Traditional MA; No Longer Respected!?!

[Hawkmoon]

I'm wondering where the concern for the respect issue is directed? Is it concern that MMA stylists, or RBSD stylists, don't respect "tradtional" Martial Arts? Or is it a concern that people who aren't even in the fold of the Martial Arts community don't respect traditional styles because of what they see in MMA?

Then, the next point to consider is two-fold: first, do you care that these folks don't "repsect" what you do? If you don't, then you've taken care of the second aspect, which would be, what is it that they don't respect? What aspects, practices, etc, and will you change them in order to catch up with the times, and gain that respect you desire for the art you study?

Good questions, I especially like the second (two fold) point you raise.

I met up with an old instructor earlier this year, I quiet literally bumped into him! anyway! he still teaches, and still runs 'the old' club, and proudly explains some changes that have come to pass in the last couple of years!

New 'colors', new ranks, new stance, new friends clubs and now that its, its own new independent organization,!

(The changes stem form some break down in relations with the AMA/AKA and one of the black belts, no idea about detail,that's not my bag)

The basics of the break down stem from a loss or lack of respect. The club then as now considered itself a TMA, not affiliated with the parent (as it was then) IKO organization.

(There is also some history to that which I don't care to understand or become involved in, then as now I just want to train)

Now the club the black belt runs carries the old name, and is run out of the old hall. My old instructor has also retained the old name and uses a new hall, in all easy enough to understand, until you learn both are not interested in the other.

(Reminds me of a thread in the forum where we discuss the shorty surrounding what we have different styles and Ryus of Karate)

Each has a clear dislike for the other.

(Oh ! I do so love politics in sport!..makes me feel warm and fluffy inside )

As both are TMA, there is a 'pride' element to the situation, but anyway back to point, my old instructor...we were talking about the old days and a visit we had form another club, not a Karate club, a ...Chinese art is all we could recall of them, but the visit was remember as at the end of the session, things had gone bad and one our senior grades was now sporting a broken nose!

In short it seemed the visiting school had expected we would honor all there codes of conduct, which we had no experience of and from that had insulted them, and so the visit fractured more and more through the session, and...'bang' no respect.

To add to the mix here, sometimes I feel some people 'create' situations to then take a position against or stand upon!

TMA is a IMO a victim of its own self worth or pride, when it assumes respect is respect no matter who or what and that respect is what TMA says it is, rather than accept that the other thing is different and not TMA.

[sensei8]

I'm wondering where the concern for the respect issue is directed? Is it concern that MMA stylists, or RBSD stylists, don't respect "tradtional" Martial Arts? Or is it a concern that people who aren't even in the fold of the Martial Arts community don't respect traditional styles because of what they see in MMA?

Then, the next point to consider is two-fold: first, do you care that these folks don't "repsect" what you do? If you don't, then you've taken care of the second aspect, which would be, what is it that they don't respect? What aspects, practices, etc, and will you change them in order to catch up with the times, and gain that respect you desire for the art you study?

I believe that the respect issue stems from one faction or another deciding for themselves that TMA is ineffective because of the TMA mindset of training, with kata being in the forefront of TMA's ineffectiveness. Bruce Lee, imho, started this with his "swimming on dry land" tantrum, and because of whom he was, other MAists jumped on his band wagon to support his belief.

That's fine, sounds good, and whatever else, but, kata is a training tool, and it's not the only training tool, and it serves an important part of training for said karateka, and again, it's not the only training tool. It serves an important part, but is incomplete in its training totality, hence forth, the Three K's of most Karate styles.

If the disdain stems from what they see in the MMA genre/venue, let me just say that that reason is the same as to why some like rock-n-roll and others like country and others like rap and other like opera; to each their own. Whatever they see effective in MMA, sparks them in ways that TMA doesn't, and once the flame burns bright, nothing will sway them away from MMA, and will push them farther and farther away from any "so called" effectiveness of the TMA.

PROOF IS ON THE FLOOR!! Now, and forever! Lumping all TMA into a tidy pile of ineffectiveness is, imho, unfair to all those who are TMA practitioners.

I don't care one way or another that anyone doesn't approve what I do, and again and again and again, PROOF IS ON THE FLOOR. I will have my chance or I'll have my turn to defend the effectiveness of Shindokan and myself whenever "we" meet on the floor.

