The blurring of arts

[wingedMonkey]

So I started training in Kung Fu again recently, although most of my life I've studied mostly Tae Kwon Do because I love it. Anyways..I was able to do some advanced forms fairly quickly..and noticed the techniques were roots for moves I had already learned in TKD.

Has anyone else ever studied more than one martial art, and almost had them finally blur together..I think this is theoretically true for probably all martial arts since they all have roots that are the same.

[marie curie]

Yeh, but i think that t makes sese for two reasons:

1. Japanese Karate does have its roots in Kung Fu

2. The idea is to effectively defend yourself- if there is a great thing to do in a fight (like a punch) many different cultures would probably come up with the same thing, simply because they have the same tools (human body) and same goals.

[bushido_man96]

2. The idea is to effectively defend yourself- if there is a great thing to do in a fight (like a punch) many different cultures would probably come up with the same thing, simply because they have the same tools (human body) and same goals.

I agree. All around the world, the human body moves the same, breaks the same, etc. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to think that many styles have similarities. I have seen similarities in styles as far apart as Jujitsu and the hand-to-hand combat of Medieval Europe.

[armanox]

Reminds me of something Sensei says - There are only so many ways to swing a sword, so many ways to throw a punch, only so many ways to throw a kick, only so many ways to effectively damage another. Therefore techiniques across styles must overlap to an extent.

[Zanshin]

Has anyone else ever studied more than one martial art, and almost had them finally blur together..I think this is theoretically true for probably all martial arts since they all have roots that are the same.

Whilst I can see a common ground in some of the techniques used in the two arts I practice, I actually try hard not to allow them to blur together as one.

For me, cross training in Daito helps me understand some of the more technical Jujutsu elements of Wado, and perhaps allows me to look at Wado from a fresh perspective.

The other day for example, at Daito, we were practicing a drill with the Kodachi (short sword) and I was amazed by how similar the movement was to a punching method we have in Wado called Nagashi-tsuki (evasion or flowing punch). I could see how the Wado way of moving could have evolved, given Otsuka Sensei background as a Jujutsu-ka.

That said, although the body movement was the same of course the application was different and that’s why I try to keep an open mind.

I agree with the others that fighting is fighting at the end of the day, but different arts or systems promote alternative means to the same end. Blurring them together could mean that you are missing the point in both.

[marie curie]

Reminds me of something Sensei says - There are only so many ways to swing a sword, so many ways to throw a punch, only so many ways to throw a kick, only so many ways to effectively damage another. Therefore techiniques across styles must overlap to an extent.

Great saying!

Zanshin, I can see that if your priority is tournament fighting or just promoting, but if you are going for self-defense, I think finding what works for you from each and using that is the best option. (Some Kajukenbo shining through)

[Zanshin]

Reminds me of something Sensei says - There are only so many ways to swing a sword, so many ways to throw a punch, only so many ways to throw a kick, only so many ways to effectively damage another. Therefore techiniques across styles must overlap to an extent.

Great saying!

Zanshin, I can see that if your priority is tournament fighting or just promoting, but if you are going for self-defense, I think finding what works for you from each and using that is the best option. (Some Kajukenbo shining through)

Nooo! And tournament and promoting couldn't be further from the point. If self defence is what you are looking for, attend a self defence seminar. It would be far cheaper and quicker than trying to cobble together bits from complete systems. If you try to do that, at the end of the day you will end up with an Irish stew of a martial art.

[marie curie]

Are you saying that martial arts are no good for self-defense?

I think that an Irish Stew of martial arts, adjusted to one's own tastes (abilities, strengths, weaknesses) is exactly what I want.

Also, I have a feeling that years of training are going to teach me to react quicker, block and dodge faster, and attack better than a self defense seminar.

So what is the point of taking a bunch of martial arts if self-defense, tournament fighting, and promoting are all not your goals?

[ps1]

I, like many others here, have had the great fortune to study several martial arts in great detail (to black belt and beyond). This has led me to develop my own unique way of using the techniques I've learned, strategizing (sp?), and adapting them to me. However, as a matter of respect, tradition, and just good form, I have always and always will teach each seperately. I figure the reason I was able to form my way of doing things is because I have learned the arts in an unblemished manner. I owe it to my students to offer the same. It's their path, who am I to change it.

So...to answer your question, yes! There certainly is blurring. You should be able to adapt your skills seamlessly. Just keep in mind that your adaptations are possible because someone showed you the whole picture, not just their version of it. What often seperates the various martial systems is not the techniques used, rather the strategy with which they employ them.

[marie curie]

Good post ps1!