At what point does accomodation of a student remove them from practicing the actual art?

[Steve]

My head hurts trying to keep up with the posts since I've last participated in this thread. Did we come to some consensus or, more likely, not?

Me too, and... no.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

My head hurts trying to keep up with the posts since I've last participated in this thread. Did we come to some consensus or, more likely, not?

No, but consensus was not the object. Not for myself at least. I have enjoyed the different perspectives, regardless of whether or not I agree with them.

 

[K-man]

My interpretation specifically on the matter would need another thread so I do not get shouted at by unforbearing people

I was hoping that was the case. I have seen 'grounding' demonstrated by a guy called Steve Burton. His 'grounding' is based on yin and yang theory as it applies to DimMak. It is totally different to the 'grounding' that some CMA people here claim to use, and of course totally different to the aikido concept of Ki. :asian:

 

[Steve]

I was hoping that was the case. I have seen 'grounding' demonstrated by a guy called Steve Burton. His 'grounding' is based on yin and yang theory as it applies to DimMak. It is totally different to the 'grounding' that some CMA people here claim to use, and of course totally different to the aikido concept of Ki. :asian:

I'm an expert on grounding, having spent most of my childhood being grounded by my parents.

 

[Carol]

Would that be considered a chassis ground or an earth ground?

 

[K-man]

Would that be considered a chassis ground or an earth ground?

More likely 'home' ground!

 

[puunui]

I'm not an aikido practitioner, so take my answer for what its worth.

You might be. Afterall, your Hapkido roots include someone who studied aikido in korea and japan and eventually became the Aikikai representative in korea. Also, GM CHOI, Yong Sul's last name is Choi, not Sul.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Would that be considered a chassis ground or an earth ground?

For any fight on the roof of a moving vehicle (bus, train, tractor trailer) uses chassis grounding.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

You might be. Afterall, your Hapkido roots include someone who studied aikido in korea and japan and eventually became the Aikikai representative in korea.

True.

Also, GM CHOI, Yong Sul's last name is Choi, not Sul.

Whoops!!! Can't believe I missed that!! Choi Dojunim. Sorry.

 

[puunui]

In a similar way, I had a discussion with punuui regarding BJJ. His experience with BJJ is Relson Gracie guys over in Hawaii. Relson is well known for his self defense, practical approach to BJJ. Would a Relson guy think that someone like Caio Terra is a legit BJJ practitioner? I don't know. I'd guess that the philosophies involved are different. Caio Terra has a very high level, successful approach that involves a lot of inversion and working from the bottom. I'd say both are top tier, but they might disagree. Similarly, guys who only train in a gi... are they training BJJ? Well, I guess it would depend upon the person answering the question.

Relson and Relson guys. Relson doesn't distinguish like that. He thinks of it all as jiujitsu that had its origins from his father and uncle. As for what the Relson guys think, they don't really discriminate in that fashion. What they might say is "that isn't what or how relson teaches", but that's about it. As for only gi training, I know a lot of people who do only that. If anything, no gi only would probably get you closer to the "that's not bjj", but personally I think that is still bjj.

 

[Makalakumu]

This question varies depending on the art.

With certain arts, you can loosely interpret the priciples of the art in order to have more people practice and learn it and with others, you cannot.

With TSD, you can move and change things around because we don't have strict performance standards. A lot of arts are like that. On the other hand, certain sporting arts, like BJJ, have a competitive expectation for the quality of their levels, so it's much harder to accommodate. In other arts, the whole point of practicing it is to pass it on exactly as it was taught for generations. There is no wiggle room there either.

So, in the end, it goes back to the nature of the art form.

Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk

 

[Steve]

Relson and Relson guys. Relson doesn't distinguish like that. He thinks of it all as jiujitsu that had its origins from his father and uncle. As for what the Relson guys think, they don't really discriminate in that fashion. What they might say is "that isn't what or how relson teaches", but that's about it. As for only gi training, I know a lot of people who do only that. If anything, no gi only would probably get you closer to the "that's not bjj", but personally I think that is still bjj.

Not trying to put words in your mouth. That's what I meant when I wrote, "Would a Relson guy think that someone like Caio Terra is a legit BJJ practitioner? I don't know."

