The big question is why

[Kuma]

Something that's been drifting around in my head for a few days now.

Although I primarily concentrate on karate-do nowadays, like many other members of this forum I've had a smattering of MA experiences as well. Especially when you're young and moving around a lot like I was.

Now, most of my background is in karate, but I've also done some boxing, jujutsu, and a seminar here or there of other things. Combine that with military combatives, LEO defensive tactics, and cross-training with friends. Thus, like many others, I have some tools that don't come in the standard toolbox of karate.

This is what interests me though and gets me to wonder. I've never thought of renaming my style or inventing my own or calling myself "Sensei in such-and-such." Maybe it's me. I post occasionally on a few different forums aside from this one (I tend to stick to ones with quality rather than quantity so sometimes you need a bit more than just one) and I've noticed that MANY people are creating their own styles and aren't shy about it.

To me, it doesn't make much sense but I'd like to see what others think about it. To me, just because I add in a foot sweep to my repertoire doesn't necessarily mean I'm deviating from what the style is. I just don't understand the motivation.

[tallgeese]

It depends. Man, how sick of hearing that from me is everyone here .

If it's a signifigant understanding of a wide variety of tools, codified into a unique format with solid principles and defined goals. Why not. If it does what it's supposed to do, good luck.

In a smaller sense, we all "create our own style" individually just based on what we're good at within our own systems of study and physical/psycological gifts and attributes. It's an out growth of this to take the next step.

My questions would be, how is it different? What role does it serve? How well does it do that? What are the systemimic elements that define it?

Time in multiple systems would be paramount to this kind of thing. Long enough to be able to understand the "whys" of what they are doing as well as the hows. I don't think guys with a smattering of "techniques" from a couple of different things need to be doing it. Then you've just got a hodgepodge of movements with no real defining elements. If someone has to explain their new system by a list of movements then it's probibly just what I talked about, a hodgepodge and nothing more.

Lastly, and most importantly, how well does it hold up on the mat? That's the key. I don't care much about the pedegree of a fighter nearly as much as I care about what he can teach me and how well what he does works.

[bushido_man96]

I think tallgeese is on the right track here. My primary art is TKD, but I have been focusing a lot on Hapkido recently. I don't plan on creating my own style, but I do have plans to integrate my TKD and HKD training. Does that make it a different style? I don't know. I don't plan on inventing Brian-Kwon-Do, and declaring myself such and such rank and title. However, I would work towards improving the integration of the two, and if I was to teach anyone, I would probably teach this integration.

[Kuma]

I think tallgeese is on the right track here. My primary art is TKD, but I have been focusing a lot on Hapkido recently. I don't plan on creating my own style, but I do have plans to integrate my TKD and HKD training. Does that make it a different style? I don't know. I don't plan on inventing Brian-Kwon-Do, and declaring myself such and such rank and title. However, I would work towards improving the integration of the two, and if I was to teach anyone, I would probably teach this integration.

I am completely in agreement with this as well. I thoroughly enjoy cross-training in Judo and am hoping once my schedule opens up I can start formal classes. I think it goes great with karate and is applicable to what I do. Even integrating them together though, if someone asked what style do I train in I would make a clear distinction between the two. I wouldn't call it Kuma Ryu, get myself a nice wacky black belt, and formalize it. Only if I deviated FAR beyond the basic system to the point where it's very different would I even consider something like that.

[jaddensinn]

I personally think its kind of silly for people to create their own style... unless perhaps they have something really new or really interesting to bring to the world of martial arts. Also in some cases it just seems like arrogance on part of the system's "creator".

I suppose I think its kind of silly because if your background is in say... TKD, BJJ, Judo, and Kali. And you take bits and pieces of each and put them together in a new package... you're really not CREATING anything new...

On the flip side if you have a school or run a program and say up front that you simply teach "Martial Arts" because of your diverse background, that doesn't bother me nearly as much, no traditional system is complete so teaching/learning complimentary styles is a great thing... but doing so and putting your name on it just seems silly/arrogant.

[Grego]

Really, creating your own "style" is over-rated.

When you integrate a bunch of different Martial Arts, it becomes Mixed Martial Arts, which you can learn at any McDojo in the united states.

There are some instances when I think its cool (my own sensei broke away from the United States Chito-ryu federation, and formed the American Chito-ryu Kempo Federation). Most of those reason are political. When your federation is stepping on your toes.

I'm not saying that you're guilty of this, but it seems that there are alot of people out there who create their own style for the sake of creating their own style. While you are probably legitimate, there are hundreds out there that aren't.

[the beast]

When you integrate a bunch of different Martial Arts, it becomes Mixed Martial Arts, which you can learn at any McDojo in the united states.

Amen to that brother. I am honestly getting tired of the whole MMA "fad". That is exactly what it's turning into, a fad . I for one would like to see traditional kickboxing make a come back.

Sorry for the rant.

[tallgeese]

MMA to a certain extent has a connotavitve meaning of using tools that have a long reputaion of working in caged free fighting events. Mainly, you're looking at some form of stand up, jj, and wrestling. That's ingnoring a vast amount of skills that could be useful in other venues and situations where a graded response might be called for.

