It's OK To Be A Devoted Proponent!!

[sensei8]

The doors of the MA freely open to and fro in ones MA journeyed search for that perfect fit. Doors bring memories, no matter if they're good or bad to that MAist, well, that's to be said by that practitioner alone.

Often times, a style of the MA is dragged in the mire and muck of another's opinion without any thought and/or consideration. To be served a heap of observations, no matter if they're true or false, yet, quite absent of validity. It's easier to ridicule, than to teach/help a fellow MAist.

To some MAists, it's much more easier to tear down, than it is to build up!!

"[fill in the style] is superior to [fill in the style]; no questions!!" It's fine to be a devoted practitioner to a style, but is it ok to be so a devoted practitioner that that practitioner is blinded by its own press?!?

Again, as I've stated over the many years here, it's not the styles fault, but rather, it's the practitioner that's at fault. If, for example, I was a practitioner of BJJ, and I've failed to be that proponent of BJJ, does the blame rest on the style or the practitioner??

It's my fault that I've not honorably represented Shindokan! Blame ME, but not Shindokan! Blame ME, but not the founder! Blame ME, but not the student body! When one does that, false securities are birthed about the style in general that ineffectiveness has risen in that style. Don't blame BJJ...Shotokan...TKD...Aikido...etc....blame the practitioner and not the proven styles!!

That's a dangerous assumption to blame the style without looking at the practitioner as well!!

Just when one has masked a style as it being ineffective in general, that's when that assumption bites them right in ones own backside with a practitioner of that pronounced ineffective style that has effective reckoning that's hard to ignore.

Or better said..."Don't be surprised when you're wrong in your accusations!"

Every style has a flaw in their armor; it's called...the practitioner!!

Let's speak of them with respect and practice some tolerance for those who disagree with us.

Your thoughts, please!!

[JR 137]

Very good post. I'll take it one step further and say it's also the instruction.

I used to heavily look down on TKD. Every TKD place I saw was McDojo. It was all competition based - point fighting and forms for tournaments void of any application at all. My uncle who was a TKD black belt in the 60s and early 70s in Beirut, Lebanon joined a TKD school here about 15 years ago. During sparring, he was constantly told "Why are you punching? Punches don't score points!" His reply - "I'm not here to score points."

Then I went to college. We had a MA club that was run 100% by students, with a faculty advisor who was never there nor had any MA experience. We all took turns teaching class, and the couple TKD guys brought it. They did flashy kicks to develop physical skills like balance, flexibility, and coordination, but they weren't hopping around with their hands below their waist and acting like they've never heard of punching before when it came time to spar. They didn't wear gis (dobaks?) with patches and ads all over them, nor did they set forms to music and glow in the dark weapons.

I took back every bad thing I've said about TKD after an hour with those guys. I've visited every TKD school in my area. Unfortunately, what they're teaching isn't what I think they should be. But then again, who am I to criticize? When was I put in charge of the rules of MA?

Of all the MA styles, TKD pretty much gets the worst rep. I guess people see a place or two, and a fighter or two getting embarrassed on YouTube or the like and think they're all like that. No different than when you hear of certain religious zealots doing something shameful and thinking they all support that, or when a few people of a certain complexion get arrested for a drive by shooting and think they all do that.

Pretty much everyone thinks what they're doing is the best. If it wasn't, wouldn't they go elsewhere?

[Nidan Melbourne]

I personally believe that TKD has gotten such a bad rap because it has become in a way very 'sporty'. Which does sadden me because it is an amazing Martial Art to watch but in a way I have seen that it is these days 'lacking' because most schools have completely ignored the arms as well.

I cannot judge another style of Karate nor another Martial Art until I have studied it myself. I have studied a little bit of BJJ but cannot judge it because i haven't fully submerged myself into the art and learnt as i could due to my current financial situation. But what from I have learnt from it is that it is effective on the ground but also standing up to apply locks, chokes and holds.

Even though I stated above that TKD has become very 'Sporty' i DO still believe that the sport side of the martial art does have strong ties to its history. But also it takes tremendous amounts of flexibility, strength, power and speed to execute such techniques.

