Collecting Training by the Famous

[Bill Mattocks]

I've noticed some folks seem to set great store by the number of people they've trained with who are well-known, and by their fame. I also notice that these same people seem to have a different definition of 'trained with' than I do. I consider training with someone to be an ongoing situation. I've attended a few seminars with people who are more-or-less well-known in certain circles of my particular style of karate, but I don't consider myself to have 'trained with them' as they would not know me from Adam if someone mentioned my name to them. I was there when they were there and I did exercises that they were leading many of us in; once or twice. That's not 'training with' someone, is it? They're not my instructor.

I don't doubt that many famous martial artists are also great people to train with, so I kind of get it, but at the same time, it sort of turns me off. Like, training is about training, not how famous the person you train with is, isn't it? The fact that a person is famous is certainly interesting, but is it important? Is that something to try to 'collect' like a person would collect autographs or selfies with famous people?

Anyway, I'm interested in other's take on it. Maybe it's because I don't have a long list of the famous people I've brushed shoulders with, and I'm just jealous. Maybe it's just human nature to want to mention the well-known people we've been around in a training situation.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

The fact that a person is famous is certainly interesting, but is it important? Is that something to try to 'collect' like a person would collect autographs or selfies with famous people?

I think this is pretty much it. In the same way it's a cool anecdote that one of my friend's dads spent a weekend hanging out with the Islanders, it's a cool anecdote that Tim Waid came to my dojo a few times to train us. And I even drilled with him and learned a specific drill that's probably one of my favorite/most useful knife fighting drills.

But, just like my friends dad wouldn't say that he's friends with anyone from the islanders, I wouldn't say that I trained under Tim Waid.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I love going to seminars and so have had the chance to meet some fairly well known martial artists. (I won't say "famous" exactly, because unless a martial artist happens to be a movie star or a UFC champion, most people outside a fairly limited circle won't really know who they are*.) My thoughts ...

Fame, skill, and teaching ability aren't particularly well correlated.

Even if the seminar instructor isn't that great of a teacher, I still generally enjoy myself. Just meeting new people and trying new things in a martial arts context is fun.

Like you, I wouldn't refer to seminar experiences as "training with" someone unless they were frequent enough that I had a personal relationship with the instructor so that they knew who I was and they were actively involved in my development as a martial artist. I do have friends who have spent years developing that sort of training relationship with an out-of-town instructor that they mostly only saw at seminars. Those people I think could fairly say that they "trained with" so-and-so. I wouldn't say I've had that sort of relationship even with the instructors I've seen in numerous seminars.

I will give credit to the instructor if I learned something particularly cool at their seminar that I haven't encountered elsewhere.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I was thinking about making a list of all the seminars I've attended and seeing how many of the instructors would even be recognized by the martial arts nerds here, but then I realized that I can't even remember the names of all of them. I did figure out that it's been probably between 80-100 seminars over the last 38 years with about 50-60 different instructors. A small handful of them were prominent enough that their names might be recognized by martial artists outside their own style. Another dozen or so would be widely known within their own styles, even by people who had no association with them. The rest would primarily be known by practitioners of the same art within the same association or geographic area.

But if I had taken pictures with all of them and held on to all the seminar attendance certificates, I could plaster the walls of my dojo office. (If I had my own dojo with an office.)

 

[Steve]

I've noticed some folks seem to set great store by the number of people they've trained with who are well-known, and by their fame. I also notice that these same people seem to have a different definition of 'trained with' than I do. I consider training with someone to be an ongoing situation. I've attended a few seminars with people who are more-or-less well-known in certain circles of my particular style of karate, but I don't consider myself to have 'trained with them' as they would not know me from Adam if someone mentioned my name to them. I was there when they were there and I did exercises that they were leading many of us in; once or twice. That's not 'training with' someone, is it? They're not my instructor.

I don't doubt that many famous martial artists are also great people to train with, so I kind of get it, but at the same time, it sort of turns me off. Like, training is about training, not how famous the person you train with is, isn't it? The fact that a person is famous is certainly interesting, but is it important? Is that something to try to 'collect' like a person would collect autographs or selfies with famous people?

Anyway, I'm interested in other's take on it. Maybe it's because I don't have a long list of the famous people I've brushed shoulders with, and I'm just jealous. Maybe it's just human nature to want to mention the well-known people we've been around in a training situation.

