Is knowing one style enough?

[Flatlander]

I believe that there is no quantity of training that is ever enough. If any of us were to "retire" from our training, my bet is we would get a bit rusty. To be at our peak, we need to be continuous. Given the passion with which many of us debate, I would wager that most of us here will be training until we're dead, or incapable of moving.

So, let's not stagnate. If we feel that you have learned all that your art has to offer, then in the spirit of continuity of training, let us find something new which interests us. Maybe something complementary, maybe something completely different. The key point: I can't ever claim to have reached the end of my journey until I run out of places to go.

 

[loki09789]

Well if what your saying is true, then no system does. In that case learning all system of MA would not be "enough". You would have to learn "other" skills such as emergency medicine and survival techniques. But we are talking about martial arts and so in that case only those things that can apply to martial arts. If your saying no system of MA teaches EVOC/Escape and counter ambush driving, then learning all the systems of MA will not be "enough". If your saying that you have trained in those things then when you teach someone these things is what you teach them enough? Because wouldn't that really be "one system"? I guess we could get caught in arguing semantics but in relevance to martial arts skills, I personally think you can get all you need to know about martial arts from one system. After that you would need to search outside of martial arts for these "other" skills you mentioned. I agree that these skills are useful for self defense in some situations, but in the context of martial arts you are only going to learn a set amount anyway, right?



7sm

The problem is that any system will be based on someone or some groups idea of 'complete' and will have thrown out things they did know about or not include things that they weren't even aware of - or the most realistic is that times/technology will change and the system will have to change to keep up.

That is why "Science" is broken down into sub schools of soft and hard or biology or chemistry. Even within those "Schools of science" there are sub sets of "macro/micro/geological/human/flora/fauna..."

As martial artists we study only one of these subsets when we stay in one system. When we seek to explore the whole of Strategy/tactical/self defense training we move outside of one school/art and into the entire field.

One system will not answer all the questions, that is why we have theology as well as biology explaining the origins of life. Two different schools of thought and two entirely different reasonings. Completeness is an individual pursuit. Systems and arts are tools for the pursuit.

 

[kenpo tiger]

My feeling are that any decent style should incorporate all the same things, weapons, self defense, some ground fighting, forms well to me I like them but they could be a option.

Bruce Lee said something to the effect before he started training in martial arts he thought a punch was a punch and a kick was a kick, then he started training, he learned that a punch wasnt just a punch and a kick wasnt just a kick, then he completed his training and now a punch is just a punch and a kick is just a kick.
That being said most arts have the same puches ad kicks. Its the philosophy behind them.
Kempo for example has very hard fast movements which can be mistaken for slapping. But after studing a Japanese system and then taking kempo Ive come to realize that the blocks are virtually the same, the punches are also, what makes it different is the stances and the angles.
Kempo also has weapon techniques using the escrima sticks built nto their self defense techniques and forms.
So with that being said the only difference in systems is the philosophy.

Now there are others such as jujitsu with its ground fighting . I feel a stand up fight should learn a little ground fight in case they end up on the ground. Much like a ground fighter should rake some stand up fighting techniques. But as a stand up fighter Im starting to develope some techniques to reco9ngnize and prevent/counter ground fighters trying to put me on the ground.

I do babble sometimes huh??

No, you aren't babbling. You make some extremely good points, especially the ones referring to ground fighting. To this point in kenpo, I've learned how to take someone down and disable them so they won't be able to get up and fight, but there is really no ground fighting to speak of at my level. I think that's the "good stuff" you begin to learn at black.

BTW, I LOVE using escrima sticks. Believe it or not, I was taught the basics by one of my tkd instructors. Again, the system of kenpo I train in doesn't introduce that form until a fairly high rank in black.

Re: a punch is just a punch and a kick is just a kick. Someone I trained with used to say "you have two hands and two feet, and there's only so many ways to use them."

 

[kenpo tiger]

When you say enough, what are you referring to with that word? If you mean is it enough to master your chosen/current system? Yes, work hard, work smart and be consistent and you will improve. If you mean is it enough for real world self defense? I would say no. No matter how realistic, gritty and encompassing a school/system/art might try and be, real fights are about dealing with variables changing quickly in a potentially deadly way. You can't develop that adaptiveness if you only train in one systematic way. After a while, you can see through the 'mysteries' and the challenges laid before you because you can recognized the patterns of the style.

Stay with a core system that works for you but shake it up by trying/training new stuff. Being the beginner again stimulates/simulates the authentic experience/stress that you have to deal with in real stuff. Take a driving course, horse back riding, gun safety course, civil police programs, .... sort of the "McGuyver" philosophy of training.

I don't train in a system to get better at the system as my primary goal. Self defense preparedness is my primary goal so I get better at my system and can explore other arenas for possible skills/experiences that will accomplish my goal. Even trying hockey as a new sport and finding martial arts discipline and training philosophy helping with that... and finding new things from my hockey that helps with MA training...

I feel that I have benefited from every class I've taken in my short martial arts career of seven years. I'm not expert (yet) in my current art of kenpo, but I work really hard and try to learn all of our techniques with it in mind that they are "ideas" and that I could realistically used pieces of many different techniques in a given situation. The two times I've been confronted with a possibly dangerous situation - being attacked by a man - I've been confident and gotten myself out of them using some basic women's self defense: speaking loudly and confidently, not engaging my attacker in conversation, and keeping what I say to less than five words. Lucky? Yes. Prepared? Absolutely, if I had to fight. Thank goodness I didn't have to.

 

[kenpo tiger]

Hey KT,

That will only make you a better martial artist. Always a student.

KM :asian:

Hey Mama. You know I always listen to what you have to say. I wouldn't have gotten this far if I didn't. Tigrr

 

[kenpo tiger]

I guess my main disagreement with this post is: "Why is it that simply because it is one system it is not enough, but two systems are enough"? Not matter how realistic or encompassing; one system isn't enough simply because it is just that...one system?



