Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Christian Karate (the MA thread)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Christian Karate (the MA thread)

    Last edited by Fantasy Warrior; 7/26/2005 9:45am, .
    You are a total Douchbag. Train more, post nevermore.
    FickleFingerOfFate -08-21-2007 08:59 AM

    just die already.
    Plasma - 08-20-2007 11:45 PM


    Aikidokkkkakkakakakaaaaa
    Best MA website ever!!!!!: http://www.dogjudo.co.uk/

    #2

    1) The students skill level and ability to apply what he/she is taught is MORE important than any colour belt.
    There is nothing wrong in terms of making money in the MA, how does a dojo run, if it makes no money ?
    It has to become a non-profit organisation.
    A student shoudl never have, as a goal, ANY type of ranking, but should focus on skills and the ability to apply those skills.
    Always.

    2) Self defence MUST, it MUST be learned in a realistic manner, it must be taught in a realistic manner, progressively, AND realistically.
    Sparring MUST be done.
    Relaince on techniques and principles that have been proven effective over and over in ACTUAL application and NOT in theory, must be enforced.
    Students must be exposed to the "fear reflex".

    3) Pressure Points:
    Unless a technique or a principle can be applied, and be effective, on ANYONE at ANYTIME buy ANYONE of any shape and size, with SOME skill, that tecnique/principle is of no use.

    Pressure points are, at best, very advanced techniques that can work for highly trained fighters on the "average person".

    That are not effective on trained fighers, seasoned criminals and are not recommned to be used by novices or beginners.

    If you can't take someone out with a simple RNC, what makes you think you can incapcitate them with a move that is hard enought to pull off on soemone that is LETTING you do it ??

    Comment


      #3
      On point 2 above: self-defence.

      This is the most important bit because if Martial Arts instructors teach bullshido, the asker answers their own question:
      Last edited by Fantasy Warrior; 7/26/2005 8:41am, .
      You are a total Douchbag. Train more, post nevermore.
      FickleFingerOfFate -08-21-2007 08:59 AM

      just die already.
      Plasma - 08-20-2007 11:45 PM


      Aikidokkkkakkakakakaaaaa
      Best MA website ever!!!!!: http://www.dogjudo.co.uk/

      Comment


        #4
        I think everyone has a really good point in this thread, and that the ideal instructor will teach a mixture of their traditional art and realistic self-defense concepts (progressively freestyle sparring, full-spectrum techniques, etc...).

        However, when an instructor suddenly "gets it", and realizes that certain things need to be changed...by what authority should he modify his syllabus? What gives him/her the credibility to actually teach these types of concepts?

        Think about it. The average Olympic/American TKD instructor typically has anywhere from 5 to 25 years of experience in TKD. They have been born and bred for the rules of TKD. They've practiced point sparring to death, made a habit of using sparring "armor" in excessive amounts, and routinely restrict contact to the face and head. They've also been taught dozens of forms and maybe a handful of relatively ineffective locking/takedown techniques.

        What they haven't been taught is concepts of ground control, fight finishing, de-escalation, risk assessment, etc... The average TKD instructor that has more than a passing familiarity with groundwork is a rarity, and will often not think highly of it.

        So...lets pretend Grandmaster Kim of American TKD (Fictional School/Instructor) suddenly has an epiphany, and wakes up screaming "SOMETHING MUST BE CHANGED!" So, he incorporates the above concepts into his teaching, removes the gear, allows striking to the head, then finally allows stand/ground fighting intertwined. He also includes self-defense concepts and works with "adrenaline drills" to help prepare his students.

        Sounds great, right?

        Wrong. Grandmaster Kim has gone from a well-taught TKD instructor to an outright fraud. Under what authority would he teach these things? Where does his experience come from? How did he become certified from a professional to include these things in his training?

        Chances are he didn't, and he's just jumping on the bandwagon of "effectiveness".

        In order for instructors of "bullshido" to change their ways, they would have to COMPLETELY start over and relearn almost everything they've been taught. Since they also plan on teaching the new material, they should ethically put in enough time to lawfully attain instructor status in these new "concepts". This could take years and far too much effort and money.

        How many career martial arts instructors are willing to do that? How many could afford to do that?

        My point is that, while good in theory, the reformation of "bullshido" instructors/schools simply will not happen. Too much time, energy, and money has been funneled into their current training for many of them to extend outside their "bubble". And if they don't extend enough, then they perform a diservice to their students by teaching something they themselves aren't qualified to teach.

        Just my thoughts on the subject.

