Less formality than what? I've been training for about 26 years. Ten of them were spent in formal schools with uniforms, etc. But I've trained in groups where people wore baggy jeans and Doc Martens to practice, classes where people called the teacher "dude" rather than "sir," etc. But there was still a teacher.
How? If we're talking about someone who is literally self-teaching (i.e., teaching themselves from the ground up), then odds are decent that they're either taking longer to work out correct technique or speedily developing incorrect technique. The OP stressed empirical research. Doing that on your own, versus availing yourself of an experienced teacher, is not going to be quicker. Not if you're doing it right.
you can pick and choose what you wish to learn and your own speed of progress
Again, it seems to me that this hinges on one's ability to make informed training decisions. And where does that sense come from, if not from experience?
more discipline. you have to motivate yourself
One doesn't necessarily follow from the other. It's easy to tell yourself that you've had a good workout. That you've done enough reps. That your form is good enough. Convincing an experienced coach of same is often harder. And he's offering a different perspective on your performance. People are notoriously bad at evaluating their own performance objectively (in either direction).
quality control, instead of learning the seven hundred movements of a art learn the hundred that you like the most and are the most effective.
"Like the most" is a conclusion that you can reach on your own. But "most effective"? How do you determine that if you're self-teaching?
Anything questionable you wont waste your time learning. Toss it out.
Sure. It'll be like when we were in school, saying "when am I ever going to need math?!"
Good thing nobody let me toss math out.
without mentioning names a certain one comes to mind where they tossed out a hundred of the ones above blackbelt, revamped the program, added some different ones. If you think about that for a minute that was a hundred things someone before that was learning that someone else suddenly thought was a unnecessary waste of time. How would you like to be the one wasting five years learning a hundred things that were decided were not needed? self decided quality control. If everyone else can screw with a art then why cant you cater it to yourself?
One's ability to do what you describe is directly correlated with their experience level. People with little experience tend to confuse "worthless" and "I can't do this well." I wouldn't want a self-taught auto mechanic deciding what I did and didn't need in my car either.
You won't have to learn something then make it your own. You can make your own curriculum and just keep it your own.
What does that actually mean though?
More options. Yes, that is right . MORE OPTIONS. You can blend whatever you want with what. No repeating katas you dont like. Make your own sequence. No repeating moves you dont believe are effective anyway. No learning techniques and spending hours on them, days on them, which prove pointless. But you can add WHATEVER YOU LIKE without being concerned about failing your next belt test or not performing it correctly, just as so.
Again, you're describing the benefits to someone
with a background already. If an experienced practitioner decides to customize his training, then sure. I've ditched kata from my own practice. But I believe you need to understand a tool, know what it does, before you pitch it.
Besides, as before, there's a whole range of established training methods that embrace a whole range of training philosophies. Stripped-down self-defense. Competitive training. Philosophy in motion. In my view, your efforts are better spent identifying something that provides what you want.
I agree with you on avoiding accountability in some cases. However in others it may make one more accountable. They have no one to blame but themselves, no one to motivate them but them, and no one to ensure they are disciplined enough to continue it, but them.
That assumes that most people who go this route will train up to some inner-held ideal. Rather than modifying the ideal to closer match up with their performance. I don't have data, but I'm wagering that the latter happens a lot more than we'd like to admit.
Perhaps why most people fail at self training. It is actually HARDER. But if someone really loves the arts it might be a option. They would have control over their own path, to choose and make as they go, instead of being pushed along anothers. I can see how learning a art from someone could restrict a persons full potential as much as help them. It restricts what they learn, how they learn it, how they apply it in most cases, and what can be added to it or taken away as it is often discouraged by the formal testing and necessitys required for achieving rank.
You're describing the most formal learning environments and talking as though they represented the full range of supervised training. There comes a point in most experienced martial artists' lives when they start to take this more independent approach.
Also if you make your own path, you may be able to like it more. Anything you like, that you feel comfortable with, especially that you choose your way as you go, you will be more likley to excel in. So as many drop out of different arts because they basically dont like it, one could choose the other method and excel without facing the misery of repeating things they dont like, dont want to know, and dont think they can apply which isn't them.
Nobody can apply something until it's properly trained. If someone doesn't like a style, that's fair enough. But the web is full of people who wanted to be founders of this, sokes of that, and grandmasters of the other. Most of them go on and on about freedom of expression, their "own paths," and what is and isn't for them.
Being forced through a art is not for all people. It may actually discourage them, make them learn things they do not want to, make them learn things they cannot apply, make them learn things that just isn't who they are. Basically a discouraging kill joy. They end up beating their head off a wall instead of progressing. Or progressing so pain stakingly slow they would have been better off on other endeavors. Perhaps why so many dont achieve the upper ranks. Not because they can't, but because they dont want to.
Yeah, why do that when you can just self-teach and say that you're whatever rank you like.
The spiritual side and history. yes, you can avoid this as well. As well as all those historic neat little things you might learn or follow that you can't apply to much of anything. I remember having to read and memorize shaolin kenpo history when i was a kid. The little story about the mountain and the monks blah blah blah.......Understand the spirtual side etc. And escrima. (another art that was sliced and diced depending on the purpose and students) Looking back i dont regret it. But it isn't for everyone. I didn't like it at the time it bored me silly. You can avoid much of that with self teaching and leave the spiritual, history, and take what you wish to know.
I studied taekwondo for five years without learning a jot of history. Those schools exist. And you can still benefit from the technical instruction.
As for eskrima, that's a topic near and dear to my heart. Fascinating history. But, again, I've practiced it for 20 years and haven't faced a whole lot of formalized spiritual instruction.
disclaimer: before i get flamed for this post please realize i would always recommend learning from a qualified instructor first. And even in self training at least take a minimum of classes from a qualified instructor even if it means only paying for a occasional private class. This post is a reflection of my understanding that not all people are intended to learn through formal classes and that occasionally a person may exist that would be capable of better progression through self training if they have natural ability and insight.
Again, self-training is different from self-teaching. Maybe there are people out there who will actually perform better on their own. But I'd say that, for the majority of people, it's a recipe for mediocrity.
That's just my view. Subject to change if I start seeing self-taught people who actually look like they know what they're doing.
Stuart
