Spartacus Maximus

Between what I did before and what I am learning now, there is a whole world of difference. It is amazing that it is the exact same system. Just a different association. One thing that never sat right with me was the fact that all the kata bunkai and applications I had ever seen came from sources other than my instructor. Books, DVDs or seminars. To become able to do something, it should be practised every time. Doing it a couple of times a month or once in a blue moon at a seminar is not enough! Why learn 16 kata without understanding how to apply the first one? With all this in mind I am still grateful to my previous teachers. It is thanks to them that I followed the path towards where I am now. I cannot have any resentment or blame them.

In the city I lived in there were many dojos teaching karate and three public Kung fu schools two of which were a variety of mantis style. I had already done Shotokan as an after school program for a very brief period between age 10 and 12 so I knew that I wanted karate and as a bonus it was close to home. My siblings had gym memberships so I asked for karate instead because the fees were nearly equal.

When one starts teaching, what would bring the first layperson into the doors to join? Are new instructors or schools intimidating to the public and more difficult to find credible because they are new? It is very hard to think and remember why I started where I started. The reason I continued training certainly had something to do with the instructor's personality, though.

Practise and training essentially consisted of learning the kata by copying instructors and seniors. Little to no explanation of the movements was ever given. Bunkai and application of techniques from kata was rarely addressed. Kumite or partner drills was rare and when practised there was nothing mentioned about the links between kihon, kata and bunkai/kumite. After learning all the kata in the syllabus I realized that I had but a very superficial understanding of what I had. What I had was just a collection of forms because I had no idea of their intent, no concept of their function. It was as if I had been given a box full of tools with the name of each one but no instructions on their use or purpose.

There are a few reasons, but none of these have anything to do with disagreements or any sort of conflict between my previous teacher and I. Since my early teens I trained the same style(Shorin ryu) with the same organization but under a total of 3 different instructors. The first reason for the switch was a change of residence due to work. It is my desire to learn the missing parts I had never been taught that led me to my new dojo.

If a teacher or school's first impression for the layperson depends on the number of students, this cannot apply to one that is just starting out. In that case the place is what makes the difference.

I remember reading an account about one of the old masters of the pre-WWII era who said he refused to accept some people because they had what he called a "murderous disposition". One sensei I had trained under refused the same person twice because of reported dealings with an organized crime family. That was probably one of the few instances where someone would be turned away. There was also absolute zero tolerance for what was called "stupid vs stupid fights". If there was a list of types to never accept, known or suspected criminals would be at the top. For anyone else, an attitude adjustment might work.

The one year until I made the switch was not exactly away from training. It was one year of solo practise without a teacher. Forgetting my previous 3rd Dan and any sense of accomplishment attached to it was not nearly as difficult as trying to unlearn and change years of habits. Even now it is the biggest and most frustrating hurdle and I have yet to overcome it. I had always had a nagging suspicion that for one reason or another, my karate was missing important parts which I was never taught. Everything I am learning now are these details. Breathing, mechanics of movements, meaning and application from kata etc..

Chibana had at least five disciples who each formed their own association after he passed away in 1969. All of these men taught Shorin ryu on Okinawa within short distances of each other and mostly in the same city, Naha. Anyway between the time I left the first association and restarted training under the new one I continued training independently and in another dojo for roughly a year. Under my current teacher I restarted form scratch re-learning everything and being re-evaluated for each level up to 1st kyu.

The teacher I graded to 3rd Dan under is the head of a major Shorin ryu association in Okinawa. My current instructor is also the head of another major association. His teacher and the one who evaluated me to 3rd Dan are both disciples of the famed karate expert Chibana. Since starting under my current teacher I have forfeited that 3rd dan and continued to try my damnedest to forget and unlearn so that I can relearn with the pieces that were missing. This process is causing me much frustration and doubt of the skill level I supposedly have reached.

But surely if one chooses to dedicate one's life to the practise of martial arts, and every life choice is made with this as a priority there must be at some point; difficulties. The most painful have been the loss of close relationships. not far behind are years away in unfamiliar places away from home and family.

The experience of having re-started the same style under a different association and teacher has brought about this question, which has been troubling for quite some time. Under my previous instructor and association I was evaluated and given a 3rd Dan. When I re-started the same style from zero with my current teacher I realized that everything I had been doing was either wrong or missing important parts. Since then, I have reached the level of first kyu but nearly every time it seemed to me that my skills were not good enough for the level I was being given. I trust my teachers judgement but I doubt my level is where what I have been given.

I have seen a few dojos and schools where a causal observer or potential student coming in would have a difficult time identifying the instructor at first glance. These were all very traditional Chinese, or other East Asian systems. In cases like these the instructors probably depended on reputation alone, because unless asked their credentials were never mentioned anywhere. To know their skill level one had to watch them move.

Quite right indeed. Under my current teacher, every single day in the dojo is an exam and the grading is just the result. I never ever know when I reach the next level. Not until the training day before and only at the very end. The observers besides the teacher are everyone shodan and above and at least three who already have the rank of the grading.