        May you achieve
        Satori
        Originally posted by Exodus
        Helio was submitted by Kimura

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Satori
          I think everyone has a really good point in this thread, and that the ideal instructor will teach a mixture of their traditional art and realistic self-defense concepts (progressively freestyle sparring, full-spectrum techniques, etc...).

          However, when an instructor suddenly "gets it", and realizes that certain things need to be changed...by what authority should he modify his syllabus? What gives him/her the credibility to actually teach these types of concepts?

          Think about it. The average Olympic/American TKD instructor typically has anywhere from 5 to 25 years of experience in TKD. They have been born and bred for the rules of TKD. They've practiced point sparring to death, made a habit of using sparring "armor" in excessive amounts, and routinely restrict contact to the face and head. They've also been taught dozens of forms and maybe a handful of relatively ineffective locking/takedown techniques.

          What they haven't been taught is concepts of ground control, fight finishing, de-escalation, risk assessment, etc... The average TKD instructor that has more than a passing familiarity with groundwork is a rarity, and will often not think highly of it.

          So...lets pretend Grandmaster Kim of American TKD (Fictional School/Instructor) suddenly has an epiphany, and wakes up screaming "SOMETHING MUST BE CHANGED!" So, he incorporates the above concepts into his teaching, removes the gear, allows striking to the head, then finally allows stand/ground fighting intertwined. He also includes self-defense concepts and works with "adrenaline drills" to help prepare his students.

          Sounds great, right?

          Wrong. Grandmaster Kim has gone from a well-taught TKD instructor to an outright fraud. Under what authority would he teach these things? Where does his experience come from? How did he become certified from a professional to include these things in his training?

          Chances are he didn't, and he's just jumping on the bandwagon of "effectiveness".

          In order for instructors of "bullshido" to change their ways, they would have to COMPLETELY start over and relearn almost everything they've been taught. Since they also plan on teaching the new material, they should ethically put in enough time to lawfully attain instructor status in these new "concepts". This could take years and far too much effort and money.

          How many career martial arts instructors are willing to do that? How many could afford to do that?

          My point is that, while good in theory, the reformation of "bullshido" instructors/schools simply will not happen. Too much time, energy, and money has been funneled into their current training for many of them to extend outside their "bubble". And if they don't extend enough, then they perform a diservice to their students by teaching something they themselves aren't qualified to teach.

          Just my thoughts on the subject.

          May you achieve
          Satori


          A very good point.

          Comment


            #6
            I see the point satori is making put I don't think it applies in all cases.

            To someone with five years experience teaching everything you have said applies.

            To someone who never trained in head strikes everything you said applies.

            To a TKD instructor who suddenly wants to include ground fighting, everything you said applies.

            However, those with 20 or more years experience were probably training back when the game was ruffer. They also probably got around to having a lot of hard contact experience and, while not the most competant boxers, probably have better head defense than TKDists who have only known the olympic rules.

            There are some guys out there who know exactly how to train hard but avoid it because it will lose them students.


            Also, I would like to know exactly how this orginization integrates Christianity with MA. I'll keep the "OMG God's dumb zerg rush" in the other thread. But I think knowing how the religion is integrated into the training is substinative to commentary here.

            And I was the one who suggested this thread, not PL. Damn, I get no respect.

            Comment


              #7
              Lampa, sorry :(

              Satori, I hear your point but that shouldn't discourage change -but those instructors who are not suitibly experienced to teach "reality" should get themselves schooled in it before teaching it. in the meantime they need to radically alter the messages they're giving their students re SD. IMO.
              You are a total Douchbag. Train more, post nevermore.
              FickleFingerOfFate -08-21-2007 08:59 AM

              just die already.
              Plasma - 08-20-2007 11:45 PM


              Aikidokkkkakkakakakaaaaa
              Best MA website ever!!!!!: http://www.dogjudo.co.uk/

              Comment


                #8
                >>but those instructors who are not suitibly experienced to teach "reality" should get themselves schooled in it before teaching it. in the meantime they need to radically alter the messages they're giving their students re SD. IMO.

                exactly. satori makes a great point: "on what authority are they now teaching these techniques?" and like kickcatcher said, they need to tell their students the whole story. honesty goes a long way.

                staying with the tkd instructor example, what would be the problem with opening up the training environment to include groundwork? if the instructor makes it clear to the students that it's necessary for sd, that he's only a beginner himself, that he encourages them to find a competent instructor, but the mat's open for students to roll, do you think that would be irresponsible? he's admittedly not a competent instructor, and there's perhaps an increased risk of injury, but it seems like a step in the right direction.
                If the guy standing on your porch doesn't follow these rules, don't let him inside - whether he is a robot or not.

