View Poll Results: If an art has any sub-optimal components is that art bullshido?
- 97. You may not vote on this poll
Teachers should warn students of the lack of depth in the specific area.
2/11/2006 8:46am, #31Originally Posted by TheManchu
2/11/2006 8:53am, #32
- Join Date
- Jul 2004
Now you're being argumentative about nothing because your original "reading comprehension" crack turned out to be wrong. If someone declares you the winner, do you get some sort of sad little internet trophy out of this?
2/11/2006 9:19am, #33
This is fairly simple.
There are three "core" ranges of fighting.
Each of which has several sub-ranges, but everything you do in the Martial Arts comes down to one of the three components. You can grapple with a weapon. You can strike while grappling, etc.
Most arts focus on one range and may or may not contain components of others. If we were truly to rate each art, in a general fashion, on its ranges, it would look something like this.
-Striking: 6 (lacks kicking/elbows/knees/etc)
-Grappling: 2 (clinch)
-Weapons: 0 (Though Krabi Krabong has weapons, and MT is sport KK).
Now, these are just rough numbers based on my personal knowledge on each art without any associated research. But it should be evident that there really is a distinct difference between arts, and an EXPLICIT need for cross training.
2/11/2006 9:32am, #34Originally Posted by Phrost
Well done Phrost. I will be do the same with arts I have trained in.
-Striking: 4 (mainly used to set up throws)
-Grappling: 7 (lacks extensive ground work)
- Weapons: 10 (A real school will include kenjutsu, sojutsu, kusarijutsu, etc.)
-Striking: 6 (good strikes, but just enough to get away)
-Grappling: 1 (if you are grappling, you aren't running away)
-Weapons: 7 (Ningu aren't as Powerful as the Bujutsu weapons, but can be fairly nasty)
- Striking: 0 (No striking)
- Grappling: 4 (Throws/locks w/o any follow up ground work)
- Weapons: 2 (They try to do Kenjutsu, they really try)
-Striking: 6 (lacks good punching)
- Grappling: 0 (no grappling)
- Weapons: 1 (they twirl some kobudo weapons, no application)
BJJ (Pedro Sauer)
-Striking: 3 (Knees/elbows/GnP from mount, thats it)
-Grappling: 9 (Lacks a bit on takedowns)
-Weapons: 0 (no weapons work)
2/11/2006 9:35am, #35
You need to make sure those numbers are adjusted for aliveness. For the purposes of this exercise, you can't rate anything above a 4 or 5 unless it's trained properly. How much sparring was there in your JJJ class vs compliant partner drilling?
2/11/2006 9:41am, #36Originally Posted by Phrost
We do complaint partner drilling, but after they get the hang of the technique the uke should start resisting the technique.
2/11/2006 9:42am, #37
I said before, these are the numbers from my personal training expirence. I really wouldn't know as a whole.
2/11/2006 12:12pm, #38
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- orlando, FL
My third post on here and it's in one with a heated debate. I'll try not to step on toes, but I'll offer my own point of view, disregarding the semantics of what "sub-optimal" means...
I think what it boils down to has nothing to do with the teacher having to "warn" his/her students about "sub-optimal" techniques...it's a matter of expectations...
Just as with any learning situation, there should be a clear distinction of what is to be expected of the teacher and the student...and there should be the ultimate goal of teaching the student to understand the knowledge/skills/abilities he/she is being taught, rather than simply just "knowing" it...
That said, there should be a clear understanding of what the student wants to learn and what is being taught to him/her...for example, when I occasionally teach class at my original TKD school and we work on "self-defense" maneuvers...I make it clear to them that what I am teaching them does not come from my instructor's Hapkido knowledge base and comes from my own limited BJJ experience (training regularly since May 2005)...thus I address more realistic scenarios vs. the normal stuff you see like one-wrist grabs or two-handed "rape" chokes...
All in all, there is no sense in discounting your own style by "warning" your students that the style lacks anything...rather, I think it's beneficial to add from other experiences and other training. And to answer the original question...having a basis of "sub-optimal" skills doesn't make something bullshido...if the goal is to submit an opponent or wrist lock them or what-have-you from a simple wrist grab and it works...then it works.......for that particular situation. The students should just know full-well that situations like that are either a) rare and b) should be taught permutations of those situations as to properly apply principles learned in class to address them...
Hope that wasn't too long-winded...
2/11/2006 12:34pm, #39
That is a fantastic idea. This should go along with the discription of the arts.
Originally Posted by Phrost
-Striking: 8 (lacks kicking/knees)
-Grappling: 1 (clinch work)
An elbow is a just a hook with a slightly different angle. Dirty boxing is still boxing.
An active clinch where you are pushing and leaning and using your forehead on your opponent.You can't make people smarter. You can expose them to information, but your responsibility stops there.
2/11/2006 12:41pm, #40Originally Posted by PirateJon
And you can't count "dirty boxing" as it's not a primary feature of Boxing as much as a set of tricks to be used here and there. 8 is way too high for an art that only features one form of striking (punching) and doesn't even include backfists, hammerfists, etc. You must think kicking/knees/etc are only worth 2 points.
Try to stay objective. You are not your Martial Art.