Therefore, I'm not sure you can lump new codifications into the "mma" catagory. Espically when they might include some form of weapons training that stems from the basic unarmed principles and striking that would be disallowed in competion....the list can go on.

I'm also not saying that everyone who does some for of cross training should should slap a new name on an existing style. See my list of questions above.

I'm merely saying that with everyone's divergent gifts and intrests, even those people withing a given art won't look identical and will deviate in their own way. Certainly tidbits picked up here and there will also serve to seperate practitioners further. I don't think it's good if ma-ers out of the same system are carbon copies. We should all look a bit differnt as fighters. For optimization to occur, we must persue skills that we can utilize to their fullest. Some times this will be differnt than the guy next to us.

I'd argue that most systems lauched since the beginning of the 20th century, probilby before, haven't come up with much that's new. Creation of something entirly diffent is diffucult after a few thousand years of learning to hurt and kill one another. Unless radical changes occur in physiology, the basic ways to hurt each other will remain the same. Weak points in the human body will be the same, physics for generating power won't change, ect.

If radically new, never before seen movements, are needed for the definition of a "new" art then we probibly haven't seen many since Thag put his neanderthalic fist into Grog's face over who owned the water hole out back.

Most of what delinates arts is the concepts behind the application of tools and the stratgey of how best to defeat an opponant. How to best utilize your tools to overcome aggression. Those we still see advances in as well as the occassional change in direction ddue to a specific sector that the movements will be used in. That refinment is probibly where most "creation" occurs.

Now, I'm not saying I've done this myself. I just see the possibilites in it. I do come out of a style where this amalgamation of tools out of multiple, well understood arts, was placed under an umbrulla set of combative principles, then unified and deliniated by teaching progression. It's served me well as well as given me a framework into which I can incorporate and grow what I do and still keep the form of the goal in mind.

As someone above mentioned, there are pleanty of guys out there who just slap somehting together. They probilby aren't all that good. So be it, the proof is always on the floor. It's a shame they feel they need to do it for no reason and without sufficient cause or understanding. But it's not hurting us at all.

There can be a place for it. Like I said- maybe

[jaddensinn]

Amen to that brother. I am honestly getting tired of the whole MMA "fad". That is exactly what it's turning into, a fad . I for one would like to see traditional kickboxing make a come back.

Sorry for the rant.

I find that kind of funny that you say that because when kickboxing became big in the 70's many traditional martial artists didn't like it and felt it was a fad as well. (Of course I also assume when you say traditional kickboxing you are referring to full contact kickboxing that was made big by guys like Joe Lewis, Chuck Norris and Bill Wallace, so if I'm making the wrong assumption please by all means let me know)

Assuming that, I'm not saying I agree or disagree with you on the point I just think its funny. I've spent a good deal of time thinking on the subject actually, because the grandmaster of our system is Bill Wallace who blasted MMA last year in some of his columns in Black Belt magazine and caught a lot of flak for it. So I always find it a little amusing...

[bushido_man96]

Amen to that brother. I am honestly getting tired of the whole MMA "fad". That is exactly what it's turning into, a fad . I for one would like to see traditional kickboxing make a come back.

Sorry for the rant.

I find that kind of funny that you say that because when kickboxing became big in the 70's many traditional martial artists didn't like it and felt it was a fad as well. (Of course I also assume when you say traditional kickboxing you are referring to full contact kickboxing that was made big by guys like Joe Lewis, Chuck Norris and Bill Wallace, so if I'm making the wrong assumption please by all means let me know)

Assuming that, I'm not saying I agree or disagree with you on the point I just think its funny. I've spent a good deal of time thinking on the subject actually, because the grandmaster of our system is Bill Wallace who blasted MMA last year in some of his columns in Black Belt magazine and caught a lot of flak for it. So I always find it a little amusing...

Actually, Chuck Norris never competed in full contact bouts, as near as I remember.

I recall the article that Wallace did on MMA. I actually started a thread on it in Black Belt Mag's forums. I was one of those that didn't really care for it, but that is neither here nor there.

What I don't understand is what the big slam on MMA is. MMA has just as much to offer in training as other styles do. I think that some people feel that if the art doesn't have that "traditional feel" of wearing uniforms, bowing to instructors, that it can't be classified as a true Martial discipline.

I don't think it is really a fad. I'm pretty sure that it will stick around in some form or another for a long time. Its already been over 10 years since the first UFC, and it was in existence in other countries before that; Vale Tudo, Pancrase, Jim Arvanitis' Pankration, and we can't leave out the old Pankration from ancient Greece.

I also agree with tallgeese in that there really isn't anything new under the sun when it comes to hand-to-hand fighting; just new methods of training, improved training equipment, etc. Like tallgeese also mentions, when you take an approach to training with certain goals and ideas in mind, it can seem different when compared to what is out there.

Creating one's own style may not seem coshere to most of us, but we should also remember that some guy with the last name Lee hodge-podged some stuff together, and it turned out pretty well....