pmh1nic

Interesting that this question has come up because I was asked this question by a new student this week. Martial arts is a discipline but in many cases is marketed as a relaxing pass time, minimizing the work, sweat and repetition require to become proficient. You've got to sell your services to X number of new students each month to grow the business and/or to make up for those that find out that it's going to require hard work to earn your BB and leave. Given a society that has a microwave mentality many sell membership in the school and achieving BB as something anyone can do when in fact everyone just doesn't have the discipline to do what it takes to earn their BB.

"But Isn't the whole point of studying MA's to basically broaden our options when it comes to violent altercations?" I think of MA training as training to to teach you how to take advantage of the opportunities made available to you in an altercation. I always tell my students that real fights are chaotic, the situation changes in milli-seconds and your training is meant to help you react correctly, instinctively to take advantage of the opportunities to strike, break, lock-up, throw during the milli-second the opportunity is available to you.

Another issue that may cause some confusion is has to do with what constitutes grappling. I think a lot of people interpret grappling as primarily ground or floor fighting versus stand-up grappling. I can't imagine that a soldier wearing a sidearm, utility belt with equipment attached is going to be very effective moving on the ground. So when the term grappling is use (as in the article linked by Ravencroft) it doesn't necessarily mean ground fighting. Good article by the way.

"Striking is described as "more complicated than grappling techniques" My sensei (Jiu-Jitsu Grandmaster with 35+ years teaching experience) would totally disagree with that statement. I do too but I'm a novice with only 10 years of martial arts experience. Grappling techniques are much harder to master to the point of being effective. There are nuiances to throw the most effective strikes but even a strike that makes contact is going to have some affect. With many grappling and joint locks if they are not done right, with a fairly high degree of correctness they will not be effective.

"Their techniques are very versitaille in that one move can apply to many situations" Over the last six years I've trained with a Jiu-Jitsu Grandmaster. He has over 40+ years in the martial arts, primarily Jiu-Jitsu but it also includes boxing, kickboxing, stick and knife fighting. He knows a hundred and one variations to every technique and is always developing other variations to technique (primarily to keep the training interesting). That said he often says that in an attack situation the vast majority of people are going to revert to something very basic. The hundred and one variations usually comes down to some very basic blocking, striking and grappling techniques. Practicing the complicated striking, throwing and grappling techniques is done more to make doing the simple and basic instinctive/reative in a really adverse situation.

Thanks for the info. KSD, when you say BJJ are you saying that the majority of the training involves takedowns and floor fighting?

I was curious as to what percentage of the combat martial arts training among these units is devoted to grappling. Can any of you current or ex-Seals or Special Forces guys comment?

A Kotegashi excuted at just the right time is an awesome move. Some of the Irimi and Shiho throws are nice but most of all I like anything that is very direct and to the point. Bada, boom...done.

I just want to echo what others have said, teach because you have a passion for it. You can make a decent living but you're not going to get rich owning a martial arts school. Simple demographics is a limiting factor in how much income your school will bring in. For the most part, especially in the beginning, you're going to draw students from a radius of 15 or 20 miles (in addition to whatever following you might bring with you from former contacts). You have a certain population in that radius and within that population a very small percentage are interested in martial arts, have the desire and discipline to train and the financial resources to pay for that training. You'll be competiting for those dollars with other schools in the area. In additional to actual instructing there are the business issues that you'll have to address (ugh). There is also a limit to how much you can physically do in a day. I'm a little older than you (a slight exageration ) and if you're teach 3 or 4 class a day 5 or 6 days in a row your body begins to wear down. You need to learn out to delegate the training responsibilities to higher ranking students or hire help. Anyway, I'm not saying these things to discourage you. If it's in your heart to teach, if it's your passion go for it. But you'll be wise to count the cost.

"The Gracies actually helped conceive the UFC, and as a result we have the MMA competitions of today." I respect the Gracie's for what they have contributed to the develop BJJ BUT I don't put the conception of the UFC as a great accomplishment. Actually I think the UFC debases the martial arts. The martial arts isn't a game or sport. Ultimately it's about living and dying. IMHO it's not about two guys in a cage beating the stuffing out of each other for money. I don't buy that the UFC is good because it shows what is or isn't effective in a real situation. If you want to know what's effective in a real situation find instructors that have experience training police officers, Army Rangers, Special Forces, Navy Seals, etc., etc. The UFC is about money, bottomline.

