It's all in the Practitioner

[wingedMonkey]

Bruce Lee once said that if it helped you, to practice it, no matter what it was. He did not believe in styles but believed in getting what best worked for you out of the traditional styles. It has been this way forever now since there have been countless fights of TKD vs. KungFu, Muay Thai vs. Karate, KungFu vs. Ninjitsu, whatever vs. whatever, and always there is one winner but never necesserally on style that wins overall. Why? Because its all in the practitioner and how hard he dedicates himself to his training, if he keeps his mind open to learn from others, and if he always reaches for perfection.

With this in mind, I don't understand why everyone dogs on ATA. I know they run things as a business, BUT, to me, they have one of the finest styles of Taekwondo out there, and that is also an opinion, but what I am trying to say is for people to stop saying that EVERYONE that comes from ATA is horrible. I am in ATA, but i leave myself open to all other styles, I DO love ATA's style but of course its mostly about money to them. I dedicate myself as hard, if not much more than the next guy. So why must I continue to hear from fellow martial artists that I'm no good just because of the school I go to? Its all on how hard the person practices and how much he cares for it. What do you'all think?

[cross]

The practitioner will only be has good as the experiences they have. If a persons only experience is in an average school, then they will likely be average. Sure, things like natural talent, youth and athleticism may make them seem pretty good, but that natural ability would be better nurtured in a high quality school/system.

[username8517]

The practitioner will only be has good as the experiences they have. If a persons only experience is in an average school, then they will likely be average. Sure, things like natural talent, youth and athleticism may make them seem pretty good, but that natural ability would be better nurtured in a high quality school/system.

I agree 100%

[The BB of C]

Bruce Lee once said that if it helped you, to practice it, no matter what it was. He did not believe in styles but believed in getting what best worked for you out of the traditional styles. It has been this way forever now since there have been countless fights of TKD vs. KungFu, Muay Thai vs. Karate, KungFu vs. Ninjitsu, whatever vs. whatever, and always there is one winner but never necesserally on style that wins overall. Why? Because its all in the practitioner and how hard he dedicates himself to his training, if he keeps his mind open to learn from others, and if he always reaches for perfection.

With this in mind, I don't understand why everyone dogs on ATA. I know they run things as a business, BUT, to me, they have one of the finest styles of Taekwondo out there, and that is also an opinion, but what I am trying to say is for people to stop saying that EVERYONE that comes from ATA is horrible. I am in ATA, but i leave myself open to all other styles, I DO love ATA's style but of course its mostly about money to them. I dedicate myself as hard, if not much more than the next guy. So why must I continue to hear from fellow martial artists that I'm no good just because of the school I go to? Its all on how hard the person practices and how much he cares for it. What do you'all think?

I'm very glad you said this. I've been trying to remind my Kuk Sool Won teachers about this all of the time because they always preech their moves like it's the only way that ever existed to do them. And everyone seems to think that MMA fighters are always the best or this or that style is better than any other style out there. I can't stand it. Victory lies within the individual, not the style.

[ninjer]

Bruce Lee once said that if it helped you, to practice it, no matter what it was. He did not believe in styles but believed in getting what best worked for you out of the traditional styles. It has been this way forever now since there have been countless fights of TKD vs. KungFu, Muay Thai vs. Karate, KungFu vs. Ninjitsu, whatever vs. whatever, and always there is one winner but never necesserally on style that wins overall.

Sure there is-specific martial arts tend to have a much higher degree of success than others. To name one, Muay Thai is a style that holds quite a successfull record against virtually all striking martial arts and is, along with western boxing, regarded by many as the most effective striking style. Before this hits a nerve with certain people, allow to me to explain that the popular opinion of muay thai occured as a result of its great success, and not the other way around (in other words, those who judged it werent bias).

Why? Because its all in the practitioner and how hard he dedicates himself to his training.