So at the end of the day every single martial art has its merits, strengths and weaknesses within' it. Also it comes down to the individual schools that teach Martial Arts to teach the best that they can and not to restrict students to one slice of the Martial Arts Cake.

[wagnerk]

I agree, lots of factors have to be taken into consideration when labelling a martial art. Even the Australian art which has a bad rap, which is a combination of Shotokan and Goju Ryu in theory is a very good art - however it's the implementation & teaching of it that brings it down*.

Let's face it, there are only so many different ways to punch, kick, throw, lock, etc... How it's taught, how it's interpreted, how it's learnt as well as the individual student him/herself. Show the same thing to two different people and they'll take away different things. Get two different instructors to teach the same thing, the students will learn different things.

*I talk out of my own experience - I'm not knocking any martial arts here.

[DWx]

Good points so far.

Whilst we cannot categorically say one style is that best, I think it's important to bear in mind that certain styles are geared towards certain aspects of the Martial Arts whether that be grappling, striking, sport or tradition and that its OK for people to enjoy different aspects of them.

Taking the point about TKD for example, competition is a huge element. Competition against other fighters is encouraged because it tests the effectiveness of the fighter. But more importantly the getting the sport into the Olympics was a huge factor in spreading it worldwide. Over the years this has resulted in a combat sport which some clubs exclusively train for (and are very good at). That's not to say that TKD The Martial Art had disappeared, but TKD The Sport is what most people will associate with TKD because that's what they have been exposed to. FWIW, the comments so far reinforce this as I guess most of you are talking about

rather than something like

or

.

[JR 137]

Good points so far.

Whilst we cannot categorically say one style is that best, I think it's important to bear in mind that certain styles are geared towards certain aspects of the Martial Arts whether that be grappling, striking, sport or tradition and that its OK for people to enjoy different aspects of them.

Exactly. Too many people feel they should make the rules as to what is truly worthwhile to everyone. Ever read the Bull shido forums?

Some people think the only way is to go all out, all day every day. Anything less that that is a waste of time and a joke.

Everyone's path is different. Even McDojos have their worth, regardless of what the naysayers say. I follow my path because it's where it's taken me. My path is what's best for me; it doesn't matter if it's the best path for everyone or no one else. That doesn't make my path better than everyone else's or no one else's.

Competition is a good thing. It forces people out of their comfort zone, puts them under pressure, gives them different people to experiment on, and puts them under their own microscope. But that doesn't mean it's required to be truly effective and/or validate one's MA existence by any means.

[sensei8]

While it's true that each MA style is its own stand alone across the board; effectiveness exists. The style is innocent, and it's the practitioner that's not. Without the style, the practitioner is nothing.

Alas, the style can be said that it's nothing without its practitioner. Both need each other, nonetheless, the style needs qualified as well as effective practitioners to breath vibrant life, and not that stale dead air, into it. Otherwise, no fruit can be produced of any benefit.

Competition or not!? That decision is left to the practitioner to make at their own discretion, and not the style. The style doesn't decide that. No! The governing body decides that, and the style begs difference for the betterment of its own.

The TKD I've known was taught by GM Young Ik Suh, and it was a no-nonsense type of TKD, similar to Danielle's second link, but even more so. GM Young Ik Suh once was the bodyguard for the Korean President, which tells me, he was quite effective. The things I witnessed myself were astonishing, to say the least; every standing flying side kick, his head would graze the ceiling tiles. His black belts were in a class way above black belts from any other TKD faction; explosive techniques. He didn't encourage, nor discourage competition in his students; he was nondescript towards competition. Him and his students made their style of TKD come alive and vise versa; two peas in a pod.

[DWx]

While it's true that each MA style is its own stand alone across the board; effectiveness exists. The style is innocent, and it's the practitioner that's not. Without the style, the practitioner is nothing.

Respectfully, I have to disagree. Effectiveness exists but I think it's also fair to say that ineffectiveness also exists. Though I guess we have to define what exactly we mean by effectiveness; are we talking combat effectiveness? Effectiveness for self defense? Effectiveness for health and fitness?

I don't think we can categorically say a style is the best (at least not without defining "best at what") but we can definitely say some styles are poorer than others.

