Creating your own style.

[Shorinryu Sensei]

Is there a skill limit on creating your own style?

 

A skill limit? Oh heck no! In fact, you don't even hve had to take a single lesson to start your own style! Just look in the back of any martial arts magazine and buy a gi, gelt and off you go! No kidding..it's that easy.

Is there an age limit on creating your own style?

 

Well, being old enough to walk would probbly be a good thing. But honestly, who's going to take a 16 year old Master of the Martial Arts very seriously?

Is it better to create a style that forms around your personal skills?

 

As opposed to starting a new martial art based around somebody else's skills...or no skills at all?

I was not thinking of creating my own style, just pondering the thought.

 

Ah..now we're getting down to the nitty gritty here. How about giving us some idea of your martial arts background. Start with your age, how many years (months?) of training in what arts and what belt you currently are. That will help us a lot in helping you make this major decision about starting your own style. I anxiously await your reply, as I really want to help you with this.

[scottnshelly]

Is there a skill limit on creating your own style?

 

Is there an age limit on creating your own style?

 

Is it better to create a style that forms around your personal skills?

 

I was not thinking of creating my own style, just pondering the thought.

 

It depends on your definition of ‘style’. If you use style in the most common way of classifying martial arts (Tae Kwon Do, Kenpo, Judo, etc.) then no you can not create another style of this caliber.

 

I define ‘style’ as a way of fighting. In this case, everyone has their own individual personal style. For instance, the Arts that I have studied, the experiences that I have, my build, speed, skill, etc will make my way of fighting different than someone who went to all of the same classes that I went to. We both studied the same ‘style’ but have a different ‘style’ of fighting.

 

If you are referring to the former, then forget it, just learn what information is offered to you. If you are referring to the latter, then learn everything that you can about everything that you can from anyone you can. Take the techniques that work for you and utilize them, modify the ones that don’t work well for you.

 

What do you mean ‘101 on MA sects?’

[Harmony]

The age old debate. Old style, new style, my style, your style. The fact is substance far outweighs style. I hold belt ranks in different systems, but I never get hung up on which style is better. I prefer to focus on what techniques work, and which training methods work. The rest is just traditionalists passion, or personal ego. I teach here in my home town, and based on the various systems I've trained in, I have a preference to how I teach, and what I teach. Most of the techniques can be found, in several styles. When it comes to kicks, punches, ect., there isnt that much new under the sun. However, depending on your goal in training varying methods can and do produce different results. I teach reality based combatives, with no desire for sport application, purely defense and survive. I believe that saveral mainstream traditional classes don't equip students to face the harsh realism of violent attack. So I teach what works for me based on my knowledge. Heres the difference though, I dont claim to have a "new" style, and I dont claim to be the best style, in fact I dont wish to be compared to anyone or any style. I do what I feel is best for me, and I share it with those who want to learn from my perspective, its not about whose better or worse, or if I created a new thing , or modified an old one. I try to keep it about goals. My schools goal is survival and reality scenario fighting. It is never about being better or superior to anyone else, or belittling a traditional system, we just do what works for us. Anything else is just ego.

[pineapple]

The age old debate. Old style, new style, my style, your style. The fact is substance far outweighs style. I hold belt ranks in different systems, but I never get hung up on which style is better. I prefer to focus on what techniques work, and which training methods work. The rest is just traditionalists passion, or personal ego. I teach here in my home town, and based on the various systems I've trained in, I have a preference to how I teach, and what I teach. Most of the techniques can be found, in several styles. When it comes to kicks, punches, ect., there isnt that much new under the sun. However, depending on your goal in training varying methods can and do produce different results. I teach reality based combatives, with no desire for sport application, purely defense and survive. I believe that saveral mainstream traditional classes don't equip students to face the harsh realism of violent attack. So I teach what works for me based on my knowledge. Heres the difference though, I dont claim to have a "new" style, and I dont claim to be the best style, in fact I dont wish to be compared to anyone or any style. I do what I feel is best for me, and I share it with those who want to learn from my perspective, its not about whose better or worse, or if I created a new thing , or modified an old one. I try to keep it about goals. My schools goal is survival and reality scenario fighting. It is never about being better or superior to anyone else, or belittling a traditional system, we just do what works for us. Anything else is just ego.

 

My Goodness, Harmony! This could have been my post! I guess you and I are a lot alike!

[Harmony]

Nice to know others share some of the same ideas. Thanx, and nice to meet you!!

[Taku-Shimazu]

Is there a skill limit on creating your own style?

