Is it appropriate to create a new martial art?

[James Kovacich]

Originally posted by RyuShiKan
I agree with that statement and would like to add that we all “personalize” the art(s) we study merely by studying them.
That is to say we don’t do things “exactly” as our teachers do them……something that is impossible. I can no better imitate my teachers technique than I can walk and talk like him. And to imitate anothers knowledge is merely that……..imitation and not real knowledge. You must make techniques your “own” to truly make them effective.

You clearly understand what you "preach" and I think that by your posts you also "practice what you preach."

With that said. I am asking you at what point do you think that your art becomes differant enough that it needs the name to be changed.

If you take a very differant approach, one that your instructor "definately" does not follow. An approach that your instructor does not beleive in. This approach would include significant changes enough that your instructor may even be offended if you used his name.

Note; I said signifcant changes, not inventing.

In your opinion would it be approppriate to not change the name?

 

[RyuShiKan]

Originally posted by akja

If you take a very differant approach, one that your instructor "definately" does not follow. An approach that your instructor does not beleive in. This approach would include significant changes enough that your instructor may even be offended if you used his name.

It hasn’t happened so I guess I don’t really have to worry about it.

 

[James Kovacich]

Originally posted by RyuShiKan
It hasn’t happened so I guess I don’t really have to worry about it.

I didn't mean you, I meant in general. Some people get confused when I use the word you. I meant it referring to anybody.
Sorry.

 

[Mike Clarke]

I think we all like to think the way we do things is good [no great!], but that's not the same as it actually being great.
To my students, everything I do seems great, but to my teachers I still have a long way to go to get things right.

So at what point do you stop listening to your teacher and start thinking you have 'arrived'?

For me that could only happen when I could physically prove that 'my' way of doing things was better than the methods they have taught me. Also, I'd have to be able to win any arguments they might be able to put up as to why I should continue to practise the techniques I'd been instructed in. I should point out that I'm light-years away from being able to accomplish either of the above.

Much has been made of Shu-Ha-Ri by people who have founded their own systems, but none of them, so far as I can tell, have understood the meaning of this concept. The fact that they see themselves as having reached the final stage, Ri, is proof in it's self that they have missed the mark by miles.

Each of these stages of progress or learning are seen in us by others, not by us. In simple terms, 'Shu' is to follow faithfully and to try and learn all that one can from ones teacher. At this stage we do as we are told and only as we are told.
'Ha' is reached after many years of training [if it's ever reached at all?], and means to make the methods ones own in some respect. To infuse what you know with your own 'feelings' while still adhearing to the teachings of your sensei.
'Ri' is to transend those teachings and emerge with something different from the body of knowledge you have learnt from your teacher.

As I've already said, too many people use this kind of thinking to justify their self proclamation as founders of their own style.
But, as I have also said, to do so is to highlight the depth of their own folly and lack of understanding.

Mike.

 

[Nightingale]

if you have good teachers and respect them...

you stop listening to your teachers and feel you have "arrived" when they tell you so and give you equal rank or send you on to someone else to continue your journey.

 

[James Kovacich]

Originally posted by Mike Clarke
I think we all like to think the way we do things is good [no great!], but that's not the same as it actually being great.
To my students, everything I do seems great, but to my teachers I still have a long way to go to get things right.

So at what point do you stop listening to your teacher and start thinking you have 'arrived'?

For me that could only happen when I could physically prove that 'my' way of doing things was better than the methods they have taught me. Also, I'd have to be able to win any arguments they might be able to put up as to why I should continue to practise the techniques I'd been instructed in. I should point out that I'm light-years away from being able to accomplish either of the above.

Much has been made of Shu-Ha-Ri by people who have founded their own systems, but none of them, so far as I can tell, have understood the meaning of this concept. The fact that they see themselves as having reached the final stage, Ri, is proof in it's self that they have missed the mark by miles.

Each of these stages of progress or learning are seen in us by others, not by us. In simple terms, 'Shu' is to follow faithfully and to try and learn all that one can from ones teacher. At this stage we do as we are told and only as we are told.
'Ha' is reached after many years of training [if it's ever reached at all?], and means to make the methods ones own in some respect. To infuse what you know with your own 'feelings' while still adhearing to the teachings of your sensei.
'Ri' is to transend those teachings and emerge with something different from the body of knowledge you have learnt from your teacher.

As I've already said, too many people use this kind of thinking to justify their self proclamation as founders of their own style.
But, as I have also said, to do so is to highlight the depth of their own folly and lack of understanding.

Mike.