Imho, those that don't respect TMA, is again, the supposed ineffectiveness, in that, our ineffectiveness is wrapped around TMA's training module/methodology/ideology and the like. "I'm not going to waste all of my time training in kata and the like because things like that don't address live training!" They're right! Live training with realness is vitally important; that too is just ANOTHER training tool.

What aspects, practices, etc, and will you change them in order to catch up with the times, and gain that respect you desire for the art you study

.

I've no inclination to change anything. Especially to "catch up with the times"! That's their bag, that's not mine. I'm complete in my totality as a MAist, and in that, my MA betterment doesn't fight their fight, not now, and not tomorrow. If some find solace in that they've "evolved" out of the training tools of TMA, and have been born again in a brand new way of training to find their effectiveness, I bow to them in respect.

"TMA is ineffective because the way they train!" It's a feeling, and I'm cool with that. However, I know of some well known and respect TMAists that ARE effective, very effective, and they are because of the way they've trained their whole MA life.

A way is just a way, just not everyone's way!! I respect their ways as it being their way, but TMA, for the most part, doesn't get that in return, or so, it seems.

[bushido_man96]

I met up with an old instructor earlier this year, I quiet literally bumped into him! anyway! he still teaches, and still runs 'the old' club, and proudly explains some changes that have come to pass in the last couple of years!

New 'colors', new ranks, new stance, new friends clubs and now that its, its own new independent organization,!

And changes like this don't have to be the only ones. Adding or changing belt ranks is fine, as long as there is a point behind it. I'm not sure what your old instructor's goals were here, and I won't attempt to evaluate them. I think that they can be good changes and additions, if done right, and for the right reasons. I do think that at times, branching out on one's own is the proper course of action.

In regards to these kinds of changes that some instructors or styles make, I do have to say that is one thing that the ATA has done well for itself on. I know there is a lot of disdain for the ATA out there, but they really did their students a favor with their different Pro-Tech systems they implemented for black belts, offering different branches of training, like weapons and ground fighting, and I think even PPCT was one of them offered. These systems provided differening interests that allowed the ATA members access to different things without having to leave the association to find them. I do believe they also have an XMA system in place now that the upper echelons worked extensively with Mike Chat on. The ATA is always looking at ways to get a little bit better.

As both are TMA, there is a 'pride' element to the situation, but anyway back to point, my old instructor...we were talking about the old days and a visit we had form another club, not a Karate club, a ...Chinese art is all we could recall of them, but the visit was remember as at the end of the session, things had gone bad and one our senior grades was now sporting a broken nose!

In short it seemed the visiting school had expected we would honor all there codes of conduct, which we had no experience of and from that had insulted them, and so the visit fractured more and more through the session, and...'bang' no respect.

To add to the mix here, sometimes I feel some people 'create' situations to then take a position against or stand upon!

TMA is a IMO a victim of its own self worth or pride, when it assumes respect is respect no matter who or what and that respect is what TMA says it is, rather than accept that the other thing is different and not TMA.

Its interesting, this scenario. Two different TMAs, and with different views on respect. So, it would seem that disrespect for TMAs is rife within TMAs themselves? In regards to the bold above, I do think there is truth to that!

I believe that the respect issue stems from one faction or another deciding for themselves that TMA is ineffective because of the TMA mindset of training, with kata being in the forefront of TMA's ineffectiveness. Bruce Lee, imho, started this with his "swimming on dry land" tantrum, and because of whom he was, other MAists jumped on his band wagon to support his belief.

"TMA is ineffective because the way they train!" It's a feeling, and I'm cool with that. However, I know of some well known and respect TMAists that ARE effective, very effective, and they are because of the way they've trained their whole MA life.

I'm not really sure that just because some don't feel that TMAs train in an effective manner equates to disrespect. I don't think Bruce Lee disrespected TMAs; after all, he started in one. For example, I practice many of the ITF forms, but not with sine wave. When I watch ITF practitioners do their forms on youtube, I find it difficult to watch the forms, with all the up and down movement and the seeming disconnect between the movements. But, just because I don't like the way they do their forms doesn't mean I don't respect their way of doing things or them as Martial Artists. Its just a different point of view, based on different experiences. Not disrespect, though.