 

Ah..now we're getting down to the nitty gritty here. How about giving us some idea of your martial arts background. Start with your age, how many years (months?) of training in what arts and what belt you currently are. That will help us a lot in helping you make this major decision about starting your own style. I anxiously await your reply, as I really want to help you with this.

 

I appreciate your avidest any I also share an 'Excitement' on the matter, so here you go:

 

Age: MA training years you mean? Having an enthusiastic MA family, diversing in many styles I 'started' no, It just kind of got murged into my life from very early on. About 19yrs Approx

 

Karate Do: I got to purple, (White, red, yellow, orange, green, blue, Purple.) And I would like to add that then My 'McDojo' closed on me and I was Martially artisticly homeless. And also I train regularly (Every other day) with and also without Tonfa.

 

Tai Chi (Yang form): I have mastered the full Yang form of Tai Chi and I practise it every day, yes Every Day.

 

Ninjitsu: I have a limited knowledge of this art and I have mainly studied the internal side of this art.

 

I hope this information helps. I would also like to take the time to say that when I was 'pondering' the thought of a new style I was thinking more of 'Shimazu Karate' than 'Shimazu Kara-jitsu'.

[SloMo]

I have a more basic question to ask everybody. What defines a new style? My personal thought is that a "style" is a system of martial arts that centers around some basic theories or concepts or philosophies. TKD, Wing Chun, Judo, Savate, Boxing, Etc all have some basics that the style revolves around.

 

I teach TKD but I have studied Wing Chun as well. I have incorporated some of what I learned into TKD ( Especially when the opponent is close in ) but I would not call what I teach a "new" style. I teach traditional TKD with a little of my experience thrown in.

 

I hope I'm not bad mouthing anybody here but to create a whole new style that is truly original would be one of the most difficult tasks to accomplish. Is picking bits and pieces from different styles creating your own? Maybe, it depends on why you pick what you do and how you meld them together.

 

I think even styles that say that they just do what works have core basics to them. Maybe they are not formal but I would consider criteria like "To be able to defend yourself quickly and with minimal energy" or "With minimal risk" or whatever to be a basic concept behind the style.

 

Judo focuses on throws, Aikido on holds, TKD on kicks, Wing Chun on controlling the center line, ATA on making money ( kidding! ), boxing on conditioning.

 

( my pardons for over simplifying these styles, I know they have more to them that this ) My point is that a true "style" should have a some sort of core that it builds from, some sort of foundation.

 

Any thought about my thoughts?

[Shorinryu Sensei]

Age: MA training years you mean? Having an enthusiastic MA family, diversing in many styles I 'started' no, It just kind of got murged into my life from very early on. About 19yrs Approx

 

Karate Do: I got to purple, (White, red, yellow, orange, green, blue, Purple.) And I would like to add that then My 'McDojo' closed on me and I was Martially artisticly homeless. And also I train regularly (Every other day) with and also without Tonfa.

 

Tai Chi (Yang form): I have mastered the full Yang form of Tai Chi and I practise it every day, yes Every Day.

 

Ninjitsu: I have a limited knowledge of this art and I have mainly studied the internal side of this art.

 

I hope this information helps. I would also like to take the time to say that when I was 'pondering' the thought of a new style I was thinking more of 'Shimazu Karate' than 'Shimazu Kara-jitsu'.

 

OK, so if I understand this correctly, you've been involved in the martial arts for 19 years? And the highest rank you've achieved during that 19 years is purple belt? Is this correct?

 

Again, how old are you please?

[ryangruhn]

"use no way as way. Use no limitation as limitation."

 

I feel that the term “style” has been misused from the start. You either fight or you don’t fight. Similar to a rugby player, you either play rugby or you don’t play rugby.

 

Style is an individual fixation on a personal level. Style can be tight, weak, quick, smooth, loose, heavy, soft, hard, or any other description for that matter; but what it can’t be is one set thing. For instance, you don’t hear people saying “I study the “Babe Ruth” form/style of baseball.” People may study Babe Ruth’s attributes, but there is no such thing as a “Babe Ruth” style of baseball. In conclusion, you either fight or you don’t fight.

 

Just My Opinion,

 

Gruhn

[KungFuMan]

Sevenstar,

 

You are not a jack of all trades if you study one style that may use various methods and applications within its own individual concepts and theories.

 

I do see your point, but is irrelevant to what I said.

 

According to your argument a tennis player may also be considered a jack of all trades because he may do running and cardiovascular for stamina and weight lifting for strengh, and etc. According to me it is more likely that he is a jack of all trades if he plays tennis, squash, ping pong badmington and racketball.

 

KungFuMan