Home Study Courses

[Tez3]

Point out one example. Evan Tanner, former UFC Middleweight champ, taught himself grappling from dvds. Him and his training partners would watch them and then drill them over and over.

Ah but as you say, he and his training partners, I was asking how one can do it all on one's own. He was already a wrestler so watching BJJ moves and making them work was relatively easy for him having down an allied art before.

 

[Tames D]

actually, I personally appreciate the fact that Chris is often willing to speak up and call BS where the BS is rampant. There are a whole lot of bad ideas floating around out there and a whole lot of people who seem willing to give the propagators of these bad ideas a pat on the back and the encouragement to continue. Seems to me that Chris is pointing out these bad ideas for what they are. I agree with him.

People can make their own decisions about it, continue with their bad ideas if they wish, that's their choice to make. But at least people like Chris have given their honest opinion on the subject.

I agree with you FC. That's not what my post was about. I have no probem with a self appointed watchdog for bad martial arts. Re-read my post. Maybe I just didn't communicate very well.

 

[MJS]

seems to me that a big part of the issue lies in a sense of entitlement. Someone wishes to study a particular art, but there are no quality teachers of that art nearby. So people look for an alternate. They don't look for a quality teacher of something else, rather they look for an alternate way to get what they want. Video, distance learning, etc. And people who pursue this method want to believe that it is just as good as having a good instructor, or is at least "good enough." They are delusional.

I just find it weird.

Agreed. Usually in those cases, I suggest the following: 1) Accept the fact that the art that you're looking for is either not in your area or if it is, the quality of teachers suck, 2) travel to the area a few times a month to get training, 3) move to the area where the training is, if possible, 4) Train in something else.

People have done what I said, hell, I've done it myself. After being unsatisfied with the quality of Kenpo in my area, in addition to teachers who are more interested in the $$, rather than training, I began a new path. I thank God every day that I did. My only regret is not starting down that path sooner, but as the old saying goes....better late than never.

 

[Chris Parker]

Not to derail this, what did the first martial artists do? Oh, that's right they just got together and practiced and figured out what worked and what didn't.

See, that's the problem with imagining what you think might be logical and common sense... because this is completely inaccurate. The "first martial artists" by no means "just got together and practiced and figured out what worked and what didn't". They were warriors who managed to survive enough battles to have some idea of something that helped them. As they got better, or at least more noticed, they rose up the ranks, until they were in command. This allowed them to gain insight into military strategy, which would be then further added to by subsequent generations. This then lead to established schools of military strategy and warriorship, which later became the core of martial art systems.

However that is a very general look at it, when you look at the ideas of "original martial artists", it is always in the context of the arts in question. For instance, you could talk about the "first martial artists", and be talking about particular warriors, say, swordsmen from Japan, but that doesn't necessarily mean anything when it comes to the founders of particular systems, even particular sword systems. When looking at said founders, it could be argued that prior to them, the art they taught didn't exist... so they are the "first martial artists" in this context.

That said, I feel you are using the phrase to imply some form of ancient proto-warriors who figured out a better way to clobber someone with a big stick... but I'd say that's completely removed from the idea of a martial artist.

To think that you can't learn to defend yourself without a teacher at all is martial snobbery.

Who's talking about defending yourself? We're talking about learning particular martial arts here. And for that, you need a teacher. Otherwise, all you're doing is mimicking techniques. And that is far from training in a martial art.

A teacher will help your journey go quicker and can make it more effective, but it's not that hard to punch/kick/twist somebody.

Which completely misses the idea of training in a particular martial art. If that's all that was required/desired, there'd be some teacher of some system around. This is when someone wants a particular art, and turns to distance learning.

Now, if you are talking the higher levels and subtleties, then yes you will need one. But, for basics, I'm not so sure.

Basics for what? As an example, I'm rather conversant with some dozen or so systems, as well as being familiar with at least as many again, and each have their own approach to "basics". Some are similar, others are wildly different, and each are unique and particular to each of the arts. If all you want to learn is how to hit someone, learn boxing. But if you want a particular martial art, you need guidance in that martial art. I mean, I train in five different sword systems, and each have different forms of grips, cutting mechanics, postures, angling, distancing, timing, and more. If you just want to be a generic swordsman, that's one thing.. but if you want to learn any of the particular methods, you need someone who understands them to teach them to you. Even (and especially!) the basics, as they form the basis for the entire art.

