All right, now that we seem to have a consensus that it’s the stylist and not the style, can we agree that some “styles” are made up poop? I’m just sick of being pc, can’t we agree that some styles are well thought out, and some are total monkey dung?
Is it safe yet? I just want to know, we don’t need to say out loud whose style is total eel feces, we can just know that that’s the way it is, it’ll be a little unspoken thing we’ve got. I’m sure you know which members I’m talking about. They’re a nice bunch, but they couldn’t fight there way out of a Sesame Street On Ice show on a good day.
We don’t need to tell them, but it’s ok to know that their style sucks, right?
Styles that have been around 150 years or more, generally do not suck. Styles that are younger, but have been tested in competitive environments, and include the positive contributions of thousands, generally do not suck. In fact, most styles that suck are actually fake styles, or styles that are being mis-applied to situations they were not designed for.
Now, about the eel feces - is that a good or a bad thing?
What if it’s old, but hasn’t been tested in a long time? Like the shaolin when that one emporer made them reform in order to make them effective again? Does that count, so an old style could have a sucky period?
If it’s become inneffective then it’s the teaching methods used, not the style. The effective techniques and principles are all there in the forms and drills, it’s just some people forget them.
Yes, much stuff does suck. There are people on this board who I know their Sifu learned half his stuff from wle.com. There are others who spout such complete nonsense about what they teach that it’s laughable. Yet more are so vague and generic about what they actually do you know they’re fake.
Yes, of course some styles suck. That’s a given. But, because the stylist himself is such an important element in the execution of martial arts, a really good martial artist can find and use techniques of even a sucky style and make them effective.
So, once again, it’s the stylist and not the style that’s the most important facet of martial arts…even when we’re talking about a style that “sucks”.
So maybe it is a degree of not so useful vs. Useful
Budokan makes a good statement that the stylist might/will make it work. However, some arts make it easier than others. I was going to continue but something I read from the 5 rings and from Bruce Lee entered into my thoughts, now I must stop writing.
Peace.
If a style that is usually not considered effective can be used by an insightful person to make it un cararacteristically effective (along the lines of Budokan’s first mention here). There is a concept that the Style is constantly effective (in it’s design). It is impatient students who have not studied. Have not learned. Are not experienced, riding on the laurels of The Style (reputation)~. Delusional that membership conveys the end product of a decade(s) of training with the signing of a contract or paying a bill or a handshake or the such. Training becomes as busy work as they are now the archetype Kung-Fu person with fantasic skills, undefeatable; and needs not fear getting hurt so they talk big, are not smart, and allow bad situations that were avoidable, anxiously to happen.
It is not to be said that the students are poor (there are however a great many people who merely take classes). It is more at people who lack understanding. At least a lack in understanding what they can get from the Style or how to get it. And a lack in understanding what they would like (to do (in Life)).
Style is only important inasmuch as your options in any given situation are a result of your training. Some styles of martial arts provide more options. Some provide faster options. Some provide more damaging options. Some provide easier options.
The more you train the techniques you have learned, the more those techniques are going to be fast, damaging, and easy.
I don’t get into details, and I’m not into doing deep twists or long postures for the sake of doing them.
Nor do I do much static stance training, as I need my mobility in combat. No dead stances, no techniques that I can’t get in and out of.
I do forms regularly, but I don’t get TOO worked up over the details. As long as I’m getting the right jing out of the form, I don’t worry if my hand is an inch too low or too high. In the context of a real fight, it’s all a wash anyhow.
And if the style doesn’t teach you to have your arms up? Will getting hit in the face be the fault of the practitioner if the style does not have a good reason for this.
Also, if memory serves me correctly, the problem of the shaolin wasn’t just a training thing. Their style needed work.
Remember, forms weren’t always well documented. /subtle changes could happen from one generation to the next that lost the details.
RD,
Not really talking about anyone in particular at all, just thought it was an interesting topic.
I think it’s the responsibility of the practitioner of a style to CHANGE the style if it doesn’t work for him.
How else would a style grow?
For example, I used to study Northern Shaolin kung fu intensely. But as a result of sparring, I ended up completely reorganizing the style for my own purposes.
It’s not that the style was lacking anything, it was simply a matter of rearranging the method into something palatable for me.
We all know that every style/ school has its limitations. If you think your style is perfect, you’re either deluded or what you are studying will take forEVER to get close to mastering. If you can devote that much time to your studies, you’re a luckier person than I am.
Truth is that today MA are a hobby far more than a way of life, in comparison to what it was when they were derived/collected/tested. Many styles require us to be in much better shape to be effective than most Americans are willing to be (with regard to the diet and exercise).
One Korean art that is about 90% kicks and is an Olympic style (that shall remain nameless) is a prime example. It is so commercialized that many of thier “Black Belts” might be able to do the movements necessary, but not in the time required to be effective. I saw a public exhibition put on by a school of this style once where a female Black Belt could barely kick above her waist. This was not due to an injury, she just couldn’t do it. Wrong style for that person to be effective. In this country (US) where a new student with a checkbook is almost NEVER turned away, promotion just a matter of time. In fact, some places put a Black Belt assurance in the contract!!
Take practicioner of made up style “A”, who has a school where they beat the crap out of each other regularly–you’ve essentially got a decent streetfighter.
Take a practicioner of 8000 year old style “B,” who doesn’t do full contact sparring on anything resembling a regular basis, but who has great “technique.”
My money’s on A.
I think it’s about how you train. If you even have rudimentary MA skills and train them hard a lot, you’re not going to be TOO bad off.
Odie Wan’s tagline “It’s not the Art, it’s the Artist” brings up an interesting point for me. I disagree with this statement very strongly, although I’m certain I’m interpreting it differently than he is, based on his actual post.
He mentions a TKD BB who is unable to attain the flexibility needed for a kick higher than waist level. To which I say, “so what?” not because I believe it’s unimportant or dangerous to kick at the head of a standing opponent (although certainly in some cases that it is dangerous, and therefore an unimportant ability to have) but because it is the artist who makes the art, not the art that makes the artist.
We all know that even with ‘perfect’ form, no two individuals will move in exactly the same way - the fact that we ARE unique individuals is the reason for this. And so two tkders, or bjjers, or karateka, or whatever of equal experience will have different strengths and weaknesses. These strengths and weaknesses may cancel each other out, and the two may be equally formidable. But NOT THE SAME! My Ch’ang Taijiquan is going to be inevitably and permanently different from a classmates, even if we each win against the other exactly 50% of the time. We have different Ch’ang Taijiquan. It’s the same set of techniques and practices and whatever else, but mine is mine and his is his.
So, this stifflegged TKD BB will have to use the TKD she has learned and make it work with her limitations. And her TKD will be her own. And maybe incredibly effective - who can say? But even if it doesn’t look like Hwang Jwing Ming, it will still be TKD.
