Martial_Artist

But it all depends on your reasons for training. If you truly want to be effective in the fighting arts, the limitations of one art are too great to be ignored. However, as has already been pointed out, if you train for other reasons, then cross training, or expanding your arsenal, is not that important. The key isn't restriction to movement or mentality. Applying yourself to one art will make you very proficient in that art, but the only tools you'll have are the ones that art offers. When you fight you will be fighting from that art. When you fight another art you will be concerned about which of art's weapons can be used against that art. The key is diversity. Fighting can be such a random act that it doesn't make sense to limit your expectations to within the boundaries of one style. Why worry about which of your weapons can be used if you have every weapon and they use themselves? Now, that all just applies to the person who seeks to be a fighter. Experience is a good thing and can in many times sway the course of a fight. Experience coupled with good technique and skill is much better. Why place the limit on yourself? That's all I'm saying. You don't have to cross-train if you don't want to. It's as much of a personal decision as choosing which art to take. But, if given the chance why limit your knowledge? That's just my thoughts.

Good point, Aamorn. That's another reason I like massage, to move the fluids out of the muscles.

Epic fantasy, and character driven sci-fi. I have some books in the works for publishing, and when they're done I'll let you know. In fact, I'll be sending some anyways to my friends in New Zealand. They're waiting patiently. I think what I have to say about the martial arts would make for a good book. It wouldn't be fictional. But I still haven't decided yet.

There is a kangaroo in Tekken, a little Dinosaur too. The guy with the cheata head, well, that's a mask, he's supposed to be a pro-wrestler. The Bears are just fun.

I really don't like using romaji. It doesn't capture the japanese as well as hiragana, katakana, or kanji. I wish I could speak German for fun. Instead I'm plagued with all these obscure languages. Tagalog, Ilocano, a little Visayan, and a little Hiligaynon. Once upon a time I spoke some good gutter Ybanag, but nothing more. Fortunately, thanks to my mother, I'm proficient in Spanish, and to my Dad for English. I used to translate rudimentary japanese anime in high school, but never pursued it afterward. Today all I can do is basic conversation and read almost everything but those obscure kanji. And my pronunciation of kanji has been skewed by my recent study of Mandarin, of which I have no ability. Well, that's life. Dankashe.(ream me for the spelling, I know it's wrong.)

What could be the negatives? Injury? I think that's a benefit because you'll learn to take a hit, and the benefit of that is great. For me, there are no negatives to full contact. I think what you said is good. MA.

Hi Mike, To me it doesn't sound like a quality martial arts school. Black belts shouldn't be bought for a non-negotiable contract and $4500. It sounds like what we call a McDojo. That is a school that only seeks financial gain at the expense of the ill-experienced, or ill-informed. Any school that doesn't promote based on individual achievement is not a very good school. Compulsory attendance in exchange for rank is a good indication that the school is only interested in pleasing the parents or students to keep them attending by giving them higher rank for attendance. A black belt should only be given to a student that has demonstrated the mental maturity, the physical ability, and technical knowledge that comes with time. It isn't something that should come quickly, or to the too young, especially if it is to have meaning. Hope my advice helps. I apologize for not being able to answer some of your other questions. I don't really advocate for any single style or school. And as for pricing, that is really variable. Some good schools might seem to charge much, but you get quality. And, as you are experiencing, some poor schools charge much and you don't get quality. There are people on this forum that have much more knowledge concerning modern schools than I, and I hope some will be able to answer your other questions. MA.

Iie, dou itashimashite.(You're welcome) ps. it's spelled gozaimasu. for the characters, go-za-i-ma-su. The u is silent.

