Did you make up your own stlye?

[Tkdampbjj]

I wouldnt necesarily create my Own style. However I feel that the taekwondo I know I would mix some of my other knowledge into to make it more effective for self defense. I don't need to call it Wayne Kwan do though. My personal style already includes muay Thai, boxing, trapping, as well as dirty fighting not usually taught in taekwondo.

Am I creating my own art?

Ps sorry for the necro

[sensei8]

No, I've not made up my style, nor would I ever want to.

[bushido_man96]

I wouldnt necesarily create my Own style. However I feel that the taekwondo I know I would mix some of my other knowledge into to make it more effective for self defense. I don't need to call it Wayne Kwan do though. My personal style already includes muay Thai, boxing, trapping, as well as dirty fighting not usually taught in taekwondo.

Am I creating my own art?

Ps sorry for the necro

I don't think necessarily, but also kind of in a way, yes. Confused? Me too.

Everyone really has their own style and method. You are taking what you've learned and your experiences and using them to mold your self-defense. So, what you do may be a bit different from what others do. So in a way, it is your own style. But, does that constitute the creation of a new style? Not necessarily. I could take the Hapkido I've done and add it into what I've learned with TKD, but I don't think that would necessarily mean I've created a new style. Just a different method and approach.

[sensei8]

I wouldnt necesarily create my Own style. However I feel that the taekwondo I know I would mix some of my other knowledge into to make it more effective for self defense. I don't need to call it Wayne Kwan do though. My personal style already includes muay Thai, boxing, trapping, as well as dirty fighting not usually taught in taekwondo.

Am I creating my own art?

Ps sorry for the necro

I don't think necessarily, but also kind of in a way, yes. Confused? Me too.

Everyone really has their own style and method. You are taking what you've learned and your experiences and using them to mold your self-defense. So, what you do may be a bit different from what others do. So in a way, it is your own style. But, does that constitute the creation of a new style? Not necessarily. I could take the Hapkido I've done and add it into what I've learned with TKD, but I don't think that would necessarily mean I've created a new style. Just a different method and approach.

Brian,

Great points. So great that it made me think that how my Soke took Okinawa-te and Shuri-te and created Shindokan. What he created...maybe it's not a new style after all; it was HIS style of what he had learnt from those two cores.

Hhhhhmmmmmmmm

[Tkdampbjj]

I wouldnt necesarily create my Own style. However I feel that the taekwondo I know I would mix some of my other knowledge into to make it more effective for self defense. I don't need to call it Wayne Kwan do though. My personal style already includes muay Thai, boxing, trapping, as well as dirty fighting not usually taught in taekwondo.

Am I creating my own art?

Ps sorry for the necro

I don't think necessarily, but also kind of in a way, yes. Confused? Me too.

Everyone really has their own style and method. You are taking what you've learned and your experiences and using them to mold your self-defense. So, what you do may be a bit different from what others do. So in a way, it is your own style. But, does that constitute the creation of a new style? Not necessarily. I could take the Hapkido I've done and add it into what I've learned with TKD, but I don't think that would necessarily mean I've created a new style. Just a different method and approach.

I agree I think one should never limit themselves to one form or way of thought. If something works I include it in my arsenal. I am not necesarily just cataloging random techniques, but I am finding ways to do deal with attackers,

And to overcome challenges they may present.

[bushido_man96]

The way I see it, as much as any one of us try to imitate what an instructor teaches us for years and years, we can only become so much like that person, as we cannot become that person entirely. We're all a bit different, and so our experiences are a bit different than those we learn from. We all end up spicing the MAs in our own way.

[lowereastside]

"The way I see it, as much as any one of us try to imitate what an instructor teaches us for years and years, we can only become so much like that person, as we cannot become that person entirely. We're all a bit different, and so our experiences are a bit different than those we learn from. We all end up spicing the MAs in our own way."

Very well put -

[sensei8]

The way I see it, as much as any one of us try to imitate what an instructor teaches us for years and years, we can only become so much like that person, as we cannot become that person entirely. We're all a bit different, and so our experiences are a bit different than those we learn from. We all end up spicing the MAs in our own way.

That's a VERY SOLID post!!

[bushido_man96]

Thanks, guys.

[SifuGazz]

Did you make up your own stlye?

1. Why did you?

2. The you teach the same thing you learn'd in your other stlye?

3. What makes your stlye diffrent from the other?

Yes I did, "Flowing Combat", to answer your questions briefly;

1) Why? A few reasons

a."lineage queens"-- when I say I practice Tai Chi, or Bagua, etc. it can become a lineage battle fest, who's style is better, who's teacher learned the "real deal". The material becomes less about standing on its own merit, and more about who's black and white picture is hanging on the schools wall. I got sick of such debates, and preferred the new label to stop the cycle.

b. No system is complete (not even mine)--each style has it's own pro's and con's. Once a few are learned quite well, and notes can be compared amongst very skilled practitioners, this is apparent. I find the internal arts (taiji, xingyi, bagua) are complimentary, they bring out the best in the tools of the other, and allow for the blend to exponentialize the skill sets. Also, Military unarmed combat was added because I felt the weapons disarmament methods were up to snuff, and the weapons trained (sword, etc.) have no real place in modern combat. Better to learn situational shooting, how to deploy and use a combat blade, etc.

2) Yes, necessarily I teach the things contained in the individual styles. Just not in the same way, and not always the same order.

3) The material becomes combat viable at a much higher rate. There are more basic drills used from each system, and combined basic motion drills that are more workable and offer a better range of skill sets. Two man tactile sensitively drills are also more numerous from the combination, and the material is more dynamic by doing the foregoing.

That being said, as another poster mentioned, each person in a way creates their own style to a degree. Mimicking your instructor at some point should stop. Concepts should be learned, and techniques should flow from the basics you already know. Things can be adapted to your own body style, and preferences. In the end what matters is that you pressure test what works, discard what doesn't, and never assume you are done learning.