                Comment


                  #9
                  There's always the possibility of synergy in the sense of visiting senseis/coaches/trainers. For instance, financially there's hardly any harm in exchanging lessons for instance. Have a local - is possible, of course - wrestling coach to come in once every two weeks to give a lesson. Have your own sensei/whatever visit their gym to give a taste of the oriental in return. First of all, exposing students to different kinds and approaches to teh marital arties is always beneficial and both parties might actually benefit from such an exchange studentbodywise.

                  Of course, whether or not a local kickboxing (for example) teacher wants to exchange lessons with a McDojo of any sort is a different question altogether.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    For instance: back when I used to do Hokutoryu Jujutsu we sometimes had a BJJ guy (or some other 'expert' - I fail to remember) come in to teach us and work on our ground game. The two clubs were sort of affiliates but still.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      However, those with 20 or more years experience were probably training back when the game was ruffer. They also probably got around to having a lot of hard contact experience and, while not the most competant boxers, probably have better head defense than TKDists who have only known the olympic rules.
                      Exactly.

                      I wouldn't agree that a majority of experienced instructors would need to "start over" and get credibility from other schools. Because chances are, they've already spent some time there, or have more than that "passing familiarity" that you speak of. And in some associations, higher level instructors are actually encouraged to get out of their area of "expertise" and go train in a different art, with the goal not necessarily being "Go get a black belt in something, " but instead to gain that "more than a passing familiarity."

                      Now whether every instructor follows these instructions implicitly and honestly is a whole different discussion, but good instructors do in fact do this.

                      However.

                      While I've known instructors that, for themselves, fight hard, train hard, have been in the rougher/tougher era, have more than a passing familiarity in more than one art... that instructor's school still doesn't teach that way at all. None of it.

                      Why?

                      It's simply not good business.

                      We can discuss the pure virtues of hard sparring, having a proficient striking and ground game, and why the common person coming into a dojang doesn't actually learn real self-defence skills to we're blue in the face. But good business practice shows that it's very difficult to make money AND keep your students if you teach "the real thing." The real thing was what led to rivalries, people splitting off, broken noses, injuries, fewer students, rougher students, blah blah blah. Granted, today's stuff causes the same stuff, sans the violence.

                      Even in the traditional schools that I have and still occasionally get a chance to train at, sparring gear becomes mandatory, or sparring becomes less and less and less the focus of the curriculum. And the sparring was never that "hard" to begin with. Control is cool. Doing the controlled stuff is cool. I think it's less than wise to have your average students, the ones that aren't really looking to become macho tough fighters, spar heavy and hard all the time. That's not what they came in the door for in the first place, even if they pay lip service to it.

                      But business practice suggests that light to no sparring ever is ideal, and with protection and a 'qualified supervisor' at all times. The more students and the more public you are, the more you have to worry about lawsuits, or so the instructors say. And these are the "tough guys" talking. When you base your school around that, you get the women and the children coming through the door as well (not to say that women are not tough -- that's not true).

                      But anyway, it is a correct assumption to say that the "younger" generations such as myself would essentially need to start over if they ever wanted to say anything regarding "My school teaches ground fighting too." Some instructors that teach TKD/TSD of my generation or a little older have indeed done that. Many have not (including myself, but I don't instruct so no harm done).

                      Anyway, I think the Christian Karate schools really don't incorporate "Jesus" or Christianity into their art that much at all. I've heard of schools like this before the website stuff was shown, so isn't really a new concept. I think the primary thing is just that it's like any ole MA school, except it professes a faith (something MA schools traditionally don't do at all), and hence caters and advertises too those who would otherwise not associate themselves or pursue a hobby that didn't have "christian" marked all over it. I could be wrong though.

                      Some dojos like to push more than just the physical aspect. Their aiming towards creating "better" or empowered individuals, rather than "good fighters." (NOTE: not claiming other approaches to training don't do the same thing). The Christian Karate thing could just be an extension of that.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Wow. Guys, thanks for this thread.
                        I actually just started looking at this site a few days ago and I was really impressed at the integrity of it (exposing B.S. and promoting what is effective). My reaction was something in between "Hey! They're into what I want to get into!" and "Ummm.. That kinda sounds like my current MA instructor. *embarrassed grin*". To sum it up, I really like this site..
                        Yesterday I stumbled on the Christian Karate thread in which everyone was basically like "Christians are bigots/idiots/responsible for all kinds of atrocities and God sucks and they shouldn't practice MA at all" and I got discouraged..

                        Yeah, I'm a Christian (non Catholic). And not just a nominal one.

