Rock Martial Arts. It is Very, very, very closed circuit. They do not share or interact with any other TKD schools. You are either in or out. As a corporation, they are Very profitable. So they have figured out a model that works based on economics which, to be honest, is a big part of the viability of any school and especially a system. Good or bad? For me, both. Good for the people making money and hopefully good to most of the people training. It must have many good training qualities (facility, equipment/gear/teaching) or I doubt people would buy in for as long as it has been around (since 1983). But for me bad as a traditional Martial Art. I don't even know if they consider themselves traditional.
Just an example to think about.

Some really well stated points here. Lots to think about and discuss. I just thought it was a good topic to get insight from everyone. You added yours and it is of great value.
 

dvcochran

Grandmaster
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Messages
7,047
Reaction score
2,296
Location
Southeast U.S.
But the probability of that stat would be based largely on where the stats were logistically gathered from. In some areas of just our country alone are more prone or comfortable with physical contact and fighting. So much so I would give an area like that statistical advantage. In other words, they grew up in an environment where 'street fighting' was a way of life.

FWIW, the bottom video is not available.
 
Top