[sensei8]

I'm not really sure that just because some don't feel that TMAs train in an effective manner equates to disrespect. I don't think Bruce Lee disrespected TMAs; after all, he started in one. For example, I practice many of the ITF forms, but not with sine wave. When I watch ITF practitioners do their forms on youtube, I find it difficult to watch the forms, with all the up and down movement and the seeming disconnect between the movements. But, just because I don't like the way they do their forms doesn't mean I don't respect their way of doing things or them as Martial Artists. Its just a different point of view, based on different experiences. Not disrespect, though.

Imho, Bruce Lee disrespected ALL kata/forms, and lumped them into one big and fat disdain disapproval of it. Bruce's point of view, as I understand it to be, is that the "Swimming on dry land" can't possibly provide an adequate way for one to defend oneself while training in kata/forms and the like.

I don't know, but I'm sure that Bruce thought the three K's was a joke, or at least, incomplete in some way or another.

Bruce or no other MAist is ever going to convince me that kata is a waste of training time because I've seen the benefits of kata my entire MA journey. Many of these, I've spouted about here ever since that I've been a member here. No training tool, imho, is complete by itself.

[Hawkmoon]

Imho, Bruce Lee disrespected ALL kata/forms, and lumped them into one big and fat disdain disapproval of it. Bruce's point of view, as I understand it to be, is that the "Swimming on dry land" can't possibly provide an adequate way for one to defend oneself while training in kata/forms and the like.

I don't know, but I'm sure that Bruce thought the three K's was a joke, or at least, incomplete in some way or another.

Bruce or no other MAist is ever going to convince me that kata is a waste of training time because I've seen the benefits of kata my entire MA journey. Many of these, I've spouted about here ever since that I've been a member here. No training tool, imho, is complete by itself.

I so get and agree with you here.

To add, to me there is an extra aspect we need to consider and that is the ideology that drives the practitioner, i.e. a cultural element/effect is to be expected.

Kata is a good thing, however to a degree Bruce and Sosai have a like mind set here, if the kata serves no purpose why do it at all?

Why swim on dry land....etc etc.

Hence I say ideology!

Kata is meant to show/teach (bunkai) how to defend or attack, (normally both) an attack form an imaginary assailant.

Hence, in Kyokushin if the Kata does not support Sosais' karate he dropped it.

(A thread where I explain why we have a Kanku Dai kata but not the Kanku Sho kata as well.)

I would offer into the conversation that Bruce Lee took a more direct view about kata, to promote his other view that to fight and fight well you have to fight!

A view Sosai promoted as well.

Kata in this mind set is seen to be a dance, a play fight after all the attacker is imaginary!

Kata competitions, are amazing to watch, the movement is graceful, well performed, the team kata is amazing, of this there is no doubt no doubt at all.

Yet there is no modern day application, MA as taught today is not a life or death lesson to learn...its sport (to take a simple and generic view of MA overall)

We do not learn these skills to serve the local Shogun, or after a past event wander the land as a Ronin, we go to work, drink coffee go home watch TV, and maybe watch Football or Tennis etc etc.

So as I said earlier, TMA to me is a victim of its own self worth, arrogance. Respect is whatever the two persons involved accept is respectful.

If one side is not prepared to allow for mistakes, if one side not accept the other does not know all the bits and pieces 100%, and does as a result get upset and angry.

[jaypo]

I study TMA's from a student with a direct lineage to Gichin. However, he brings in elements from 7 martial arts and incorporates them into his training style. And we absolutely practice Kata. He can take the most basic Kata, (Heian Shodan, for example) and show about 10 advanced self defense and offense techniques in each movement. The fun part is trying to incorporate those techniques in my kumite! (Example, Heian Godan- there is an advanced strike/takedown at the end, and I was able to do it in Kumite last week.).

Which brings me to my question- what is a Kata, per se? Is it just a series of choreographed movements with no partner? Well, we practice bunkai from the katas with a partner. And as I said above, we use them in Kumite. So we get the benefit of doing the form to perfect the technique, practice it with a partner, and use it in sparring whereas in certain systems that eliminate Kata, they only use techniques in kumite.

I'm a huge fan of Bruce, but as a TMA practitioner, I see the benefit of following tradition, but I also see the benefit of breaking from it when necessary.

[Hawkmoon]

hmm...

Lets explore the 'stay with' - 'not stay with' tradition point!

The Gi.

At the end of a session some guys in the Dojo, roll it up and bind it with there belt and drop it into there kit bag.

I fold mine and drop it into my kit bag, belt placed inside as its own 'object'.

I have had one guy 'whine' (it's the best way to describe his constant going on and on) about me folding my suit up being the wrong thing to do.