When I read this, the first person who comes to mind is @Buka . That guy has trained with everyone at one point or another, by any definition.

Regarding your main point, I feel the same way, and would also extend that to people who collect styles. There are folks, including a few around here, who will argue on one hand that people shouldn't have opinions about a style unless they've trained that style. And then on the other hand, opine freely about styles they have very little experience with, because they consider a seminar or horsing around with a friend to be "training". The "Oh, I can speak about BJJ because I roll with my friend who is a BJJ blue belt. So, I can speak with confidence about how my ninjutsu experience is better for self defense," phenomenon.

 

[Steve]

I love going to seminars and so have had the chance to meet some fairly well known martial artists. (I won't say "famous" exactly, because unless a martial artist happens to be a movie star or a UFC champion, most people outside a fairly limited circle won't really know who they are*.) My thoughts ...

Fame, skill, and teaching ability aren't particularly well correlated.

Even if the seminar instructor isn't that great of a teacher, I still generally enjoy myself. Just meeting new people and trying new things in a martial arts context is fun.

Like you, I wouldn't refer to seminar experiences as "training with" someone unless they were frequent enough that I had a personal relationship with the instructor so that they knew who I was and they were actively involved in my development as a martial artist. I do have friends who have spent years developing that sort of training relationship with an out-of-town instructor that they mostly only saw at seminars. Those people I think could fairly say that they "trained with" so-and-so. I wouldn't say I've had that sort of relationship even with the instructors I've seen in numerous seminars.

I will give credit to the instructor if I learned something particularly cool at their seminar that I haven't encountered elsewhere.

I should say, @Buka and @Tony Dismukes ... those guys have BOTH trained with just about everyone.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I should say, @Buka and @Tony Dismukes ... those guys have BOTH trained with just about everyone.

Nope. I haven't trained with even a quarter of the guys that I want to. And of the ones that I have, it's mostly just been the occasional seminar, not a personal relationship where we actually know each other.

 

[Flying Crane]

One yardstick is, you might claim that someone is your teacher, but would that person claim you as his student?

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I do at least have to give credit to those who actually show up and train at seminars before claiming to have trained with someone. I remember going to seminars with guys like Dan Inosanto and Stephen Hayes. I saw more than one instance of people showing up after the seminar was over to get pictures taken with them. Like, seriously guys. We know you're going to put those pictures up in your dojo office as advertising. At least show up and train for a couple of hours.

 

[Flying Crane]

I do feel that one can make a legitimate claim of having trained with someone who might not be your actual teacher. There could be a friendship or a relationship that develops over the course of multiple seminars and may grow into informal training sessions and it leads to a genuine transmission of knowledge and development of skills. So yes, you trained with them and they have strongly influenced your development and you may even have learned a lot from them. But this could still be very different from being someone’s actual student. There is nothing wrong with that, other than it simply merits recognizing the distinction.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

One yardstick is, you might claim that someone is your teacher, but would that person claim you as his student?

That yardstick has issues, because some teacher's claim that they've trained people to bolster themselves too. So you have to figure out which of the two is more impressive, and see what the other one says.

But then you've got famous people with egos, who don't want to admit they trained under/over a no-name person, or said person insulted them somehow and they 'disowned' them.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

I do at least have to give credit to those who actually show up and train at seminars before claiming to have trained with someone. I remember going to seminars with guys like Dan Inosanto and Stephen Hayes. I saw more than one instance of people showing up after the seminar was over to get pictures taken with them. Like, seriously guys. We know you're going to put those pictures up in your dojo office as advertising. At least show up and train for a couple of hours.

On the one hand, if I had the opportunity, I'd absolutely love a photo with Dan Inosanto, and it wouldn't be for advertising purposes. On the other, I don't think I'd have the cojones to skip out on his training session and then ask for the picture.

 

[Flying Crane]

That yardstick has issues, because some teacher's claim that they've trained people to bolster themselves too. So you have to figure out which of the two is more impressive, and see what the other one says.

But then you've got famous people with egos, who don't want to admit they trained under/over a no-name person, or said person insulted them somehow and they 'disowned' them.

