I don't see the point of style based organizations, the only relationship that should matter is the one between a student and their instructor.
I think it depends a lot on what you want out of your training. If the purpose is to learn to defend yourself and nothing else, then yes, one would think the quality of instruction would be paramount, not the organization from which the trainer claimed certification or approval.
However, if the training is at least in part due to a desire to learn a particular style of martial arts, and to keep that training as authentic as possible according to a particular organization, then I think it would make more sense to belong to such an organization.
Even within Isshin-Ryu, there is tremendous variation in style. Will all of those changes work in self-defense situations? I don't know, but probably, sure. But they're not all what was intended by Shimabuku Soke. Each Isshin-Ryu organization claims to cleave the closest to what he taught; but I am satisfied with the legitimacy claims of the UIKA, and so this makes sense for me to join. No disrespect intended to any other organization.
What are the benefits of an organization? Standardization? Who cares?
Well, anyone for whom standards are important, I guess.
Even in my newness to martial arts training, I see clear differences between the kata and bunkai taught by various students of various lineages. Is this important? It is to me.
So you ask 'who cares'? I care.
How many associations are big enough that if you did actually move to someplace new that there is a greater that 50% chance there is actually an instructor from that organization in place already.
Not that great, unfortunately. However, that situation won't improve if dojos and students don't join. It's a Catch-22. The NRA wasn't a power in Congress until it was. It didn't matter until it did.
Recognition? From who? The general public doesn't give a rat's *** because the name is generally meaningless and when was the last time you thought “ooh, he’s from the AAAA organization, he must be a badass?” As experienced martial artists you know the uh, “wide range” of capabilities that instructors from any particular organization can exhibit.
Only from fellow Isshin-Ryu stylists who know who Master Mitchum is (which would be all of them). His approval carries weight.
I have met several people on MT who are self-proclaimed black belts in a variety of styles. I don't know what their abilities are, but from listening to some of the advice they have given (and having seen some of their videos on YouTube (OMG!), I suspect they don't know beans about beans.
I am not suggesting that one has to be affiliated with any respected organization to become an excellent martial artist, but I do suggest that I'm more willing to listen to one who has the credentials to back up what they're saying.
I completely understand and support the use of competition based organizations for sports, that is an area where some level of standardization and organization is important. But I largely think the large associations are about money not the art. If each instructor just worried about producing quality students and instructors, the art is secure, and the need for an organization goes out the window.
I don't think that's necessarily true.
Have you ever taken part in one of those things where the class lines up and the teacher whispers a secret into the ear of the first student, who then whispers it into the ear of the second student, and so on to the last student? In the end, the 'secret' is repeated back and it has NOTHING to do with the original statement made by the teacher, usually hilariously not even close. Like that.
A student learns and at some point goes out on their own. One hopes they continue to train even as they become teachers themselves, and hopefully their own teachers continue to train, etc. But as people move, as they lose touch with their original teachers, as they develop physical challenges, and so on, they change and alter their own styles; and guess what? They teach those changes to their students. In a couple generations, what they teach has no resemblance to what was taught to the their teachers or their teacher's teachers.
I have been told of a sensei who became, shall we say, quite large in the middle. As a result, he performed his 'stack hands' with an exaggerated reach-around his large belly. I know how that is, I have to reach a bit myself. However, this man was a sensei, so I am told that one can identify his students to this day; they all perform the same movement, even though they themselves are not heavyset. Presumably they also teach this to their students now.
I have trouble keeping my feet straight when I should be in a seisan stance. I hope to cure this deficiency, but supposing that after years of being on my own without guidance from an organization that sets standards, I drift into my usual splay-footed stances? I suppose that is what I would teach, or at the very least, that is what my students would notice and emulate.
What I'm saying is that even with the best of intentions, instructors change things without meaning to. To suit their own thoughts, to suit their own imperfections, or even due to physical conditions such as being overweight or having a bad knee, etc. This gets passed on to their students, and the style begins to drift. That may not make it less effective as self-defense, but it does change it from what it was in terms of the authenticity of the style.
I am also not saying that styles can never change; but I am a student of Isshin-Ryu and that is what I wish to learn; not someone's idea about where Isshin-Ryu was wrong and so he inserted his own ideas about what should be done instead. He may well be right; and more power to him;
but that's not what I want to learn. As a student, knowing that my dojo is affiliated with the UIKA means I am learning authentic Isshin-Ryu as taught by Master Mitchum, who learned it from Shimabuku Soke. This is important to me, even if it is not important in the grand scheme of things.
Is it worth $25 a year? Absolutely.