I've given comments in the past about the young. But, all that aside, if in your school you have a teenage instructor, then by right of their title respect is required. That is the ceremony of the school you attend. That is how things are run. If you don't agree with it, then you can change, but the person who is teaching is teaching for a reason. Regardless of whether it's a McDojo or not. Common decency requires nothing less. I have my differences with more than a handful of martial arts instructors, but I in no way am rude or obnoxious to them, my personal opinion is meaningless concerning their style, etc. I give them the common courtesy of respect. This isn't to be equated with admiration, but the courtesy of one professional to another. So, whether I think a teenager should be an instructor isn't related to whether I should respect that instructor. And, if my school had such an instance, then I would expect each and every student to afford the same respect given me to my young instructor. Because that young teacher was chosen by the head of the school. Whether this is right or wrong doesn't change whether or not respect, i.e. courtesy of professionals, is to given or not. It always should be. MA.

Tekken 2. I had a record of 703 wins and 14 losses against anyone who wanted to play. Lei Wu Long baby! It was a fun, innovative game. I had to bite. MA.

Get a massage. Nothing like a good massage. Me personally, I just tough it out and still do my workouts, just not so long. I give my muscles time to rest, but I still stretch so that they heal stretched and remain limber. Hope that helps.

Books(fantasy fiction and sci-fi, as well as a language book I'm working on-Tagalog) and freelance magazine articles. I also do copywriting and editing for local college students. When one of my novels goes big I'll let you know. I was thinking about a martial arts book. I have had several people actually suggest I do, and that it would fill a nitch in the market. It's still something I'm playing with in my mind. Thanks for asking. MA.

Yes, I see we're saying the same things. Dog chasing his tail. Good comments, Delta1. Thanks for the discussion. MA.

Kchen, As for copyright transfering to the consumer, that doesn't happen. The copyright basically says the creator of the idea has the ownership. When you buy a CD you're buying the plastic and paying a royalty to the artist. The rights of the CD still belong to the artist/copyright holder. Tombstone, Let's say you write something down that everybody likes. You decide to sell it. But first you copyright it. Now you have protection against people stealing your idea, because you have protected the copy rights. Now, let's say that someone gets ahold of your idea and copies onto another piece of paper and gives it to his friend. Your idea is spreading but you're not getting paid for it. How would you feel? That's the nature of the copyright laws. To protect the rights of the artists. It's the nature of the business for writers, musicians, and others who sell ideas or intellectual property. It's the only protection they have for their way of life. Sharing something that isn't yours, or that you don't have the rights to share is wrong. It doesn't matter how many people it reaches. Now, the ramifications of this are small. You likely won't be prosecuted for copying a CD and giving it to your friend. But as more people do this the market will be affected and the artists will have to charge more to make up for the flooding of their markets with product they didn't receive compensation for. It's still black and white. It's stealing. However, the laws aren't black and white about it, because they focus mainly on people making money off another's work. The parts on distribution without permission/compensation are vague. As for Microsoft, they have one of the hardest hitting anti-piracy groups in their company. They actively hunt down and prosecute software pirates. When I used to work for a large computer sales company the Microsoft software license sales were what they drilled into us. The licenses had to be bought and suspects were prosecuted. In fact Microsoft offered a huge spiff for information pertaining to suspected pirates. Their stuff is still pirated even with their strict security measures. That's why their stuff is hundreds of dollars. They are in the business of making as much money as possible. Since they lose a huge amount to piracy they make up for it by inflated prices. Just something to think about. MA.