I'll put it this way, if you think you can learn "just the basics" without an instructor, then go and learn a punch. Just a punch. Then visit as many schools around you and see if the way you learnt is usable in their system. Most likely, the first thing you'd need to do is relearn how to punch if you want to learn those systems.

I agree with you FC. That's not what my post was about. I have no probem with a self appointed watchdog for bad martial arts. Re-read my post. Maybe I just didn't communicate very well.

Care to re-phrase, then?

 

[GaryR]

Hello,


I'm curious if there are any home study courses that are not completely ridiculous. Ideally something with graded levels.

Yes and Yes, quite a few.

Before you burst into laughter...

• I'm in my 40s and am mainly interested in doing this for fun.
• I have a busy life and a number of physical activities I can't swap out for martial arts (i.e., we do stuff as a family and no one else has any MA interest). My free time tends to be at times when no MA studio is open - e.g., 5am.
• I have studied several martial arts but never particularly deeply because I've moved a bit. Six months each in two different styles of kung fu, purple belt in Kenpo.
• It's not vital to me how "effective" what I learn is. In fact, I wouldn't mind something that included a kata portion.
• I would like something with a belt system, as having goals to strive for keeps me motivated.

It is great to identify your training goals up front. Many people have already given good advice. As said before there is no replacement for an actual teacher. Second to that is a video and a good training partner, and hopefully traveling to see the teacher, and others of high level as frequently as possible.

Because you do not care if your material is combat viable, you should look to what you will enjoy the most, what gives the most positive work-out method that is fun, etc. The metrics should be what makes you healthy etc, Tai Chi is great for this, done slowly it is smooth, good on the joints, etc, plus, done quickly is a cardio work out. Coupled with Bagauzhang, spinning and coiling footwork / body mechanics makes it even more entertaining!

I have experience with both learning and teaching via home study courses, I had a few training partners, versed in other things as well. Much like instructor on here, I made them initially for my military students when I deployed. They found it useful, and thus far others have found it useful as well--and that was 10+ years ago.

I will send you a DVD if you like when I start / finish my new volume for the cost of shipping, it may be more on the combative side, but you should enjoy it anyhoo.

Best,

Gary

 

[jasonbrinn]

Honestly, it's not an assumption. Knowing the way martial arts work, the way the training works, and so forth, means that I can categorically dismiss distance learning for actually learning a martial art. Techniques, sure, but not a martial art.

Chris,

I am curious. Could you briefly describe "the way martial arts work, the way the training works?" I think it could be quite possible that some systems "work" and "train" differently then you may know and thus lend themselves just fine to distance learning.

If something or someone finds themselves outside of whatever your response is to "the way martial arts work, the way the training works" does that mean, in your opinion, that it is not a martial art and they are not martial artists?


Thank you,


Jason Brinn

 

[MJS]

Chris,

I am curious. Could you briefly describe "the way martial arts work, the way the training works?" I think it could be quite possible that some systems "work" and "train" differently then you may know and thus lend themselves just fine to distance learning.

If something or someone finds themselves outside of whatever your response is to "the way martial arts work, the way the training works" does that mean, in your opinion, that it is not a martial art and they are not martial artists?


Thank you,


Jason Brinn

Hi Jason,

I know you're addressing this to Chris, so I'll let him answer the question you asked. However, this part caught my eye:

"I think it could be quite possible that some systems "work" and "train" differently then you may know and thus lend themselves just fine to distance learning."

Granted, all systems are different, unless one is content with 'air training' and subpar skills, then I'm not sure how DL could be of any value. Ex: I've done Kenpo for over 20yrs. If I were to pick up a Larry Tatum dvd, and watch it, I'd most likely gain something from it. Why? Because I'm going to be familiar with what he's doing. Could I do the same with a TKD dvd? Sure, I could mimic the moves of the kata, the techs, but as for an in-depth understanding of them? Nope, not going to happen.

I've yet to see a dvd that was so complete, that every single fine point was shown.

