Shorinryu Sensei Posted October 21, 2003 Posted October 21, 2003 Looking at that link, the conclusion I think is the most important part. "CONCLUSION Students can learn techniques as efficiently from well-made martial arts instructional tapes as they can from an instructor. Both training methods, however, require them to practice what they have learned to become proficient. The social rewards that accompany membership in a dojo tend to encourage students to train regularly and practice what they have learned—even when their progress is slow. Training at home in front of a television does not offer that type of environment. Students who require the presence of others to stay motivated will be unlikely to make as much progress with videotapes as they would with a live instructor." I think the highlighted parts are significant, in that most studying off the videotape, once they have got it down, won't practice it much again..whereas in a dojo, the sensei will require them to practice the technique in class...over...and over again. That's his job, as it teaches you to use it without thinking, not jsut the few times so that you can do it. The martial arts are all about reactions to a stimulus. (Can we say Pavlov's dog here?) The goal of the arts is to react to an attack, without thinking (there's a Japanese phrase for this, but I don't remember it.) and effectively apply techniques to subdue and defeat your opponent. I doubt if you'll get this sort of reaction from training with video tapes. My nightly prayer..."Please, just let me win that PowerBall Jackpot just once. I'll prove to you that it won't change me!"
Martial_Artist Posted October 21, 2003 Posted October 21, 2003 I don't believe every move in TMA's is combat proven. There are some that are nearly useless and there solely for the sake of tradition or ceremony. If the author of the thread wanted to create a "style" by simply using logic and thought and applying that method to the creation of technique, how--outside of individual limitation--could he not create something at least minimally effective? Not talking about books or videos, if the author of the thread wanted to set out and create a "system" all his own, I see nothing preventing him from doing so except the limitations of his own mind. He could only create so far as his mind and body allow him. A punch can be dealt with in a myriad of ways. But each of those ways are not beyond the scope of human invention. In fact, they were invented by humans. That being so, it is quite possible for another human being to come to the same effective conclusions, perhaps in a different method, on their own without ever having been exposed to prior TMA training. I do not see any difference between a man a hundred years ago and man today. Other than the man today has the advantages of science and technology. Why cannot a man today develop something on his own and it be as "valid" as something created hundreds of years ago? In my eyes, I see no argument other than ,"That's the way it is." or "It's tradition." or "it was proven in 'combat'". How is that any different from someone who has been in fights, survived fights, and has developed a logical approach to fights? Sounds no different to me than what the ancient masters did. I just don't see any water being held by the argument of tradition being the sole source of effectiveness. I can find fault with many TMA techniques and philosophies. So, how can they be better than anything else created by another man hundreds of years later? Gods didn't create the styles of old. The dieties of creation didn't. Humble, mortal men did. "I am enough of an artist to draw freely upon my imagination.Imagination is more important than knowledge.Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world." Einstein
JerryLove Posted October 21, 2003 Posted October 21, 2003 I do not see any difference between a man a hundred years ago and man today. Other than the man today has the advantages of science and technology. Why cannot a man today develop something on his own and it be as "valid" as something created hundreds of years ago? "If I have seen farther than others, it is because I was standing on the shoulder of giants." - Isaac Newton The issue is twofold. For the above cited reason, it makes sense that someone inventing their own martial art should learn what already exists first. The other problem that having a few thousand practitioners fixes that creating your own art generally fails (unless you are off fighting a great deal) is the problem of inbreeding. The Greeks developed the Hopolite and spent a few centuries perfecting it against each other... when they ran into non-Greeks, they discovered that the Hopolite formation had intrinsic weakness that had been missed because their opponents had all been doing the same thing. Of course someone can come up with their own art... someone can reinvent math from scratch too... I recommend learning what exists and then creating. https://www.clearsilat.com
Shorinryu Sensei Posted October 21, 2003 Posted October 21, 2003 I seem to recall a relatively young gung fu practictioner who created (taught himself) another style; perfected it and taught it. All before the age of 30. And Jeet Kune Do is doing just fine. Just one minor point, but didn't Bruce Lee train for quite a while with Yip Man and several others before launching on his own and creating JKD? My nightly prayer..."Please, just let me win that PowerBall Jackpot just once. I'll prove to you that it won't change me!"
Lazy Scholar Posted October 21, 2003 Posted October 21, 2003 I was about to bring that up ..but you beat me to it . . . with that aside, he did train with quite a few people.. wally jay, lebelle to name a couple. He did train in wing chun for five years under wong shun leung / william chueng i think.. he basically had a foundation to build upon.. "JKD is based on what i have learned and my evaluation of it" a lot of his original students often commented on how they considered themselves training dummies for bruce ..but yeah.. he didn't really self teach that great a deal he still trained on a peer basis. you scythe with it!!!!!!
backfist Posted October 21, 2003 Posted October 21, 2003 Correct. Lee trained with many notable martial arts legends, masters and professors--my late instructor among them. And I agree that he had an incomparable foundation on which to build. I'm not saying that martialartsresearcher is the next Bruce Lee, but I support him (so long as he masters the basics) for setting out to create his own art. One thing about martial arts--like most other arts. You can call yourself whatever you want. The proof is in the finished product. So Many Masters; So Few Students
backfist Posted October 21, 2003 Posted October 21, 2003 Just one minor point, but didn't Bruce Lee train for quite a while with Yip Man and several others before launching on his own and creating JKD? Yes sir. He began training in Jun Fan gung fu, later studying Wing Chun under Yip Man. Ironically, Jun Fan gung fu is also the creation of Lee Jun Fan a/k/a Bruce Lee. So Many Masters; So Few Students
Drunken Monkey Posted October 21, 2003 Posted October 21, 2003 no. he studied wing chun under yip man (well, wong shun leung and william cheung...) jun fan kung fu is what he called the thing that he was teaching that later evolved into jkd. essentially, what he called jun fan kung fu was the wing chun that he had learnt while in hk. post count is directly related to how much free time you have, not how intelligent you are."When you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite."
martialartsresearcher Posted October 23, 2003 Author Posted October 23, 2003 basicly I just do shadow boxing alot, and do numerus repititions on strikes and kicks that i get of shaolin.com and see how long i can do a horse stance. however i think i want to get in to akido & jeet kune do. but thanks guys.
Recommended Posts