I already mentioned radio. The artists are getting their royalties from the station. A copied song from the radio isn't near as good as quality as an original. But that doesn't really matter. I don't have cable, either. I really don't watch much tv. I agree the government doesn't do a good job of detailing what the copyright law is. I read the 500 page copyright law once. The most boring thing I have ever read. It's not very clear on a lot of things. It's really vague, because it's trying to protect something not really tangible: creative thoughts and ideas. So in its purpose it is flawed, I'll agree. There are no speculations about media types in the law, that I know of--500 pages is a lot and I don't remember every little thing. But it's the media types that are prosecuted. With TV and televised programs most companies don't care because they have been compensated and the quality of recorded media isn't as great as original. Most people that record a movie off of tv eventually buy the original anyways. As for NFL, I do believe you're not supposed to record them, but no one is going to prosecute you if you do. See, my point was, it is black and white from a moral standpoint. It's theft. Sure, you probably won't ever get prosecuted, but does that make it right? As far as what is chosen to be prosecuted or what they choose to defend legally, that's a very grey area. If they start to lose money in they'll prosecute. That's why they're pretty strict on DVD's and VHS's. Most of them have anti-copying protection anyways. It's something they want to protect. I feel that's what's going to happen in the music industry. With books it's a little harder. Much more stuff to copy or duplicate and it will hardly ever look like the original. With music, you can copy from a CD and get the same quality. It hits a little closer to home for the musicians. IF one site buys CD's and then copies them and gives them away from free, or even just the sharing, why would anyone want to buy a CD from the store? You can copy all the songs you want and burn your own CD. That's really just it. I'm not trying to be analytical about it all. Just sharing my view of it. I'm a writer and I wouldn't want anyone copying my work and distributing it without any compesation or permission. Would you? I know the musicians make millions as it is and for now the impact isn't that great, but who's to say what the future will do? That's all. Thanks for the discussion. MA.

No see, that's just it. He used that technique because it worked against his opponents. However, he also knew his whole system. He didn't limit himself to that one technique. He didn't use that kick every single time, only when the opportunity presented itself. If that was the only thing he knew and did nothing else better he probably wouldn't have achieved the level he did. He most likely would still be famous for a 60mph kick, but not knowing how to do anything else doesn't amount to much. Like I said, nothing wrong with a bread and butter move, just that bread and butter don't go with every meal. I see what you're saying. But I still think that a broader arsenal is better, experience has taught me so. MA.

I would agree, as far as the definition of stealth and Modus Operandi is concerned.

Nothing wrong with a bread and butter move, but remember bread and butter don't go with every meal.

Ah, yes, Treebranch, you've almost hit it right on the head. Every style has weakness and strengths. If fighting is your goal, then limitation to a single style will be your downfall. It is in your best interest to the find the styles that accomplish what you want.

Ah, but television is not the same medium as music or books. Something that has to be purchased before use. Television is freely dristibuted and royalties are collected from ad agencies and not the consumer. You don't pay NBC or ABC or FOX to watch their tv programs. Companies paying to place ads on TV do. Now, if the individual consumer had to pay for each program viewed then there would be stricter regulations regarding the distribution of TV. Look at movies, DVD's and VHS, it is very explicit about the copyright notices. That's because you have to pay for those and royalties are made on each sale. TV is pretty much considered public domain, same as radio. You don't see the FBI Warning before each and every program. Music and books are different media and are handled different from TV shows. MA.

But, if you're training properly, then you won't have 100 hundred techniques that fight against you, or confuse you. Each and every technique you learn you should be learning to be natural. There shouldn't be a reason for you to stutter in thought with technique. When punched at you shouldn't be restricted to a single response. You should have the option of choosing how to react, because you do not know in advance how every single situation is going to be played out. And saying that one move or even ten will handle everything thrown at you is a bit naive. No one knows how a fight will resolve or what circumstances will alter or affect the fight. One hundred techniques/movements isn't that many. Every little thing that happens in a fight is governed by motion. The human form is capable of an almost limitless supply of movement. Saying otherwise is the limitation of style. If you train properly, one thousand techniques does not hinder you, but provides you with the ability to direct the situation the way you want. MA.