 

[Chris Parker]

Chris,

I am curious. Could you briefly describe "the way martial arts work, the way the training works?" I think it could be quite possible that some systems "work" and "train" differently then you may know and thus lend themselves just fine to distance learning.

If something or someone finds themselves outside of whatever your response is to "the way martial arts work, the way the training works" does that mean, in your opinion, that it is not a martial art and they are not martial artists?


Thank you,


Jason Brinn

It's not the easiest thing to put into words, really, and that's a big part of why distance learning doesn't work... but I'll give it a go.

Firstly, I'd highlight the part of my statement that followed the section you bolded, namely: "Techniques, sure, but not a martial art". In other words, there is quite a distinction between learning a martial art, and learning techniques. Learning techniques means that you learn the sequence of mechanical movements, the actions that make up the technique itself. Depending on how it's taught (via DVD, for instance), there may be aspects of the particular power generation, but not always. Learning a martial art, on the other hand, is learning a consistent and congruent way of moving that is then applied through the techniques. For this to be imparted, there needs to be constant guidance by someone who understands the art, which is far more than the techniques, to ensure that everything is done as the art itself dictates. And that simply can't happen by remote learning, as there is no contact to ensure that the art is being learnt with consistency. Add to that the limited scope of a DVD format, and you tend to have students adding in bits and pieces without having it based on actual knowledge of the art in question, as the student simply doesn't have it.

I'll put it this way: Learning a martial art is learning a complete approach which then informs everything done within that context. Learning techniques is learning single aspects devoid of the connection to that more complete approach, which get put together in a more random, haphazard fashion. For instance, I have some students with a variety of backgrounds, some TKD, some Karate, some CMA, and so on, some are still training in the other systems, some left those and then came to me, and so on. And some of these students still feel that what they learnt in the other systems is valid, as they feel the "techniques" they learnt there are strong and effective. Unfortunately, what they're doing (bringing in the methods of other arts, or really, bringing in methods that don't fit with the art I'm giving them) means that the art they're supposed to be learning isn't being learnt, and is being weakened (in them), due to the conflicting, or at least incongruent, methods and mechanics. But, left without guidance, they will continue to use the outside methods and techniques, due to a lack of knowledge of why things are done the way they are in our system. By them attending classes, I can correct them, and explain why things are done one way and not another, and in that way ensure that they are genuinely learning the martial art I'm teaching. Without guidance from someone who is watching each moment to ensure that the art is being followed, there is no way that an art is learnt. The best is that you could learn some techniques. Not a martial art.

 

[DennisBreene]

How would you react if a surgeon told you he had read all the books, watched all the DVDs and practiced diligently on a dummy at home, and now proposed to do bypass surgery on you. The absurdity is obvious. The science and art of medicine takes years of training under people with vastly superior skills than one's initial abilities. Much of the art of medicine is learned at the side of mentors who have the experience and insight to know when a certain technique is the correct choice for a given situation and when it may be fatal in an apparantly identical situation. That differance between technique and art is the same in MA. Books, DVDs etc. may be excellent adjunctive materials. They do not substitute for actual hands on training, and as the more complex builds from a strong foundation in the basics, the greater the risk of serious short and long term injury you face.
Please heed the advise of the many experienced practitioners who have written here and don't be a dilatant. Either find a way to train properly or find another form of physical fitness that will serve you without the risks you face in MA.
With all hope that you find a path that works for you.
Dennis

It's not the easiest thing to put into words, really, and that's a big part of why distance learning doesn't work... but I'll give it a go.

Firstly, I'd highlight the part of my statement that followed the section you bolded, namely: "Techniques, sure, but not a martial art". In other words, there is quite a distinction between learning a martial art, and learning techniques. Learning techniques means that you learn the sequence of mechanical movements, the actions that make up the technique itself. Depending on how it's taught (via DVD, for instance), there may be aspects of the particular power generation, but not always. Learning a martial art, on the other hand, is learning a consistent and congruent way of moving that is then applied through the techniques. For this to be imparted, there needs to be constant guidance by someone who understands the art, which is far more than the techniques, to ensure that everything is done as the art itself dictates. And that simply can't happen by remote learning, as there is no contact to ensure that the art is being learnt with consistency. Add to that the limited scope of a DVD format, and you tend to have students adding in bits and pieces without having it based on actual knowledge of the art in question, as the student simply doesn't have it.

