Originally posted by RyuShiKan
What was the topic of this thread anyway?????
Heck, I am confused. I think it had something to do with the fact that some people are quite willing to claim something in a public forum, where it can be read by millions of people, and when they are asked for some sort of proof they get evasive.
Of course, it just seems to be common sense that if you do so, then you have to expect most people to talk about you like you are a lying, incompetent fraud. If you claim you studied under a certain master, you need to prove it. If you don't want to reveal something while proving it, you should not be talking about it in the open in the first place. The same goes for street fighting experiences, military service, ranks or anything else that may be asked to be proven. There are points in my life I don't like to talk about. I do not even mention them in passing. I will never have to prove something based on something I do not want out in the open.
In my opinion, anyone who makes a claim about their personal training and then refuses to back that claim up is a fraud. Everything they or their students say from that point on is suspect. I can not even count how many times I have run across groups that claim to have 1000 year old Japanese lineages only to check and see that no one in Japan has ever heard of them and the guy who "revealed" the art to the public is completely ignorant of anything Japanese. But 99 times out of 100 they come back and say, "lineages/rank aren't important- fighting is and we can fight!" Oh? If lineages aren't important, why did you mention them in the first place? And why should we trust your word that you guys can fight?
And I am talking about personal experience. Some people bring up the fact that some arts can't be traced back 500 years like they claim to cover the fact that they can't prove that they had the training they boast about. I accept that problems happen with history over time, but everyone should be able to prove the claims they themselves make about what they did and achieved.
I just got through with a thread on another forum. The head of the style wrote a response talking about how no one was interested in getting to the truth, only attacking them. And he mentioned how no one had said anything to his face. I shot back a response saying that I did ask for some sort of proof that the guy's teacher was in Japan and offered to go visit them when they showed up in Japan this summer as they claim. So far- silence. It is rather amazing that the grand poo bah of an art seems scared of a little guy like me.
As for Kano and Lee, both of them did not really come up with a style, rather a way of looking at martial arts and training. If you look at the Koshiki no kata of the Kdokan, you will find the curriculum of the Kito ryu. Kano just wanted a new way of training that relflected the Western ways of education he had been exposed to. JKD students take things from complete arts like Kali, boxing and Wing Chun and make their own way. In neither case did the two really come up with techniques and say, "this is the way!" Both just rebbelled against the "classical mess" they saw and developed a new philosophy.
But for someone in the modern age to start an art at age 22 is somewhat silly- but common. Toi start your own style is to become head of it. To be head of a style means you are a master in the eyes of others. And the image that people build up in the eyes of others tends to be something they will defend to the death rather than admit they do not know everything. 22, that is a time to make many, many mistakes and learn from them. Too many "masters" just can not afford to make mistakes in the eyes of their students. Many do not push themselves enough. Some will even try to explain away their failures as some sort of brilliance.
But true growth comes from setting goals outside your reach, falling flat on your face and then after you dust yourself off, asking, "why did I fail and how can I avoid doing so the next time?"
I will give you an example. There was a guy who started his own "modern ninjutsu" style in 1979. I have a book written by him from 1999- two decades later. Despite 20 years as a master, he is still making mistakes that were very, very basic and would get him corrected in any dojo I associate with.
I am sure you have heard of Miyamoto Musashi. Have you ever heard of a contemporary of his called Yagyu Munenori? He was also a great swordsman who sent many swordsmen to defeat in his age. Both Musashi and Munenori had reputations as very efficient killers in an age known for its violence by the time they were 30 or so. Yet both of them wrote comments to the effect that they did not really understand martial arts until they were about 50. So you see how I look at 22 year olds that talk about starting their own style?
Here is a more recent example. Have you heard of "Jim Grover"? If you are interested in teaching self defense I would reccomend his stuff. In his book on street smarts he says this, (pg 171)
Second, it has been my experience that once one has named a technique after himself- even if the instructor is faced with irrefutable proof that there is a better, safer more effecient technique- he'll defend his to the end. After all, in his eyes he'll be remembered as having claimed to develop the best technique when, in fact, it wasn't. This is all good fun until you realize that teaching a substandard method may cost a person his life. If I learn something better today and can validate it, I'll be teaching it tommorow.
22 year old masters? Claims that can be made in public but can never be backed up- even as somethign as simple as who taught you? These are things that should set off alarms in people's heads. But of course, there are always people who need to be seen as macho in the eyes of others and people who will follow them. I think everyone should read the article "Tenth Dan in Bul Shi Tsu" written by Sharp Phil at PhilElmore.com. I can not seem to link directly to it.