Well, no, a kungfu stylist will train kicks differently from a MuayThai fighter because intrinsically their kicks are different and are meant to be used differently. Same goes for punches. A Boxer will train punches much more differently than a practioner of Shotokan. Training is how styles deliver their techniques. Application, usage, and practice are all covered in training. Each style teaches a different method of reaching a goal. So, training isn't separate from style. If you train Kungfu you will fight like kungfu. If you train muaythai you will fight like muaythai. I have already covered everything I'm about to say in every single of my novelic previous posts in this thread, and really, those posts should be read. I apologize if they are lengthy. I am a writer by profession. Anyways, if style meant nothing then there would be no styles. Everyone would have realized eons ago that there was no distinction between my way of fighting and your way of fighting and they would just fight. In reality, there are better ways of doing something and all things are not eqaul. But, BUT, this is the only deciding factor. It cannot be. Because not every practioner of a particular art is going to be that art's best example. And, no art can turn anyone, regardless of lack of inate ability, into a fighting machine. There has to be a level of innate ability, an epitude for things physical, and a capacity for things mental and spiritual. A good fighter using an inefficient art fighting a good fighter using an efficient art will not win. (Barring extrenuating circumstances and random bolts of lightning). If they are of equal skill, i.e. equal innate ability, then the art comes into play. So, Art vs Art is just as important as fighter vs fighter. It really is innate ability + effective technique(i.e. art) + fate = good fighter. If the greatest fighter in the world fights using insufficient or poor tools he won't do that well. No matter how good his talent is, if his training and technique don't supplement it then it won't go anywhere. The best carpenter in the world can only create as well as his tools allow him. Reduce him to his fingernails and he won't be able to produce masterpieces. You must have the proper tools. These tools are not found in every art. If that weren't true then give up your current style and start one you do not like. Why won't you? Because the other style doesn't accomplish what you want. It doesn't do things that you'd like. I.e. it's not the same. Because if it was, then why wouldn't you switch? As long as you train hard and work at it you'll be good, right? Well, you won't do it because there might be someone in a better art training just as hard and getting better tools and we don't want to face someone with better tools and equal skill. There should be great care in picking an art. Because not every art does the same thing. So, in every art vs art argument, we always hear that it boils down to the fighter. True as that may be, it is only partially correct. For a fighter is only as good as his weapons. I have gone over this in great detail in the posts that started this thread. I don't really like repeating myself, nor letting this discussion repeat things that have already been discussed. A thorough review of what has been previously posted can eliminate needless repetition. It save time if everyone already read the arguments presented in the beginning of the thread and add comments, rather than doing a cursory read and making judgements without reading the whole argument. I appreciate the comments. MA.

I choose a boundaryless approach to fighting and do not limit my arsenal. I believe it is better to have a good tool and never use then to not have a certain tool and need it really bad. So any limitation to the fighting person is bad for me. This includes just sticking to one technique. Strategy comes into play but there are only so many moves you can do with a pawn. Only so many things that can be done with a Knight. It takes the entire crew to win the game. Let's say one technique gives you so opportunity for 10 different strategies. It is, after all, only one movement. One intended purpose. For example, you now have 10 situations in which your one technique can be used. Does it cover everything possible that could happen? Add another technique with 10 uses and you have just jumped to 20 uses and 10 new situations from which to strategize. Keep adding and you may find a moment of limitless possibility where you are not restricted by style or technique. So, for me, I choose expanding the arsenal. MA.

Well just because there's no law doesn't mean it isn't wrong. Lack of law doesn't equate moral justification. I'm a writer so this hits pretty close to home. A writer or musician makes money off of royalties. A royalty is a percentage of the sale price of each individual piece of work that is given to the artist. This is not a big percentage. 3-10% on average. Royalties are paid on the individual sale of each piece of work, i.e. every CD or every book, etc. Copying something and giving it to another without paying the creator is copyright infringement. Copyright laws across the world are very specific about this. Photocopy a book and give it away and you're breaking copyright law. The only exception is archival for personal use, not distribution--free or otherwise. If the file sharing continues and everyone does it so that only a few people actually ever buy anything musicians and writers won't have the incentive to create anymore. Imagine working very hard for something and never getting paid for it. Imagine working for your boss, right now, and never getting paid. Writing and music are trades, very hard trades. It takes a lot to get published or a record produced. These people put a lot of time, money, effort, and talent into what they do. It isn't easy. Then, money hard-earned, is taken from them because of copyright infringement. It is pretty black-and-white. It is stealing. Stealing from the artist their way of life. The courts have already made a move on it, look at what happened to Napster. MA.