I'll put it this way: Learning a martial art is learning a complete approach which then informs everything done within that context. Learning techniques is learning single aspects devoid of the connection to that more complete approach, which get put together in a more random, haphazard fashion. For instance, I have some students with a variety of backgrounds, some TKD, some Karate, some CMA, and so on, some are still training in the other systems, some left those and then came to me, and so on. And some of these students still feel that what they learnt in the other systems is valid, as they feel the "techniques" they learnt there are strong and effective. Unfortunately, what they're doing (bringing in the methods of other arts, or really, bringing in methods that don't fit with the art I'm giving them) means that the art they're supposed to be learning isn't being learnt, and is being weakened (in them), due to the conflicting, or at least incongruent, methods and mechanics. But, left without guidance, they will continue to use the outside methods and techniques, due to a lack of knowledge of why things are done the way they are in our system. By them attending classes, I can correct them, and explain why things are done one way and not another, and in that way ensure that they are genuinely learning the martial art I'm teaching. Without guidance from someone who is watching each moment to ensure that the art is being followed, there is no way that an art is learnt. The best is that you could learn some techniques. Not a martial art.

 

[Chris Parker]

Hi Dennis.

Was there something in my post that you were commenting on? I'm not sure if you're agreeing with me, and using my post to demonstrate that, or if you're directing your questions to me....

 

[Gentle Fist]

It's not the easiest thing to put into words, really, and that's a big part of why distance learning doesn't work... but I'll give it a go.

Firstly, I'd highlight the part of my statement that followed the section you bolded, namely: "Techniques, sure, but not a martial art". In other words, there is quite a distinction between learning a martial art, and learning techniques. Learning techniques means that you learn the sequence of mechanical movements, the actions that make up the technique itself. Depending on how it's taught (via DVD, for instance), there may be aspects of the particular power generation, but not always. Learning a martial art, on the other hand, is learning a consistent and congruent way of moving that is then applied through the techniques. For this to be imparted, there needs to be constant guidance by someone who understands the art, which is far more than the techniques, to ensure that everything is done as the art itself dictates. And that simply can't happen by remote learning, as there is no contact to ensure that the art is being learnt with consistency. Add to that the limited scope of a DVD format, and you tend to have students adding in bits and pieces without having it based on actual knowledge of the art in question, as the student simply doesn't have it.

I'll put it this way: Learning a martial art is learning a complete approach which then informs everything done within that context. Learning techniques is learning single aspects devoid of the connection to that more complete approach, which get put together in a more random, haphazard fashion. For instance, I have some students with a variety of backgrounds, some TKD, some Karate, some CMA, and so on, some are still training in the other systems, some left those and then came to me, and so on. And some of these students still feel that what they learnt in the other systems is valid, as they feel the "techniques" they learnt there are strong and effective. Unfortunately, what they're doing (bringing in the methods of other arts, or really, bringing in methods that don't fit with the art I'm giving them) means that the art they're supposed to be learning isn't being learnt, and is being weakened (in them), due to the conflicting, or at least incongruent, methods and mechanics. But, left without guidance, they will continue to use the outside methods and techniques, due to a lack of knowledge of why things are done the way they are in our system. By them attending classes, I can correct them, and explain why things are done one way and not another, and in that way ensure that they are genuinely learning the martial art I'm teaching. Without guidance from someone who is watching each moment to ensure that the art is being followed, there is no way that an art is learnt. The best is that you could learn some techniques. Not a martial art.

Very well said.

Reminds me of a moment in my Kenpo days. I was at a training seminar and there was a black belt (maybe like 3rd or 4th Dan - he had a couple red stripes on his belt) that was going over moves being shown. The moves were pretty basic, purple belt level or so. He was fast as heck but when asked by the lead instructor but the purpose of the moves were he didn't have a clue. Most of us that were standing around him were baffled and appalled that he didn't know such basic concepts. He didn't seem to be from any of the schools present at the seminar so we weren't quite sure where he was from.