Yet another complained that I am not showing enough respect to it because I fold rather than roll it up.

They wash there Gi rarely as this is also traditional, and it is only washed to remove blood or mud etc, its never ironed after a wash.

I wash my Gi every week and I will iron it, at that time only.

The argument is made that to roll the Gi is correct and wash it only when needed as this is what was done traditionally, where the counter argument is made to wash and iron it and show clearly pride in your appearance and who you represent (club colors / badges) is a better option.

One is traditional in approach the other is shall we say "welcome to the 21st century and the invention of the iron and a new thing called a kit bag".

Consider any comparison you wish, to me the obvious and most simple one is, neat and clean vs scruffy and smelly.

It is after all merely training attire! like any other attire say like a footballer and his kit, or a baseball or cricket player or police officer, or.....etc etc

[Canadian77]

I agree with you. Doesn't it make sense that there is a difference between tradition and what was understandably normal for the time? Imagine the effort and resources needed to wash a gi back then compared to now...I imagine that had more to do with why a gi wasn't washed regularly. Some things make sense to keep as a tradition. Others, not so much. Personally I keep my gi clean and neat. It is a rule in our dojo to do so, and I agree with it.

[bushido_man96]

hmm...

Lets explore the 'stay with' - 'not stay with' tradition point!

The Gi.

At the end of a session some guys in the Dojo, roll it up and bind it with there belt and drop it into there kit bag.

I fold mine and drop it into my kit bag, belt placed inside as its own 'object'.

I have had one guy 'whine' (it's the best way to describe his constant going on and on) about me folding my suit up being the wrong thing to do.

Yet another complained that I am not showing enough respect to it because I fold rather than roll it up.

They wash there Gi rarely as this is also traditional, and it is only washed to remove blood or mud etc, its never ironed after a wash.

I wash my Gi every week and I will iron it, at that time only.

The argument is made that to roll the Gi is correct and wash it only when needed as this is what was done traditionally, where the counter argument is made to wash and iron it and show clearly pride in your appearance and who you represent (club colors / badges) is a better option.

One is traditional in approach the other is shall we say "welcome to the 21st century and the invention of the iron and a new thing called a kit bag".

Consider any comparison you wish, to me the obvious and most simple one is, neat and clean vs scruffy and smelly.

It is after all merely training attire! like any other attire say like a footballer and his kit, or a baseball or cricket player or police officer, or.....etc etc

Its just clothing. Really nothing more. I wash it after every practice, and rarely iron it. The belt is just put in the bag and toted along with everything else (when I use a bag). I don't tie it around my uniform, just because I don't; no real reason, and I'm not adverse to the practice.

To me, it seems there could be so much more important things to focus one's energy on than how to take care of laundry.

[bushido_man96]

I'm not really sure that just because some don't feel that TMAs train in an effective manner equates to disrespect. I don't think Bruce Lee disrespected TMAs; after all, he started in one. For example, I practice many of the ITF forms, but not with sine wave. When I watch ITF practitioners do their forms on youtube, I find it difficult to watch the forms, with all the up and down movement and the seeming disconnect between the movements. But, just because I don't like the way they do their forms doesn't mean I don't respect their way of doing things or them as Martial Artists. Its just a different point of view, based on different experiences. Not disrespect, though.

Imho, Bruce Lee disrespected ALL kata/forms, and lumped them into one big and fat disdain disapproval of it. Bruce's point of view, as I understand it to be, is that the "Swimming on dry land" can't possibly provide an adequate way for one to defend oneself while training in kata/forms and the like.

I don't know, but I'm sure that Bruce thought the three K's was a joke, or at least, incomplete in some way or another.

Bruce or no other MAist is ever going to convince me that kata is a waste of training time because I've seen the benefits of kata my entire MA journey. Many of these, I've spouted about here ever since that I've been a member here. No training tool, imho, is complete by itself.

Bruce Lee never said forms practice or the three K's were a joke, so I think it would wrong to assume that he said such things. He also worked with many traditional stylists during his career; Bolo Yueng, Chuck Norris, Bob Wall, Jim Kelley, and many others. There are those that didn't care for him much, and I'm sure those he didn't care for. But, I don't think there was disprespect there for the styles the others worked at.

Bruce had an opinion on the use of forms practice. The fact that his opinion goes against the principles of other stylists doesn't equate to disrespect, in my opinion.