                        I respect people's right to believe what they deem true and to even reject what I believe as false. People should be allowed to respectfully disagree. But in that other thread, well it just got to the point where I felt kinda dissed by alot of the comments, that went beyond disagreement to just blatant attacks that had little to do with MA. I was just about to say "Well, I guess bullshido.com isn't really for me", but then I saw this thread.

                        I'm glad that there are some members of this site that will put aside their dissagreement with the Christian Faith to objectively talk about the content of their fighting style and offer positive (but honest) criticism. I think that's cool.

                        Anyways, I'm not a member of Christian Karate, but I do consider myself somewhat of a martial artist and I wouldn't mind being included in the discussion about incorporating faith/philosophy in the practice of Martial Arts.

                        Thanks.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Yeah, don't get discouraged by the baiting around here. I'm not an experienced member by any means, but so far I've observed that there is occasionally a flood of over-reaction to a situation, where people have an agenda other than discussing the actual topic at hand, but after all of that is said and done, discussion usually resumes onto the topics we all came here to discuss.

                          The other thread did skyrocket into something that had little or nothing to do with karate and religious ideology being tied together, but it seems to have resuscitated in the last few pages.

                          But yeah, don't worry. There's plenty of people who are not religious, and there are groups of people who are. You might get drowned out occasionally, but mature discussion seems to be the rule of thumb here.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by Doctor Shaft
                            The real thing was what led to rivalries, people splitting off, broken noses, injuries, fewer students, rougher students, blah blah blah. Granted, today's stuff causes the same stuff, sans the violence.
                            The Straigt Blast Gym has proven that not to be true. You can teach the real thing and be profitable.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by Doctor Shaft
                              Exactly.

                              I wouldn't agree that a majority of experienced instructors would need to "start over" and get credibility from other schools. Because chances are, they've already spent some time there, or have more than that "passing familiarity" that you speak of. And in some associations, higher level instructors are actually encouraged to get out of their area of "expertise" and go train in a different art, with the goal not necessarily being "Go get a black belt in something, " but instead to gain that "more than a passing familiarity."

                              Now whether every instructor follows these instructions implicitly and honestly is a whole different discussion, but good instructors do in fact do this.

                              However.

                              While I've known instructors that, for themselves, fight hard, train hard, have been in the rougher/tougher era, have more than a passing familiarity in more than one art... that instructor's school still doesn't teach that way at all. None of it.

                              Why?

                              It's simply not good business.

                              We can discuss the pure virtues of hard sparring, having a proficient striking and ground game, and why the common person coming into a dojang doesn't actually learn real self-defence skills to we're blue in the face. But good business practice shows that it's very difficult to make money AND keep your students if you teach "the real thing." The real thing was what led to rivalries, people splitting off, broken noses, injuries, fewer students, rougher students, blah blah blah. Granted, today's stuff causes the same stuff, sans the violence.

                              Even in the traditional schools that I have and still occasionally get a chance to train at, sparring gear becomes mandatory, or sparring becomes less and less and less the focus of the curriculum. And the sparring was never that "hard" to begin with. Control is cool. Doing the controlled stuff is cool. I think it's less than wise to have your average students, the ones that aren't really looking to become macho tough fighters, spar heavy and hard all the time. That's not what they came in the door for in the first place, even if they pay lip service to it.

                              But business practice suggests that light to no sparring ever is ideal, and with protection and a 'qualified supervisor' at all times. The more students and the more public you are, the more you have to worry about lawsuits, or so the instructors say. And these are the "tough guys" talking. When you base your school around that, you get the women and the children coming through the door as well (not to say that women are not tough -- that's not true).

                              But anyway, it is a correct assumption to say that the "younger" generations such as myself would essentially need to start over if they ever wanted to say anything regarding "My school teaches ground fighting too." Some instructors that teach TKD/TSD of my generation or a little older have indeed done that. Many have not (including myself, but I don't instruct so no harm done).
                              Good post.

                              Here's a slightly different view, maybe a little too idealistic:

                              I see two options that could be taken by TMA old-timers (primarily karate-do and TKD people) who have decided that their methods are lacking.

                              First, they can just teach TMA as a cultural practice and self-improvement method -- which of course is what some hard-line traditional TMA'ers have always insisted about the "do" arts. All the instructor has to do is tell his/her students explicitly and frequently "no matter what you may have heard, this is not a self-defense art" and avoid saying or doing anything to contradict that message.

                              The second option is to quit teaching, either temporarily or permanently, and pursue another art that's more effective for self-defense. Hey, life is full of disappointments and lane changes. Wouldn't you feel a lot of respect for the fictitious Grandmaster Kim if he closed his school for five or ten years, did a ton of supplemental training, and then re-opened the school with a different focus? I would.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X