With that being said, you could see how quickly an art could be lost through just one person. If this guy was to be a teacher his students would only learn the moves and not the art...

 

[seasoned]

As it is with many schools (dojo). In terms of level 1-2-3- techniques, most never get past level 1. Level 1 can be taught from a far, but 2 or 3 needs hands on............., and insight.

 

[WC_lun]

As it is with many schools (dojo). In terms of level 1-2-3- techniques, most never get past level 1. Level 1 can be taught from a far, but 2 or 3 needs hands on............., and insight.

I disagree with this. Level one technique is where you build the base of the system into muscle memory and thought processes. If that is not done properly, anything built upon that is not reliable, at best.

 

[DennisBreene]

Hi Chris,
Sorry if there was any confusion. I completely agree with you and with your indulgence, I was trying to use your post to lay a foundation for my analogy. Hope that clarifies the situation.

Respectfully,
Dennis Breene

 

[jasonbrinn]

It's not the easiest thing to put into words, really, and that's a big part of why distance learning doesn't work... but I'll give it a go.

Firstly, I'd highlight the part of my statement that followed the section you bolded, namely: "Techniques, sure, but not a martial art". In other words, there is quite a distinction between learning a martial art, and learning techniques. Learning techniques means that you learn the sequence of mechanical movements, the actions that make up the technique itself. Depending on how it's taught (via DVD, for instance), there may be aspects of the particular power generation, but not always. Learning a martial art, on the other hand, is learning a consistent and congruent way of moving that is then applied through the techniques. For this to be imparted, there needs to be constant guidance by someone who understands the art, which is far more than the techniques, to ensure that everything is done as the art itself dictates. And that simply can't happen by remote learning, as there is no contact to ensure that the art is being learnt with consistency. Add to that the limited scope of a DVD format, and you tend to have students adding in bits and pieces without having it based on actual knowledge of the art in question, as the student simply doesn't have it.

I'll put it this way: Learning a martial art is learning a complete approach which then informs everything done within that context. Learning techniques is learning single aspects devoid of the connection to that more complete approach, which get put together in a more random, haphazard fashion. For instance, I have some students with a variety of backgrounds, some TKD, some Karate, some CMA, and so on, some are still training in the other systems, some left those and then came to me, and so on. And some of these students still feel that what they learnt in the other systems is valid, as they feel the "techniques" they learnt there are strong and effective. Unfortunately, what they're doing (bringing in the methods of other arts, or really, bringing in methods that don't fit with the art I'm giving them) means that the art they're supposed to be learning isn't being learnt, and is being weakened (in them), due to the conflicting, or at least incongruent, methods and mechanics. But, left without guidance, they will continue to use the outside methods and techniques, due to a lack of knowledge of why things are done the way they are in our system. By them attending classes, I can correct them, and explain why things are done one way and not another, and in that way ensure that they are genuinely learning the martial art I'm teaching. Without guidance from someone who is watching each moment to ensure that the art is being followed, there is no way that an art is learnt. The best is that you could learn some techniques. Not a martial art.

Thanks Chris. Very well put actually. While I appreciate your thoughts and the thoughts of everyone else of similar opinions (and there were some GREAT analogies throughout) I disagree with most of the disagreements on premise from the start.

I understand that there are definitely aspects of training that require a partner to train, however, I have yet to find any material that can not be delivered for practice via long distance methods. Would someone do better with face-to-face instruction? Most likely. Would someone learn faster face-to-face? Possibly. I think these things rely more on learning styles, which could be handled with the method of delivery more than relenting to the students face-to-face preference.

With all of this said, I believe that the answer is YES and YES;

1. Is the best form of instruction face-to-face? YES.

2. Is it possible to quality learn via long distance training? YES.


Just my opinion (from personal experience),


Jason Brinn

 

[WC_lun]

Jason, with all due respect, fighting is not about the movements or techniques performed by themselves. They are about a codified way of training the body and mind to work a certain way when confronted by another human being intent on violence. Performing techiniques in air does next to nothing to address the issues of force, timing, distance, adrenaline, etc that are neccesary to learning self defense. Fighting is not a single person activity and therefore cannot be trained effectively as a solo activity.