There are much too many dojos and organizations that seem to go out of their way to make gradings or evaluations more complicated than they ought to be. The best kind of grading has a few very clear points revolving around positive answers to questions such as: The person understands how to perform the material Displays correct movement Has a sound grasp of how to apply the subject material Can demonstrate all of the above to a higher level without major mistakes or omissions under pressure such as with an opponent. Either a person can or cannot. Either the student has refined his skills or needs more practise, that is all there is to it. No need for fancy ceremonies or overly complicated process.

The USA is certainly known for being a very litigious country, yet with the sheer number of places and people teaching martial arts I doubt anyone would waste their time and resources attempting to sue simply for being refused or turned away with a justifiable reason. Any claims of discrimination would have to be proven by the accusing party. While traveling in the Far East and before finding a teacher, I was refused and turned away always with the same reason. A designated senior student would curtly yet politely explain that new students were not accepted at the time. With words like that, it is impossible to claim discrimination no matter how much I may have been convinced that the master there did not want to teach me. Much later, I learned the hard way that and anyone wanting to train has a better chance of getting through the door if properly introduced, preferably before or after training is done. Kindness, courtesy, guts and tenacity worked things out eventually.

I suspect that there are more undesirable types who leave or are explicitly expelled than cases where the instructor refuses to take them as students. Does everybody really get the benefit of doubt or are there types of people who should never be accepted? Is it feasible or acceptable in this day and age to test a potential student's character(patience etc...) before agreeing to teach?

Thinking back to when I first set foot in a dojo, I recall reading and hearing the sensei's rank. At that time I was not fully aware that there was several degrees of blackbelt. Like most people, my entire reference on martial arts consisted of popular action movies and a few books on the subject. For all I knew, a blackbelt was an instructor. Not necessarily a fierce expert fighter with super abilities, but someone who was good enough to teach. Perhaps it is enough for the public to know that an instructor holds a blackbelt or some sort of equivalent. Would students go to a school were there is no mention at all anywhere of the instructor's grade, experience etc?

Martial arts are first learned by watching and imitation of one's instructors, but it is never too much for an instructor to remind the student that adaptations are necessary. Knowing what to copy is far more important than just mimicking the instructor's every move because imitation is not the goal, it understanding and feeling correct movement and adapting it to one's own body. The same technique will appear slightly different when done by people of different size or frame, never mind certain physical limitations.

The inspiration for asking the initial question about instructors being selective is the many stories from a bygone age in the history of martial arts. Most familiar are the accounts from China, Japan and Okinawa. It still goes on to a lesser degree but students are not evaluated as strictly as they might have been before. As expected, instructors who are selective are usually those who can afford to be so. These types of instructors have a sense to responsibility for ensuring that the skills they pass on will not be used in ways that might cause them shame or grief. Although commercial dojo instructors must maintain numbers to continue teaching, some degree of selectivity must be feasible. Making a list may be helpful in keeping a certain standard.

Before martial arts were taught to masses and commercialized, masters would evaluate and test a prospective student's character. Those judged to have negative attitude were always turned away to prevent teaching a belligerent student likely to harm himself or others with the unreasonable use of his skills. Although refusing to teach someone may not always be a viable action nowadays, there are good reasons why an instructor might decide to do so. Has anyone ever turned away a potential student because of a bad impression of character? Has anyone thrown out a student for the same reasons?

The Okinawan kobudo weapon called tonfa was the inspiration for the secondary police weapon used all over the world. Nunchaku were also issued to some departments in several US states for a brief period in between the 1960's and 1970's.

Going toe-to-toe is best kept for a sporting match. I would never advise anyone man or woman, beginner or expert to do that when it comes to a defense situation. Following this idea invariably ends badly for the defender because it prolongs contact. The definition of defense is to protect and preserve from harm. Once one has successfully accomplished that, there is nothing more to do than disappear as quickly as possible. An effective defense must be: 1. No more than three very simple moves, the less the better. 2. Simultaneously neutralize the attack and allow the defender to break away and escape. Having the situation degenerate into a fight or something that will be construed as such is the least desirable outcome because fighting is a criminal offense and very expensive to argue about before the police and magistrates.

Attempting to see things from the average prospective student is admittedly difficult to do for someone who has been involved in martial arts for years. The experience, knowledge and familiarity with the subject provide the resources needed to make an informed and objective judgement. Exactly how much importance does an instructor's rank have for determining his perceived teaching credibility in the mind of an average new student? Schools run by first, second or third Dan instructors exist and are not rare so one could conclude that rank has little influence on their success or difficulty to find people to teach. At the same time there is always a need to justify and legitimize a person's competence with tangible credentials even if these could easily be falsified.

In other threads it has been said that almost everywhere anybody, even with very little experience or training can open a school. If ranks, titles or blackbelt degrees are not relevant, what makes an instructor more credible and likely to be successful over another? When comparing the publicity of random schools it seems that the instructor's title and rank are invariably put up front as if to validate quality. Do potential students who have little to no experience of martial arts prefer a 5th Dan over a 2nd Dan? Will they even think twice about it?