I agree with your mentality except you glide over a couple of things like your instructors don't always have the "all" answers themselves and not everyone creating and training in new systems is claiming to be "Founders!"

The old great ones who are "our" ancestral sensei and found a need to cross the ocean and discover themselves.

My Sifu in Jun Fan was close minded to grappling. I really should not speak of him that way. he was more than my Sifu, he was my friend and I hope to mend the wounds I may have created.

But the truth is, before him, I had already been exposed to grappling and I should not of been asked repeatedly to quit Jujitsu.

I may never arrive but I will always be on the journey. And I most definately do not beleive that we can find all we need in "ANY" one system. It does not exist. The logic I hear, is that I don't spend enough time in one system. I do not beleive that.

I use what is usefull, reject what is useless and add what is specifically my own!!!"

Just as "My Sijo" instructed "All" of his students to do!!

 

[James Kovacich]

Originally posted by RyuShiKan
It hasn’t happened so I guess I don’t really have to worry about it.

You still haven't answered it yet! I clarified what I meant for you!

 

[Johnathan Napalm]

Originally posted by akja
...Benny the Jet went to Thailand to "learn." After "he returned from Thailand" he became undefeated.....

He never went to Thailand to "learn". Don Wilson was the one who actually went to Thailand to learn, after he got his *** wiped. Yet, the second time around wasn't any better. He ended up apologizing to the fans for his poor performance.

The Jet got his *** wiped so bad, he steadfastly refused any challenge from MuayThai fighters. LMAO! His PR people still maintain the farce that he is undefeated.

Also Emin Bostepe supposedly knocked out William Chueng.

Bostepe is also a WC guy, same as Chueng, except that Bostepe is from another branch. Besides, that supposed fight was no more than Bostepe jumping Cheung from behind. The fight was pretty much like a bum fight. I wish Yip Man was there to witness the farce. lol

I would think that there have been many examples of certain arts prevailing over others and always will. That is unless certain arts are not willing to test their skills.

Name some.

 

[James Kovacich]

Originally posted by Johnathan Napalm
He never went to Thailand to "learn". Don Wilson was the one who actually went to Thailand to learn, after he got his *** wiped. Yet, the second time around wasn't any better. He ended up apologizing to the fans for his poor performance.

The Jet got his *** wiped so bad, he steadfastly refused any challenge from MuayThai fighters. LMAO! His PR people still maintain the farce that he is undefeated.


Bostepe is also a WC guy, same as Chueng, except that Bostepe is from another branch. Besides, that supposed fight was no more than Bostepe jumping Cheung from behind. The fight was pretty much like a bum fight. I wish Yip Man was there to witness the farce. lol



Name some.

Beeny said in an interview that he went to Thailand to train.

With Emin I said "supposedly".

I also said " I would think that there have been many examples",
but if you want an example.

In the "Contenders" competition Egor Zinoviev, a Sambo artist, beat the crap out of a Wing Chun guy in about a minute. At least he tried. Most would not of tried at all.

 

[RyuShiKan]

Originally posted by akja
You still haven't answered it yet! I clarified what I meant for you!

what was the question again?

 

[James Kovacich]

RYUSHIKAN,

You clearly understand what you "preach" and I think that by your posts you also "practice what you preach."

With that said. I am asking you at what point do you think that someones art becomes differant enough that it needs the name to be changed.

If they take a very differant approach, one that their instructor "definately" does not follow. An approach that their instructor does not beleive in. This approach would include significant changes enough that their instructor may even be offended if they used his name.

Note: I said signifcant changes, not inventing.

In your opinion would it be approppriate to not change the name?

 

[RyuShiKan]

Originally posted by akja
With that said. I am asking you at what point do you think that someones art becomes differant enough that it needs the name to be changed.

Only if it is so different it can’t be recognized as the original art.

Originally posted by akja
If they take a very differant approach, one that their instructor "definately" does not follow. An approach that their instructor does not beleive in. This approach would include significant changes enough that their instructor may even be offended if they used his name.
Note: I said signifcant changes, not inventing.
In your opinion would it be approppriate to not change the name?

Actually this happened in our system.
George Dillman was a very brief “seminar student” (a grand total of 6 seminars) and decided he had “arrived” and started doing things under the name of Ryukyu Kempo that my teacher was not.
For example:

“Color by numbers kyusho”= Dillman got off on this tangent that atemi & kyusho points were the same as the smaller more difficult to find acupuncture points, which they are not, and would draw these little dots all over people demonstrating the locations….often in the wrong spot.
A friend of mind went to a Dillman seminar and asked him the name of several points he had mentioned. Dillman’s answer was wrong on all counts.

