The Generalist and The Specialist
- Thread starter MJS
- Start date
The generalist survives, the specialist dies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalist_and_specialist_species
:rofl:
The generalist survives, the specialist dies.
Only if the generalist can actually do anything rather than just talking about it!
Chris Parker
Grandmaster
The generalist survives, the specialist dies.
In martial arts, it really depends on who is better at what they do...
Supra Vijai
Black Belt
Isn't that contextual though? I.e: taking on someone with an BJJ background, I'd have no chance on the ground or in a grappling match. Also just checking, would it be reasonable to qualify that with "who is better at what they do... on the day"?
Chris Parker
Grandmaster
Yes, absolutely. If the BJJ practitioner can keep things on the ground (their area of specialisation), I highly doubt the "generalist" will be the one surviving. Where the generalist gets the advantage is when they can keep the specialist out of their area of strength, typically into a different range where the specialist doesn't have any major skill. So it comes down to who is better on the day, mainly at dictating the situation itself.
Supra Vijai
Black Belt
Yup, all about tactics and strategies to deal with things. Glad I've picked up something after all this time
I look forward to going through things in class as always
If, "better at what they do," means to better adapt to the situation then fine.
Sean
Chris Parker
Grandmaster
No, that's not what I meant. I meant who is better at applying their strategy, whether that is a generalist or a specialist one.
Would I be correct in reading that as, "The less time You spend thinking about what Youre going to do, and the more time You spend doing it, and the more successful it is, the higher Your likelyhood of success - Regardless of whether Youre a Specialist or a Generalist"?
Chris Parker
Grandmaster
Well, theoretically the better trained (the one who put more effort into their training) would likely be the "better" of the two, so to a degree, but in essence, no. One might just be far more naturally talented, for instance.
Its like that story that was floating around MartialTalk about six months ago. Four guys rob a jewelry store, and a trained martial artist, and specialist, gets the bright idea to put one in a headlock. I'm willing to bet he had more training than the four guys he was fending off with that headlock, but by all rights he should be dead. He just got lucky.
Sean
Chris Parker
Grandmaster
I'm not really that sure of the relevance, but yeah, that was a case of a poorly chosen strategy being applied, combined with a fair amount of luck on their part.
My point is, I don't care how much you train as a grappler, multiple opponent situations make it that stuff a little un-useful. Ok a lot un-useful.
Sean
Chris Parker
Grandmaster
I wouldn't be so quick to make that claim, myself... it depends on how well a grappling strategy is employed. Grab and hold one person while the rest start hitting you, or getting weapons? Bad strategy. Lock arms to send people into walls/the ground/parked cars? Throw people down hard and fast? Use one person as a shield? Those have some real merit.
Again, it comes down to how well someone can employ their strategy, whatever it is.
Again, it comes down to how well someone can employ their strategy, whatever it is.
"When you hold a hammer, everything looks like a nail." This saying comes to mind.
Sean
Chris Parker
Grandmaster
That's far too simplistic, though. Who said that there's only one option if you choose grappling? A specialist may have a more refined toolkit, so to speak, but there's still quite a variety to those they have.
Probably the best way to look at it is that a generalist will have one or two types of a wide variety of tools (two spanners, a screwdriver, a hammer, a drill with a couple of sized drill bits), whereas a specialist will focus mainly on one or two... but have each variety available. That might mean 30 screwdrivers, instead of one. As a result, within their area, they will be far better "equipped" for dealing with different situation that require that type of tool. The generalist will also have a screwdriver, but trying to use a large-headed flat screwdriver when you need a jewelers tip one just won't be anywhere near as effective.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #20
The generalist survives, the specialist dies.
I'll agree and disagree with this. Perhaps this'd be better suited for its own thread, but I'll comment here for now. IMHO, I think both are valuable, both meaning the generalist and the specialist. In the specialists 'area' of specialty, yes, they're probably going to be the superior person. Ex: A stand up guy being placed in a strictly BJJ 'arena' yes, the BJJ guy will most likely come out on top. OTOH, in the early UFC, we saw strikers fail to survive against grapplers. They weren't in the BJJ guys 'arena', they could've done anything..punched, kicked, you name it, yet they seemed to fail.
I consider myself a generalist. I consider my training to be well rounded. I do seek out specialists to improve on my skills in a particular area. However, the difference between me and some other people, such as the OP of this thread, is that when I train in something, I usually dedicate alot of time. In other words, I don't go to a school, train for 2 mos. leave, go to the next place, stay a year, leave, go to the next, stay 3yrs, leave...lather, rinse, repeat. Furthermore, I don't make myself seem like an authority on things that I dont know. Now, OTOH, I've gone to seminars in arts that I don't regularly train in. I've done a few Pekiti Tirsia seminars. I've learned a number of great things from that art. However, I don't teach those things, I use them for my own personal training. Those were things that I took, things that really caught my eye, and things that I've drilled repeatedly, in hopes to remember and add to my toolbox. Yet, I'd never, after a 10+ hr seminar, talk like I was a PT expert.
But to each his own. In the end, it'll be that person that has to answer for his/her statements.