"When the false trappings are torn away, the true culture of Bushido will shine like a beacon light to attract all, the fallen-away students of this martial art: karate." This was the main aspect of the quote I focused on in my comments. I don't believe that in order to restore the elements of Bushido you necessarily have to "return it (the art) the status of a deadly art instead of a sport." Many of the same concepts (honor, loyality, self-sacrifice, modesty, justice, etc.) are concepts that can and should be taught and applied whether you are learning a martial art for self-defense or sport reasons.

John G I think some students are reluctant to approach their sensei and say "I'm leaving" regardless of the reason because they believe it can't help but be interpreted as an insult. This may be especially true if the instructor has said over the years that there is nothing much out there worth learning that he can't teach the student. In some cases I've heard instructors talk down a student that has left for whatever the reason. This makes it less likely that a student who is thinking about leaving wants to open themself up to a barge of negativity about leaving the school. In one sense I think the instructor has to view the relationship with his students in the same way (loosely speaking ) as you view a romantic relationship. The harder you try to hold onto a person the more they are inclined to leave. Some instructors will either talk down other schools/systems, constantly talk up their own school/system to the point of hyperbole or even put in the contract a clause that if you leave the school within x number of years of receiving your Black Belt you won't be recognized by the school or federation that issued the rank. This type of situation can be the result of pride, concerns over the financial loss of losing a student, legitimate concerns about the students progress in the martial arts or a combination of all three. My attitude is I'll give you the best I can and if you feel the need to search for something more go with my blessing. I think instructors need to communicate that a student's decision to leave is not going to be necessarily viewed as an insult and if they in fact leave the school they welcomed back with open arms.

kchenault That exact quote isn't in the Bible but the principle is there. God has equipped us with certain natural abilities. He expects us to use our natural talents and abilities (in honorable ways of course) to accomplish the things we are capable of accomplishing. He is their to help and guide us while also providing what we need in situations that may go beyond our natural abilities to deal with.

I have observed over the years the tendency of some students who after many years of training and earning their Black Belt leave their school and instructor to venture out into parts unknown. On the one hand I think this is nature. They've spent maybe five years or more learning a particular art under the guidance of a particular instructor and feel the need to see what else is out there. Yet some instructors consider this an insult and get very upset about it. I realize getting your Black Belt is just the beginning and there is usually much more to learn in your system, the necessity to fine tune what you already know and a lot to discover about your art through teaching. I'd like to understand the thinking and feels of those that have experience in this area. Do you feel betrayed if someone you've trained for many years and award a Black Belt to leaves your dojo to see what else is out there.

I'm wondering if the one experience with the new school is a sign of their own insecurity and/or the difficulty they might be having building the business. If you're secure in what you know and what you're teaching you don't feel threatened that someone else is going to "steal" your techniques or lure your students away.

The concepts of honor, respect, loyality, discipline, honesty and other virtues can be and should be taught in both types of training, whether the primary goal is self-defense or sport. One of the problems in U.S. society is people are look for a get it quick method (no discipline), get it at any means (no honor, respect or loyality) and get it with the only major investment being money (no commitment). As far as realistic training is concerned, we are one of the most litigious societies in the world. Ask the owner of your school to look at the terms of his liability insurance policy. It may give you an indication of why many schools are reluctant to have even light contact sparring let allow "realistic" contact training.

I've always been interested in learning what makes things work coupled with the science and physics behind it. There is so much science (both physical and mental) with respect to the martial arts. Learning the techniques, the fundamental principles that make a technique work, the vast number of variations of technique, how different people learn, developing new ways to teach technique, etc., etc., etc. The physical benefits have been tremendous. I'm 51 now (started training at 40 with my then twelve year old son) and my strength, flexibility and reflexes are better now then when I was in my thirties. Add to this the comradery and bond of friendship I've developed with many other good people associated with martial arts and what can I say, it's been a wonderful road.

Icetuete To be honest with you I don't know enough about the inner workings of Kung Fu to really know how much of it (after spending 15 years in dedicated training) would translate into effective self-defense technique. I've been around long enough to be a fairly good at judging what's acrobatics and flash gymnastics but not practical or effective in a self-defense situation. That said I wonder (and I can only wonder never having been close to the art or seen it tested) whether some of the folks that have really dedicated themselves to learning Kung Fu can take what looks impractical to me and be so good at it that they can make it work. Granted, it might take 10 or 15 years of dedicated training and it might not be practical or physically possible for the average person but I hate to out of hand discount the effectiveness of an art that I don't know that much about. If only I had the youth and years to test out my theory .