Once Dillman got the boot from our association he hooked up with Wally Jay of SCJJ.
I have heard from many people I respect that Mr. Jay is a good martial artist BTW.
However, Dillman started calling what he had learned from Mr. Jay “tuite”.
SCJJ and tuite are not the same.
Dillman had learned a VERY limited amount of tuite from our association……and I mean very little.
As a side note “Tuite” was a name coined by my teacher for the grappling art he teaches.
It is a combination of the Okinawan word tui and the Japanese word te.
Interesting to see how many people use that word that haven’t ever studied with my teacher.

During all this Dillman was still using the name Ryukyu Kempo.
If you go to Okinawa you won’t find any schools that teach “Ryukyu Kempo”.
The reason being my teacher didn’t want to use the name Okinawan Kenpo that one of his teachers had used. (long story)
Therefore he wanted to use a name that reflected the “old style” Okinawan arts and not the new competition oriented stuff so he chose the old name for Okinawa which is “Ryukyu”. Since much of what we do is from China he used the word Kempo as well.
Now, having said all that, Dillman used to say he did Ishinryu or something along those lines before meeting my teacher. After his 6 whole seminars he started using “Ryukyu Kempo”.
After he got the boot he still used “Ryukyu Kempo”, my teacher wanting nothing to do with the likes of him changed the name of our organization and had it Trademarked so unscrupulous folks couldn’t use it unless they were actually approved members.
Which is kind of sad since martial arts people are supposed to have some moral fiber.

 

[James Kovacich]

Originally posted by RyuShiKan
Only if it is so different it can’t be recognized as the original art.





Actually this happened in our system.
George Dillman was a very brief “seminar student” (a grand total of 6 seminars) and decided he had “arrived” and started doing things under the name of Ryukyu Kempo that my teacher was not.
For example:

“Color by numbers kyusho”= Dillman got off on this tangent that atemi & kyusho points were the same as the smaller more difficult to find acupuncture points, which they are not, and would draw these little dots all over people demonstrating the locations….often in the wrong spot.
A friend of mind went to a Dillman seminar and asked him the name of several points he had mentioned. Dillman’s answer was wrong on all counts.

Once Dillman got the boot from our association he hooked up with Wally Jay of SCJJ.
I have heard from many people I respect that Mr. Jay is a good martial artist BTW.
However, Dillman started calling what he had learned from Mr. Jay “tuite”.
SCJJ and tuite are not the same.
Dillman had learned a VERY limited amount of tuite from our association……and I mean very little.
As a side note “Tuite” was a name coined by my teacher for the grappling art he teaches.
It is a combination of the Okinawan word tui and the Japanese word te.
Interesting to see how many people use that word that haven’t ever studied with my teacher.

During all this Dillman was still using the name Ryukyu Kempo.
If you go to Okinawa you won’t find any schools that teach “Ryukyu Kempo”.
The reason being my teacher didn’t want to use the name Okinawan Kenpo that one of his teachers had used. (long story)
Therefore he wanted to use a name that reflected the “old style” Okinawan arts and not the new competition oriented stuff so he chose the old name for Okinawa which is “Ryukyu”. Since much of what we do is from China he used the word Kempo as well.
Now, having said all that, Dillman used to say he did Ishinryu or something along those lines before meeting my teacher. After his 6 whole seminars he started using “Ryukyu Kempo”.
After he got the boot he still used “Ryukyu Kempo”, my teacher wanting nothing to do with the likes of him changed the name of our organization and had it Trademarked so unscrupulous folks couldn’t use it unless they were actually approved members.
Which is kind of sad since martial arts people are supposed to have some moral fiber.

The Dillman thing is interesting. A few years back a Dillman protoge invited my Sifu to a "seminar" that was to be televised for the Dicovery channel and some magazine coverage.

Well we went and the seminar was totally staged! They had the cameras ready to go and they wanted us to let them "knock us out," the guy even took off his gi and black belt and handed it to me so that I would look good for the camera.

As it went, we were not playing that. We took the producer outside, talked a few minutes, got his buisness card and left. That led to my Sifus magazine article (part 1 of 3) on my site.

About my art it has changed "enough" in my honest opinion but its not really a style. The last few times that I talked to my Sifu I told him that I was calling my art Bujutsu.

I have a new JKD guy that wanted to train with me and my guys and I am learning alot from him. I'm in "absorbing" mode again.