But to the point of this thread, I do know a ton of guys who would be quick to acknowledge that in order to be a well rounded grappler, you'd need both gi and no-gi training. But does that mean that guys like Eddie Bravo aren't training BJJ because they don't train in a gi? Or what about the reverse... if a guy doesn't train in no-gi?

Point isn't to try and answer the question. It's simply to acknowledge that someone like Eddie Bravo might have a different opinion than a proponent of training in the gi. And that they might both be right, because they are both sharing an informed opinion.

 

[puunui]

Point isn't to try and answer the question. It's simply to acknowledge that someone like Eddie Bravo might have a different opinion than a proponent of training in the gi. And that they might both be right, because they are both sharing an informed opinion.

Ok. I think I wrote that somewhere above. But in furtherance of your point, does it really matter if one person thinks another is or isn't "doing" whatever art? How does anyone benefit from that sort of thing? I would think the only persons who it would matter to would be to the student and the teacher. Sometimes I think the student and teacher may disagree, especially if the student is adding stuff from outside of what the teacher taught him/her and the teacher says that is or isn't whatever art.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

But in furtherance of your point, does it really matter if one person thinks another is or isn't "doing" whatever art? How does anyone benefit from that sort of thing?

It's kind of like debating what constitutes a sports car. Traditionalists maintain that a sports car must be two seats, rear drive, manually shifted, and have a removable roof of some kind. Anyone driving the original CRX, which was front drive and fully enclosed (though two seats) could tell you that it was definitely a sports car, and most people considered the Datsun Z cars (240, 260, 280, and 280ZX) to be sports cars, as well as their Nissan successors, (300ZX, 350Z, and 370Z), which became available with automatics at some point and which became 2+2s with two seat versions being optional. By the traditionalist definition, none of the 2+2 or automatics were sports cars, and the 300ZX was really more of a grand tourer.

A lot of people called Mustangs, Camaros, Celicas, Supras, and other fast cars 'sports cars'. Mustangs and Camaros also were frequently called 'Muscle Cars.' None of these were sports cars or muscle cars (Mustangs, Camaros, and Challengers were Pony Cars, Celicas were sport compacts and Supras were GT tourers).

The only people that care about how accurate the term 'sports car' is are automotive journalists, sports car purists, and gear heads like myself. But to the vast majority of customers, anything that looks 'sporty' is a sports car. Journalists and sports car purists can debate and sound off about 'this isn't really a sports car' or 'that isn't really a sports car,' but the people buying them don't care and nor do the manufacturers (unless the distinction will help them sell more cars) or dealers.

People buy what they like and go home happy.

Likewise, people train in what they like and go home happy. If they don't, then they find another place to train where they will go home happy.

 

[dancingalone]

I think it matters. It should matter unless dilution isn't an area of concern for us. It would bug me if someone claimed to be teaching Okinawan Goju-ryu yet didn't even have so much as a single repetition of Sanchin in their class.

 

[K-man]

I think it matters. It should matter unless dilution isn't an area of concern for us. It would bug me if someone claimed to be teaching Okinawan Goju-ryu yet didn't even have so much as a single repetition of Sanchin in their class.

Mate, can I say "Mea Culpa". Tonight I ran out of time and promised we'd go through Sanchin on Thursday. (We did actually discuss various aspects of the kata, just didn't perform it.) Now I feel really bad! :uhoh:

 

[dancingalone]

Mate, can I say "Mea Culpa". Tonight I ran out of time and promised we'd go through Sanchin on Thursday. (We did actually discuss various aspects of the kata, just didn't perform it.) Now I feel really bad! :uhoh:

Good on you, R. Of course, I meant class in the sense of overall program, so don't lash yourself too much with the proverbial wet noodle!

 

[puunui]

I think it matters. It should matter unless dilution isn't an area of concern for us. It would bug me if someone claimed to be teaching Okinawan Goju-ryu yet didn't even have so much as a single repetition of Sanchin in their class.