A practitioner can have good athletic ability but without proper tools (techniques) and instruction for using them (methodology), they may as well take up dancing or gymnastics.

Competition or not!? That decision is left to the practitioner to make at their own discretion, and not the style. The style doesn't decide that. No! The governing body decides that, and the style begs difference for the betterment of its own.

Again sorry but I disagree. The style can contain all sorts of training methodologies and tools for testing ability and competition can be one of them. If your Soke or Dai Soke stipulated that you had to stand on top of a mountain and train kata every 3rd Tuesday of the month, that would be a part of Shindokan would it not?

[bushido_man96]

Its a good idea that when we speak with another stylist, to consider a few things. First, we should consider what we know about the style, no matter how little that might be. Second, we have to consider that the person in front of us demonstrating or discussing the style doesn't represent the entire student body; they only represent themselves. If one wanted to judge the school, one needs to go see the school.

Its very important to try to keep an open mind to anyone that comes talking about what they are passionate about in the Martial Arts. Its possible to learn from just about anyone.

[sensei8]

While it's true that each MA style is its own stand alone across the board; effectiveness exists. The style is innocent, and it's the practitioner that's not. Without the style, the practitioner is nothing.

Respectfully, I have to disagree. Effectiveness exists but I think it's also fair to say that ineffectiveness also exists. Though I guess we have to define what exactly we mean by effectiveness; are we talking combat effectiveness? Effectiveness for self defense? Effectiveness for health and fitness?

I don't think we can categorically say a style is the best (at least not without defining "best at what") but we can definitely say some styles are poorer than others.

A practitioner can have good athletic ability but without proper tools (techniques) and instruction for using them (methodology), they may as well take up dancing or gymnastics.

Competition or not!? That decision is left to the practitioner to make at their own discretion, and not the style. The style doesn't decide that. No! The governing body decides that, and the style begs difference for the betterment of its own.

Again sorry but I disagree. The style can contain all sorts of training methodologies and tools for testing ability and competition can be one of them. If your Soke or Dai Soke stipulated that you had to stand on top of a mountain and train kata every 3rd Tuesday of the month, that would be a part of Shindokan would it not?

Disagreements are fine, and needed from time to time.

Effectiveness is effectiveness without applying one label after another...until it's molded into what one needs and/or wants...combat or self-defense or health or all or whatever the label might be. Either way, the practitioner is at fault if they can't execute that which their MA styles methodology/ideology...either one can or can't!! However one slices up the watermelon, it's still a watermelon.

I don't believe in the word "best", to me, that's an illusion. An illusion that one creates out of necessity and belonging. No style of the MA, imho, is "best" at anything.

Practitioners might have the proper tools, but if they don't know how to properly execute them, then, you're right, all of the athletic abilities are for not!! I'm a MAist, and I'm not an athlete, nor do I strive to be one. I'll save that for those who want to strive for that; that was never my desire when I began my MA journey.

No...I believe you're misunderstanding what I'm saying about competition. I was highly involved in competitions of the MA types for the most of my MA journey. My Sensei and my TKD instructor weren't the most understanding when it came to their students competing, but they allowed it, with guarded intent. The practitioner, as my experience has been, decides to compete, and only the practitioner!!

Seeing that Shindokan is it's own governing body, the student body isn't under any rule that said that we had to compete or that competition was required or that competition is highly recommended. NO!! As a student, it was up to me if I wanted to compete or not, and I choose to do so, against the desires of my Sensei as well as my TKD instructor.

And no...

If your Soke or Dai Soke stipulated that you had to stand on top of a mountain and train kata every 3rd Tuesday of the month, that would be a part of Shindokan would it not?

While it might've been part of Shindokan, I surely wouldn't have followed them because I would've thought that they lost their minds. And while I was under 18 years of age, my mom would've thought the same and pulled me out faster that a speeding bullet. The only thing I HAVE TO DO, is be born, then die, between that, MA wise, I decide and not the SKKA or Soke or Dai-Soke or GM Suh or anyone. I will admit, however, I did get a big laugh out of it and tried to visualize it, and laughed even harder. I'm glad that neither of them tried to stipulate anything as foolish as that.