Granted, the movements can help a person learn the basic body mechanics, but not if there is no experienced input to correct mistakes. A beginner cannot learn martial arts from media and solo training. I do think an experienced martial artist can gain a lot from media training, but only if they have a solid understanding of the basics of the system represented. If the goal of training is just excercise or something of that sort, then solo training would benefit a person. However, I would think an excercise or dance routine would be more effecient and effective.

 

[Chris Parker]

Thanks Chris. Very well put actually. While I appreciate your thoughts and the thoughts of everyone else of similar opinions (and there were some GREAT analogies throughout) I disagree with most of the disagreements on premise from the start.

Hmm, are you saying that you're disagreeing with what I'm saying, not based on what I've said (which was answering your question), but because you disagree with the premise in the first place? Not really sure why you asked me for my take, then....

I understand that there are definitely aspects of training that require a partner to train, however, I have yet to find any material that can not be delivered for practice via long distance methods. Would someone do better with face-to-face instruction? Most likely. Would someone learn faster face-to-face? Possibly. I think these things rely more on learning styles, which could be handled with the method of delivery more than relenting to the students face-to-face preference.

With all of this said, I believe that the answer is YES and YES;

1. Is the best form of instruction face-to-face? YES.

2. Is it possible to quality learn via long distance training? YES.


Just my opinion (from personal experience),


Jason Brinn

Honestly, the fact that you're talking about "aspects of training", "needing a partner" etc tells me that you're only looking at the "technique" side of things. In other words, not a martial art. Really, techniques have a chance to be learnt this way, but not martial arts. And that's also from experience.

 

[MJS]

Thanks Chris. Very well put actually. While I appreciate your thoughts and the thoughts of everyone else of similar opinions (and there were some GREAT analogies throughout) I disagree with most of the disagreements on premise from the start.

I understand that there are definitely aspects of training that require a partner to train, however, I have yet to find any material that can not be delivered for practice via long distance methods. Would someone do better with face-to-face instruction? Most likely. Would someone learn faster face-to-face? Possibly. I think these things rely more on learning styles, which could be handled with the method of delivery more than relenting to the students face-to-face preference.

With all of this said, I believe that the answer is YES and YES;

1. Is the best form of instruction face-to-face? YES.

2. Is it possible to quality learn via long distance training? YES.


Just my opinion (from personal experience),


Jason Brinn

You are correct, and distance learning is fine, as long as the person understands and accepts the fact that what they learn, will be sub-par at best. If someone is OK with that, then fine.

 

[James Kovacich]

How would you react if a surgeon told you he had read all the books, watched all the DVDs and practiced diligently on a dummy at home, and now proposed to do bypass surgery on you. The absurdity is obvious. The science and art of medicine takes years of training under people with vastly superior skills than one's initial abilities. Much of the art of medicine is learned at the side of mentors who have the experience and insight to know when a certain technique is the correct choice for a given situation and when it may be fatal in an apparantly identical situation. That differance between technique and art is the same in MA. Books, DVDs etc. may be excellent adjunctive materials. They do not substitute for actual hands on training, and as the more complex builds from a strong foundation in the basics, the greater the risk of serious short and long term injury you face.
Please heed the advise of the many experienced practitioners who have written here and don't be a dilatant. Either find a way to train properly or find another form of physical fitness that will serve you without the risks you face in MA.
With all hope that you find a path that works for you.
Dennis

(Playing devils advocate here)
What if you were in an "outback" wilderness situation and that same "home-trained" surgeon was "all you had" to save your life "or die?" Would you choose death? Please don't say that's differant. We are using your analagy.

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk

 

[ballen0351]

I just don't get why people get so wrapped up around the my martial arts taught by a person is better then your martial arts taught by a TV screen. Who cares? Its not like were walking around every day having death matches on the street corner. You wanna learn something go learn it. You wanna learn from a book have fun you want to learn from a person have fun. But to say oh you will never really know it is just silly what makes you think your better then anyone else. At the same time I don't get why people come to martial arts forums looking for approval about their plan to home study. If you want to do it then go do why do you care what we think? Hell half the people on this site could be 14 year old kids for all you know and you care what we think?