But what could you really do about it if someone did claim to teach Okinawan Goju Ryu without having Sanchin in their class? Shut them down? What about Japanese Goju Ryu teaching the Pinan kata, which I don't believe that Okinawan Goju Ryu teaches? Does that inclusion make it any less Goju Ryu? And isn't Sanchin taught differently by different instructors?

Does it matter? Maybe, maybe not. Can you do something about it? Maybe, maybe not. Is it worth worrying about? Probably not. I would just be grateful that your teacher taught you the full art of Okinawan Goju Ryu, which you are in turn, passing down to your students. That's all you can really do when you think about it, which is what you are doing.

 

[dancingalone]

But what could you really do about it if someone did claim to teach Okinawan Goju Ryu without having Sanchin in their class? Shut them down?

I wouldn't recommend them as a place to train Okinawan Goju-ryu. On occasion, my opinion matters.

What about Japanese Goju Ryu teaching the Pinan kata, which I don't believe that Okinawan Goju Ryu teaches? Does that inclusion make it any less Goju Ryu?

Goju-kai doesn't do the Pinan kata at all to my knowledge. As for Goju-kai/JKF being Goju-Ryu or not, I suppose that depends on the teacher. Certainly I've seen karate-ka who came from the Yamaguichi and Urban lines, admittedly several generations down, who didn't exhibit the hallmarks I believe characteristic of Okinawan Goju-ryu karate. On the other hand, I've encountered my share of JKF people who are near cousins to what I do.

And isn't Sanchin taught differently by different instructors?

To an extent. Some lines of Goju commonly do a version where the turns are removed. It's not a big deal if the core ideas on body structure, muscular tension, and breathing are still present. On the other hand, there's a guy on Youtube called Calasanz (sp) who has a whacked up version of Goju kata, Sanchin included. I don't have a problem with stating that his is NOT a credible demonstration of Sanchin, although to be kind maybe it is useful for training something, if not Goju-type structure.

Does it matter? Maybe, maybe not. Can you do something about it? Maybe, maybe not. Is it worth worrying about? Probably not. I would just be grateful that your teacher taught you the full art of Okinawan Goju Ryu, which you are in turn, passing down to your students. That's all you can really do when you think about it, which is what you are doing.

It's not that I seek out the 'non-Orthodox' in an effort to conduct some type of weird karate inquisition. Far from it actually. But as an advocate of Okinawan Goju-ryu, it's up to me to promote the art the best I can, wherever I can. At times, this might mean answering certain questions frankly as they come up, whether in generic discussions like these on MT or in specific when asked about training options in some location.

 

[puunui]

I wouldn't recommend them as a place to train Okinawan Goju-ryu. On occasion, my opinion matters.

Ok, good point.

Goju-kai doesn't do the Pinan kata at all to my knowledge.

Sorry I realized after I hit send that I was thinking of Sensei Mas Oyama, who studied Yamaguchi Sensei and added the Pinan kata to form his own Kyokushinkai.

As for Goju-kai/JKF being Goju-Ryu or not, I suppose that depends on the teacher. Certainly I've seen karate-ka who came from the Yamaguichi and Urban lines, admittedly several generations down, who didn't exhibit the hallmarks I believe characteristic of Okinawan Goju-ryu karate.

I do like Sensei Peter Urban's books though, the karate dojo in particular.

To an extent. Some lines of Goju commonly do a version where the turns are removed. It's not a big deal if the core ideas on body structure, muscular tension, and breathing are still present.

What is the purpose of practicing sanchin kata, in your opinion?

It's not that I seek out the 'non-Orthodox' in an effort to conduct some type of weird karate inquisition. Far from it actually. But as an advocate of Okinawan Goju-ryu, it's up to me to promote the art the best I can, wherever I can. At times, this might mean answering certain questions frankly as they come up, whether in generic discussions like these on MT or in specific when asked about training options in some location.

I do that same thing. I guess I was speaking out loud. I was much more zealous in getting the information out there, because there was so much bad information, at least with respect to the korean martial arts. But now I feel more ambivalent about it. Sometimes I feel like I am trying to save the titanic, by bailing water one bucket at a time. Now I think my approach is to go for individual passengers here and there, concentrating on those who are open to what I have to say.