Attachment to Style

[cross]

Cross, you have some very good points and everyone should try different styles to be well rounded. However Gzk and Bushido have some good counter points to some (not all) of what you said. I will add my own point which is not really a disagreement but more of an answer/explanation to your question of why people look first to their chosen style for answers.

The reason is because it is easier. Most people join a dojo because there is much knowledge collected in one place so it is a quicker way to find most answers. It's like going to a tiny local library one block away to research a topic instead of hitting all of the huge county libraries that are all several miles away. Of course the county options will give more answers to some questions, but is today's question worth spending 10 times more effort and time to possibly get 2 or 3 more options? It's the same reason I buy expensive gas from the place in my neighborhood when I know of at least 3 places that have it for 20 to 30 cents less per gallon. It's just more convenient and I am way too busy to drive 30 minutes to save 5 dollars on a tank of gas.

So back to MA training. Most people, including me, think that less knowledge that is easy to get is better than lots of knowledge that is difficult to get since they may never get it or have to give up other things (time, money, extra training, etc) to get it. It all comes down to balancing your life and all of its endeavors, not just MA.

Of course, your answer is still the best way to go if you want to expand your knowledge. It's just impractical for anyone other than an avid tournament competitor or professional fighter.

Sorry if I am so long winded today.

AikiGuy, perhaps we have our wires crossed slightly. Im not implying that people should go around training in lots of different styles(although if you have the option it would be a great benifit). My post was addressing the ways in which people will continue to practice techniques etc from within their style regardless of practicality, even to a point where they need to come to a forum and ask "does this technique ive been training for the last 5 years actually work?" If you have to ask that question then the answer is most probably no. Which makes me wonder why people continue to train in such things and pass it off to others has self defence.

You make some excillent points and i agree that it is not practical for the majority of people(myself included) to go around training in lots of different schools. However, i beleive that for most people, the time they dedicate to training right now could be put to much better use. Instead of repeating techniques over and over that you cant even make work with a training parnter, use the time to test things, experiment. Then there will be room for a great deal of progression and you will not have to settle for less knowledge that is easy to obtain.

Hope this clears up any confusion regarding my first post.

[Montana]

In cross's origional post, I get the feeling that you are inferring that all stylized martial arts (meaning traditional arts I assume) are not practical or deal with the modern day world of hand to hand combat...correct?

I agree with that to a point about many martial arts, but not all of them. There are quite a number of systems out there, the old traditional ones that have been around and well proven to be effect in combat, that are several hundreds of years old. Defenses against a weapon or empty hand are little different now as they were then. In fact (my opinion of course), an attacker today is more likely to be LESS skilled with that knife than an attacker of 1-200 years ago, as that weapon was much more common and used more often then. The human body can only move in certain ways, or attack with a weapon in certain ways. That has not changed since...well, forever!

Not all systems are lacking in one area or another. Some systems are quite well rounded and effective in all ranges of personal combat. When talking about a hand gun pointed at your face, there's only so much you can do if he isn't within touching distance. But if it is within touching distance, yes, there are techniques that are little different than knife techniques for disarming or controlling the weapon.

If you are taking a "traditional", or otherwise martial art, and you don't feel that it is covering all of the bases that you think it should, then by all means, look elsewhere. I would. But if you're taking an art that does all levels of combat, why seek out something else if you're satisfied with it?

I've taken just the one art for 30+ years. Is it perfect? Of course not. But in all of my time i nthe artsand taking every possible opportunity to observe every other system that I have the chance to, I haven't seen a system yet that I think is better, or more complete than what I'm already doing. Yes, there are systems that are better at ground fighting (BJJ for example), but are limited in other areas. There are systems that are better from a sports aspect than what I do and there are systems that are far flashier and colorful than what I do, but I feel they are flawed from a self-defense aspect..which is my primary perspective.

[cross]

I agree with that to a point about many martial arts, but not all of them. There are quite a number of systems out there, the old traditional ones that have been around and well proven to be effect in combat, that are several hundreds of years old.

In what way have they been proven? There are lots of stories about what old masters could do, but not alot of evidence to suggest that in recenttimes these styles have been effective in full out situations.

Defenses against a weapon or empty hand are little different now as they were then. In fact (my opinion of course), an attacker today is more likely to be LESS skilled with that knife than an attacker of 1-200 years ago, as that weapon was much more common and used more often then. The human body can only move in certain ways, or attack with a weapon in certain ways. That has not changed since...well, forever!

However the majority of traditional Japanese styles continue to teach kobudo has the means of weapons training. Sai, tonfa, bo etc were all the weapons of the day back in japan, where is the progression?

Not all systems are lacking in one area or another. Some systems are quite well rounded and effective in all ranges of personal combat. When talking about a hand gun pointed at your face, there's only so much you can do if he isn't within touching distance. But if it is within touching distance, yes, there are techniques that are little different than knife techniques for disarming or controlling the weapon.

I completely agree. But alot of systems will completely neglect this aspect of training, or say that unless the attacker is in touching distance with a gun then there is nothing you can do. Its not an idea situation, but should you just give up, or not prepare for it? I dont think so. There are lots of ways to deal with such a situation that will increase your already slim chances of survival. Most of it involves psychological aspects that are never covered by traditional systems because there is no "technique" already within the system to deal with such situations.

It seems that while the majority of things in life evolve, there are still some traditional martial arts being taught exactly how they were years ago when they were devised by people with lower standards of education, less access to research and scientific information than we have today.

[Montana]

In what way have they been proven? There are lots of stories about what old masters could do, but not alot of evidence to suggest that in recenttimes these styles have been effective in full out situations.

Just using myself as an example, I've been in around 8-10 real fights (not tournament sparring) since my starting the arts and have successfully...using techniques I have trained in...defeated my opponents.

However the majority of traditional Japanese styles continue to teach kobudo has the means of weapons training. Sai, tonfa, bo etc were all the weapons of the day back in japan, where is the progression?

I was referring to defending agaisnt weapons, not traditional kobudo. We train in defenses againt knives, baseball bats, clubs in general, and all sorts of other things. That is the training I was referring to.

I completely agree. But alot of systems will completely neglect this aspect of training, or say that unless the attacker is in touching distance with a gun then there is nothing you can do. Its not an idea situation, but should you just give up, or not prepare for it? I dont think so. There are lots of ways to deal with such a situation that will increase your already slim chances of survival. Most of it involves psychological aspects that are never covered by traditional systems because there is no "technique" already within the system to deal with such situations.

It seems that while the majority of things in life evolve, there are still some traditional martial arts being taught exactly how they were years ago when they were devised by people with lower standards of education, less access to research and scientific information than we have today.

I was referrign exclusively to the physical aspects of defense against weapons/guns, not verbal/mental aspects. Yes, we train in those also. True that some dojo don't keep up with the times, we don't a lot, but do the obvious things like against an armed mugger as opposed to somebody attacking with a katana or a spear.

[longarm25]

gun control is not a martial art- knowing about guns and how to take aim is not part of a curriculum because someone who doesnt know anything, or doesnt have any strength in particular can in fact shoot a gun and kill the World's strongest.

Are you saying shooting is not a skill?

True anybody can pull the trigger and get lucky or spray and pray

but to put your shoots on target while under stress is a whole differant beast.

in fact skilled/trained Police Officers who Hit 80% + at the range hit closerto 30% during a real confrontation.

while it may not pass muster as an art. However they are a reality of todays day and age and the ability to handle firearms is most certainly a martial skill

[bushido_man96]

Yes, I believe that handling a firearm is a skill, and it must be practiced to be good at it.