battousai16 We're not arguing, we're having a friendly discussion. Sevenstar There is a limit to the how realistic the average person can train. You can't very often practice contact strikes into a vunerable area, it's not good for business and most people have to go to their regular 9 to 5 job the following day. There is a trade-off. But when you add a sporting element (meaning prohibiting even the non-contact initiation of certain types of attacks) there is a added train-off. Couple that with the starting point and the ultimate object of wrestling or the feeling out process in a typical boxing match (I do enjoy the chess game of a good boxing match), wearing gloves, etc. they fall further away from the core of martial arts (learning how to react and survive a deadly confrontation). Again, I'm biased by my martial arts background. I started my formal martial arts training at 40. I'm 51 today (actually it's my birthday today). At 40 my focus wasn't sport or learning a lot of traditional techniques that didn't have a pretty direct self-defense application. At 40 and counting my options with respect to an endurance race and flexability were limited and getting more limited by the year. The only sensible option in my mind was learning a martial are that focused on get the job done and get it done quickly. If I was in my teens or twenties with the time, energy and flexability required to master Kung Fu I might have devoted myself to learning it. That wouldn't change my opinion that the most effective self-defense techniques are the ones that are the most direct and most quickly incorporated.

Sevenstar Wrestling and boxing are sports. Granted they have martial arts applications but you're going to fight they way you train and with respect to both it's honoring the rules of the respective sport. Martial arts is ultimately about life and death, surviving a confrontation. The best way to do that is either by initiating a quick, overwhelm attack at the first sign that a confrontation is unavoidable or if an attack is initiated against you not allowing the attacker more than that ONE initial opportunity to strike. In these situations the outcome is ususally decide in the first few seconds and after that it's clean-up. This is one of the reasons people that understand the core principles and ideals of the martial arts (those that love life and understand via their training just how fragile life is) do as much as they can to honorably avoid meaningless confrontations and displays of macho, bravado. I don't doubt your experience but what you witnessed was a combination of martial art and sport. That said conditioning (which I believe is the tangent we got off on ) is important. But all the conditioning in the world isn't going to undo the off balancing or damage done by a barrage of strikes to vital areas that can be inflicted in a matter of seconds by a trained martial artist.

"bottom line is that not all fights end that quickly. I've seen too many of them. the majority of the 1 on 1 fights I've witnessed that lasted a while involved two untrained people who ended up on the ground" Sevenstar I'm not trying to belittle your experience but that's not my experience. My experience growing up in Manhattan and The Bronx, military experience and formal martial arts experience (Jiu-Jitsu with a heavy emphasis on self-defense applications) has been that fights among trained individuals (again, not sporting events but true NHB fights) last seconds not minutes. There may be exceptions but my experience is that there is an explosive first 5, 10 or 15 seconds where the outcome is going to be determined.

"Now, you have two people who SHOULD know what they're doing. Consequently, it will be harder for one to seize victory." You've been watching too many MA movies where two fighters dance around and exchange blow after blow and keep on fighting. That's not the way it goes down in a real confrontation. It's not block a strike and strike (one, two) or avoid a strike and strike (one, two). For the trained individual it's block/strike (one) or avoid a strike/strike (one) and once the first strike is landed it's strike, strike, strike, strike with no let up, not giving your opponent and opportunity to regain balance and control, until the opponent is incapacitated. All of this takes seconds not minutes. "you have to consider that the untrained fighter may have a weapon" Introducing a weapon is an altogether different situation and not what we've been discussing.

I thought it was a great show. Some of those guys are tremendous skillful and great athletes. How much of their martial arts training tranlates into being effective fighters is debatable but that doesn't take anything away from their skill and dedication to their art. BTW, those folks standing in the front row around the guys swinging the swords exercised some incredible "faith". Personally I'd want a couple of bodies between me and the sword wielder .

"I've seen several 1 on 1 fights that lasted more than a minute, some involving chairs and sticks. As for the skill of the fighters, it doesn't matter. Most of the people you encounter in a fight/ watch fight on the street won't be trained. You don't have to be trained to have a beef with someone." "As for the skill of the fighters, it doesn't matter." The skill of the fighters ABSOLUTE does matter. We were also talking about TRAINED individuals. The fact that two untrained individuals can carry on for X number of minutes in a fight shows their lack of training. People that are trained to fight (combat, no rules, NHB, live or die situations) are trained to get it done and get it done quickly.

"Depends on the fight, I have seen alot end after a few blows like you said and i have seen other go on for quite a while until one or both parties are exausted." You didn't define "quite a while" but I would question the skill of the parties if in a one on one, I'm talking one on one NHB that includes everything (eye gouge, strikes to the throat, bitting, etc.) that last more than a minute.