But what I do is I have broken down my art into a methodical way of practicing with or without a partner. Its not always convenient to have someone to train with that is at the same level as you. I know this first hand. Thats why I've worked at putting together a method that could be worked quite a bit by oneself. Making "quality training time" outl of all training time. Making the most effeient use of ones time considering you don't always have a partner. Others do this too.

We can look at it like the home training as being the Yin while the majority of the training being the Yang or vice versa. What matters is that neither are complete without the other. The two equal one whole.

In order to learn to fight, we need to learn the execution of techniques in a profiecient manner. The form, body mechanics, footwork and execution as well as many drills can all be done by oneself.

As you become comfortable with the basics then you will need a partner to work on the sensitivity training, but some of this also can be done alone.

 

[James Kovacich]

Originally posted by Johnathan Napalm
He never went to Thailand to "learn". Don Wilson was the one who actually went to Thailand to learn, after he got his *** wiped. Yet, the second time around wasn't any better. He ended up apologizing to the fans for his poor performance.

The Jet got his *** wiped so bad, he steadfastly refused any challenge from MuayThai fighters. LMAO! His PR people still maintain the farce that he is undefeated.


Bostepe is also a WC guy, same as Chueng, except that Bostepe is from another branch. Besides, that supposed fight was no more than Bostepe jumping Cheung from behind. The fight was pretty much like a bum fight. I wish Yip Man was there to witness the farce. lol



Name some.

Jonathon, Just curious.

Do you have some more examples of Art vs. Art fights?

All that come to mind besides the Gracies at the beginning of the UFC's is back in the '70's on the wide world of sports they had a Kung-Fu guy fight a boxer, each fighting by their own rules. Of course the boxer whooped him.

 

[Johnathan Napalm]

http://members.aol.com/Thaiboxing2000/

BTW, I am afraid I have some bad news for you. The term Kempo JiuJitsu is already been taken decades ago, byMasayoshi Mitose. In 1953, he wrote a book, "What is Self-Defence? Kempo JiuJitsu"

lol I think, "AKJA Kempo JiuJitsu" isn't too bad.

 

[James Kovacich]

Originally posted by Johnathan Napalm
http://members.aol.com/Thaiboxing2000/

BTW, I am afraid I have some bad news for you. The term Kempo JiuJitsu is already been taken decades ago, byMasayoshi Mitose. In 1953, he wrote a book, "What is Self-Defence? Kempo JiuJitsu"

lol I think, "AKJA Kempo JiuJitsu" isn't too bad.

Your right and there are many more after him that have nothing to do with him as well. Actually none of his students that I know of use Kempo Jujitsu at all.

They all have their own newer names that they each say is the correct name.

I did make an attemt to distinguish myself from others by putting a "label" in front of the Kempo Jujitsu, but I think its more proper to leave the"label" off for now.

 

[James Kovacich]

There have been many pros and cons as to why or why not to "create" something with a new flavor. Many negative and I'd say probably less were positive.

After the first automobile was created. Did other companies as well as other countries go ahead and "create" their own of the automobile?

Were these new versions not valid? Yes they were. But based on the things I've read, it would be no.

What about the airplane or the computer? Were all these products related in some way to the original product? Only in name and design and the make up of elements that make up each of these products. The original "creator" of the car did not go to Japan and say "I'm going to help you build a car." Yet Japan is arguably one of the best car builders in the world.

The same goes for every product and service in the world. Where is the connection besides the name?

Of course the martial arts are differant. But isn't everything in the world differant in some way?

 

[rmcrobertson]

Well, yes, sure, fine, da si. In general terms, of course this stuff is true.

Regrettably, the generalities and cliches don't mean a thing.

What's important, in settling this unsettleable question, is this specific situation.

Sigh.

 

[James Kovacich]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Well, yes, sure, fine, da si. In general terms, of course this stuff is true.

Regrettably, the generalities and cliches don't mean a thing.

What's important, in settling this unsettleable question, is this specific situation.

Sigh.

I think you touched it right there. That it is "unsettleable."

Anything imagineable in life will be copied legaly or illegaly. Copyright or no copyright. Pirates will always exist. Whats differant with the arts is its not tangible. So something that is not of real worth will not last.

But this issue still stands. Can there be an acceptable way by all parties? I think not.

 

[DAC..florida]

Everyone seems to agree that martial arts started in either the middle or far east.
I feel that over the years the M.A.'s have evolved just like everything else in this world and i also feel that like the automobile there should be different makes and models, and maybe even new styles but how different or new are they really, doesnt everything stem from the original.