complete art

[crouton]

JerryLove, i am not exactly sure what you mean when you said:

 

"I know what you loose; you loose cohesion."

 

can you explain that to me a little more. thanks.

[Treebranch]

Actually JerryLove is right.

[JerryLove]

I mean that if if you decide to study multiple arts seperately in order to be round, you have less cohesion in your training thatn you should get from studying a single, rounded art.

 

For example. You want to have grappling and striking skills so you take wrestling and boxing. But the boxing stance doesn't let you grab like you want to from wrestling, and leaves you open for a takedown; conversely, your wrestling stance doesn't guard you well from punches; and neither will teach you the transitions.

 

So now you have to blend these two arts together to do what you do. Now, you could tkae what you have learned and teach "wrestleboxing"; but then you would be teaching a single art, rather than seperatlely.

 

I know what the advantage of learning both skills in one art is; the issues of cohesions have alreasy been worked out for you and tested and improved... what is the advatage of taking wrestling and boxing seperately instead of taking wrestleboxing?

[SBN Doug]

Possibly a more in depth knowledge of each art than you get from an already fused one?

[Shorinryu Sensei]

I'll agree with JerryLove on this one. Taking two arts at the same time will not give you as rounded "experience" as taking one complete art will. Taking two arts at once will end up giving you two incomplete arts, unless you study both arts for years and years each.

 

There are some very good arts out there. Finding the one that YOU personally consider complete...that's the hard part.

[crouton]

thanks for the explanation, JerryLove. i understand what you mean now.

 

Treebranch, do you have a school website where i can read about your art.

[Drunken Monkey]

but how important is cohesion?

 

i said something to this effect before

 

(something about a bunch of good moves that work in isolation but not together)

 

and i've been thinking about it.

 

to use your example, if you do 'wrestleboxing' you will be learning a 'system' that switches/mixes the styles into an apparent coherent entity.

 

BUT

 

if you take the two separately and are good at both, where does it say that you WOULDN'T be able to switch (between them) when you need to anyway?

 

* * *

 

let's use a different example

 

let's say i do wing chun.

 

but let's also say i decide to take some sort of grappling.

 

what's to stop me from doing one when i'm standing

 

and going to the other when i'm not?

 

the point is i have one mind that works on many levels.

 

not two separate minds, one for wing chun, one for grappling that work independently of each other.

 

i take two separate, very different styles and i use whatever i need.

 

why would i have to (or need to) take a single version that combines the two into a conherent whole?

 

after all, it is ME that uses the moves.

 

anyone understand what i'm trying to get at?

 

* * *

 

S.S mentioned the time factor which plays an important part in this question.

 

anyway...

 

just airing what's been on my mind.

[Nick_14]

I would say kajukenpo is very well rounded.

[Treebranch]

Just go on to any search engine and type, Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu.

[JerryLove]

Possibly a more in depth knowledge of each art than you get from an already fused one?

Is this an advantage? Wouldn't the things that got dropped be the ones that did not work?

but how important is cohesion?

How important is it to box and wrestle simultaniously as opposed to having to switch gears? I can't quantify it, but I would think it was rather important.

if you take the two separately and are good at both, where does it say that you WOULDN'T be able to switch (between them) when you need to anyway?

 

I did not claim you could not switch; merely that you would have to. In the example, your drop your hands for a shoot and get nailed in the head because your wrestling shoot doesn't cover you from being struck.

but let's also say i decide to take some sort of grappling.

 

what's to stop me from doing one when i'm standing

 

and going to the other when i'm not?

 

In your WC+grappling example? Stance comes to mind. Want to sprawl to avoid the takedown? WC's power base is removed. Want to staw in WC's rooted position? There goes much of your grapling leverage work. Got a solution that resolves both? Why not teach them as a comprehnsive single art?

 

Please rememer, I am not criticizing cross-training, nor roundness, nor claiming that people cannot combine arts themselves... I'm asking what the advantage of taking two seperate arts is over taking one which combines the two arts you were going to take and combine anyway... why reinvent the wheel?