This is a flawed logic. The differences between styles are often easily seen. Wrestling, for example, holds almost nothing in common with say, Tae Kwon Do. If you take someone who's trained in any particular standup style for, lets say 15 years, and we pit them in a fight against a submission grappler with, lets say 5 years, we have a good idea who is going to win the fight. This was one of the selling methods used by the Gracies when they used to allow challenge matches- someone would come in to their school (or the other way around) and the Gracies would often pair one of their beginning students (blue belts) against the advanced students of the other style and still win decisively.

So why must I continue to hear from fellow martial artists that I'm no good just because of the school I go to? Its all on how hard the person practices and how much he cares for it. What do you'all think?

You're liberal in the way you approach your opinions, but let me put it into perspective. Imagine two people applying for a job as a business associate (or whatever else). One is from a classic Ivy League business school (lets say Yale or Harvard). The other went to a community college. By simply looking at the credentials you can not ultimately decide which one is going to do a better job, but you know that one particular school has a reputation for producing quality businessmen while the other has none. When all is said and done, however, you could still argue that the same classes are being taught at the community college as are at the University, but in reality the outcome is quite lopsided.

[bushido_man96]

You bring up a good point. I, too, was a former student in the ATA, and I never had any really bad experiences there, and I felt like I had good instructors.

However, as ninjer pointed out, the desparity between the groundfight and the stand-up is there. You have to know how to ground fight to defend it.

Training methodology is a very important part of what you get out of your training. You will fight the way you train. In battle, you don't rise to the occassion, you sink to the level of your training.

[YoungMan]

There are lots of Instructors out there, some in our own organization, who feel that because they have a 6th Dan or higher wrapped around their waist, that qualifies them as experts in certain disciplines or aspects of Tae Kwon Do. But the same applies whatever style you practice.

Being a 6th Dan doesn't automatically qualify you to teach self defense, or history, or philosophy, or whatever. Our GM, based on his history and experiences in 40+ years of TKD, is qualified to teach many aspects of the art. Not because he is 9th Dan, but because he has the life experience to go with it. There are many people who have the rank but not the life experience or history. I've told people I am not the best person to teach realistic self defense, because I don't have that background. But I know people that do and refer people to them.

So the fact that we come from a great organization is only part of it. Another part is how have you lived what you teach?

[Menjo]

However, as ninjer pointed out, the desparity between the groundfight and the stand-up is there. You have to know how to ground fight to defend it.

Yeah for the average practitioner, my opinion is that knowing how to fight, ground or not, can take victory over spilt up groups of styles and grappling and striking.

Just listening to stats and other people, guess what, just like training, limits one to stats and other people.

It can be looked at as a larger picture of "a punch is a punch".

I'm saying this all within reasonable boundries of course.

[cross]

It can be looked at as a larger picture of "a punch is a punch".

Sure, but a cross is not a reverse punch. You punch with your rear hand, but thats where the similarity ends. So i dont thinks its has simple has "a punch is a punch and a kick is a kick". Not all are equal.

[Menjo]

It can be looked at as a larger picture of "a punch is a punch".

Sure, but a cross is not a reverse punch. You punch with your rear hand, but thats where the similarity ends. So i dont thinks its has simple has "a punch is a punch and a kick is a kick". Not all are equal.

Yeah I see what you mean, however I do think of it like that, a little differently, but everyone has their beliefs.

Theyre all means to an end, I once sparred with a tough judo instructor before I took any type of grappling lessons... just to prove that to myself.

He tried 3 times to use a hip throw, and I caught myself everytime because my body knew how to move.

The training and understanding of a punch has no limits in its application.

In terms of versatility, when I fight, my thoughts are completely about destorying the opponent, my hard work ahead of time covers the rest.

Whats more versatile, a wrongly applied punch and getting grappled to the ground, or a completely unpredictable opponent who makes the best of things.

When it becomes a game of chess, your going to get outclassed eventually, no matter who you are, therefore by saying "im a striker" admits that one cannot apply striking to any situation and your weakness will be exploited, training to fight, trains a person for any situation.

By understanding my own body, I know exactly what that person is feeling in theirs, put the pieces together naturally in a second, their position and physical ability is the only thing thats going to take me down.

I see this as a difference between sport and martial art.