Sure, it isn’t a perfect yardstick, but none are.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

On the one hand, if I had the opportunity, I'd absolutely love a photo with Dan Inosanto, and it wouldn't be for advertising purposes. On the other, I don't think I'd have the cojones to skip out on his training session and then ask for the picture.

I'm no good at keeping track of photos, so I'm mostly only in the group shots or if I go to a seminar with a friend they'll often want to get a picture of us with the instructor.

But looking back, it would be kind of cool if I had a photo album from all those seminars over the last 38 years. If nothing else, I could have tagged them with names and dates and locations so I could remember where they were from.

 

[Xue Sheng]

I've noticed some folks seem to set great store by the number of people they've trained with who are well-known, and by their fame. I also notice that these same people seem to have a different definition of 'trained with' than I do. I consider training with someone to be an ongoing situation. I've attended a few seminars with people who are more-or-less well-known in certain circles of my particular style of karate, but I don't consider myself to have 'trained with them' as they would not know me from Adam if someone mentioned my name to them. I was there when they were there and I did exercises that they were leading many of us in; once or twice. That's not 'training with' someone, is it? They're not my instructor.

I don't doubt that many famous martial artists are also great people to train with, so I kind of get it, but at the same time, it sort of turns me off. Like, training is about training, not how famous the person you train with is, isn't it? The fact that a person is famous is certainly interesting, but is it important? Is that something to try to 'collect' like a person would collect autographs or selfies with famous people?

Anyway, I'm interested in other's take on it. Maybe it's because I don't have a long list of the famous people I've brushed shoulders with, and I'm just jealous. Maybe it's just human nature to want to mention the well-known people we've been around in a training situation.

Interesting, I had a conversation several years ago with one of those "Famous" guys (if you are into Taijiquan) from China...and he was very aware of this. He knew people, in his seminars, he would never consider students, were going to go around telling people he was their teacher, and they trained with him. Which in his view as not true beyond they were at one of his seminars, Which is why he did not take most Americans seriously. This same thing is why some of those Chinese guys that sell DVD/VCD, will show the form slightly different in the video than they would in person. So they can tell right away who actually trained with them, if even for a short seminar

 

[Steve]

Nope. I haven't trained with even a quarter of the guys that I want to. And of the ones that I have, it's mostly just been the occasional seminar, not a personal relationship where we actually know each other.

Trained with... or trained with?

 

[Steve]

Sure, it isn’t a perfect yardstick, but none are.

The perfect yardstick: cork backed, imperial and metric, a hole at the end to hang it when not in use, precision metal edge. It's a thing of beauty.

 

[jmf552]

Things have really changed re: this topic since I started training 50 years ago. Back in the day, for an instructor to get famous, they had to be good. Where I came from, a major midwest US city, you had Okinawan Karate', Tae Kwon Do and Judo to choose from, with a little Japanese Jiu-Jitsu possible on the side. Everyone knew the basics of the lineage and competition record of the local instructors. Challenges, both semi- and full-contact were not unknown and were often accepted. If you put yourself out there as an "expert" you were going have to prove yourself from time to time.

There were occasional charlatans, but they got outed pretty quickly and didn't last long. So if you said you had X belt from Y instructor, that meant something. "Trained with" meant a real lasting relationship. People did not hop around from school to school or style to style.

The "MMA Era" is mostly great, but one of the downsides is that "famous" no longer means "good," there are a crazy number of styles to keep track of and lineages are a hodge-podge. And sadly, schools and styles often get judged by the performance of people who "trained" in them, but didn't hang around long enough to really master what those styles could do.

 

[Holmejr]

“Trained” with is typically take to mean past tense and not currently training with. Most in the MA know the seminar routine and I think most of us would use the term “trained with” to mean an extended period of time. But what is that time frame?
People would come into Inosanto/Bastillo’s Kali Academy to train for a week or so. Would that be considered “trained with”? I’ve only been to one one day seminar. It was Paulsons leg lock seminar at the school I was attending. By the time I got home I could barely remember one or two locks and that is when I had decent memory and could remember where I put my keys

 

[Xue Sheng]

I was just thinking.

I could list famous folks I trained with, but most, outside of CMA, with the exception for one, and another who may only be known from a couple movies and in JMA.....most people would not know who these "famous folks are". So most. although famous within a style or a culture, are not famous outside of that.

But all would be in reality, for the most part, people who had, or were part of a seminar I went to.