7sm

7Starmantis, I think you've hit the nail on the head. Even the great Bruce Lee was constantly changing jkd because he found more efficient or better ways to do things. Don't all ma systems borrow from each other?
Thank you for your comments, as always. :asian:

 

[mj-hi-yah]

mj-hi-ya,
I guess ya can tell Im a geezer huh??? :>)

:boing1: LOL Do you mean like geezer as in old dude? What makes you think I think that?

 

[kenpo tiger]

The key point: I can't ever claim to have reached the end of my journey until I run out of places to go.
Also a great point. I think that my main purpose in asking the question, however, was to explore how much of an art one feels they need to learn - i.e., is it the journey or the destination? For me, it's the journey. It wasn't always, but it is now.

 

[loki09789]

7Starmantis, I think you've hit the nail on the head. Even the great Bruce Lee was constantly changing jkd because he found more efficient or better ways to do things. Don't all ma systems borrow from each other?
Thank you for your comments, as always. :asian:

If it is logically impossible for one man to have all the keys to the kingdom, it is just as impossible for one system to be have all the bases covered in realistic training. It is a sign of humility/integrity/honesty for a man or a system to openly admit that though he/it may have much to offer he/it won't have it all.

Seeking instruction in 'self defense topics' to be prepared realistically for a self defense situation means research into various topics. As a martial artist/self defense artist and instructor, I have never claimed to know all or offer all. I have willingly encouraged students to seek out other instructors, experts and topics so that they can be well rounded.

One system is never enough for realistic preparation. Consider how many martial art systems don't even train students in firearms or vehicular self defense. Why? Because the instructors don't know much on the topic, or aren't teaching for self defense but for artistry and these technological advancements don't fit into that scheme. Self defense is a by product of the artistic. I don't say this as a criticism of instructors, only as an example of some of the real and statistically dangerous threats that people could face that any one martial art system doesn't even address. A quality instructor would simply say that he doesn't know the answer and welcome you to find credible instructors that do.

I have made the joking statement that I sort of adhere to the "McGuyver" school of self defense - learn everything you can get your hands on because you don't know what will come in handy. The most powerful tool we have for self defense is our brains. Train it to be responsive, adaptive, clinical and creative and you can learn to use anything for self defense.

I have heard of a case (anecdotal only because I can't remember the year or news source off the top of my head.) of a woman who was pushed into a dark alley and threatened with rape. She induced herself to vomit and piss on herself - not as a stress reaction but as a conscious defensive tactic. The attacker was revolted (sort of like ruining the meal for the lion when the vultures vomit on the corpse) and left her alone. I don't think that was anything that she would have thought of in a one system mentallity. She remembered it from her college courses on animal behavior... use it all.

One system answers it all mentalllity really seems awefully arrogant to me in the end. I know I will never have all the answers. I DO know that I will know how to research and find those sources/experts who can teach me and others though.

 

[Han-Mi]

I train in TKD as a base art. Until I got my blackbelt I didn't stray much. however, I did learn basic techniques from other arts in order to not be cought off guard in a bad situation. Now that I have had my black belt for a few years I take every opportunity to suppliment my training.

All knowledge is good, and every experience is priceless.:asian:
I just made that up, I think.:idunno:

 

[Brother John]

Enough for what purpose?
Boxing isn't extremely complex, there's not that many moves...but endless skill ability development. I'd think it'd be "enough" if you wanted to be able to defend yourself OK. It's not nearly as complex as Kenpo is.
PLEASE understand, I'm not saying that boxing is better or worse than Kenpo; just that "Enough" is so subjective and vague.

Please help me better understand your question.
Thanks

Your Brother
John

 

[Flatlander]

Please correct me if I'm wrong. I think what Kenpo Tiger is getting at here is "At what point is it OK to say 'There we go, all done learning now, I've got the skills.'"

But I think that the question is more oriented towards finding out where we all stand on this, and less about wanting our advice. (Is that correct, Tiger?)

She has already told us where she stands on this:

is it the journey or the destination? For me, it's the journey. It wasn't always, but it is now.

So I think that its fair to say that there will be a few different schools of thought here.
-Some may answer "when I feel confident enough that I can defend myself"
This will be highly subjective to each individual. Some may just need to know that they can throw a punch. Others may want to be able to do more. I think most of us can agree that whether or not someone can ever be skilled enough to deal with any situation they may face is difficult to know, lest one be tested on the street, over and over and over, and survive to fight again. But wouldn't this just inspire us to continue to train?

-Some may answer "When I get to Black Belt" They may have the notion that this is the end, and at that point they are a master and have reached the end of the road. (I believe that as they get closer to their percieved end, they will realize that its farther away than they thought.)

- Some may answer "Never. This is a way of life" or "Never. I want to teach, and continue to learn." or whatever. These are the people who have become infected with the bug. They're done. Nothing else in life will ever make them feel like this, and they need it.

I would like to think that I'm of the third type, as I do not lust after belts or rankings. But I can't realistically say what my future holds, or how my mindset will evolve.

 

[OC Kid]

7Starmantis, I think you've hit the nail on the head. Even the great Bruce Lee was constantly changing jkd because he found more efficient or better ways to do things. Don't all ma systems borrow from each other?
Thank you for your comments, as always. :asian:

Very true but isnt it the philosophy behind the technique what makes most styles different. But let not forget we can not compare apples with oranges either. Stand up systems must be compared with other stand up systems. ground systems must be compare with ground systems.
One quote that Bruce Lee was famous for take what is useful. He used terms like "classical mess" to describe systems.
Why ?
Because back in his day Shotokan and say Kempo while both good styles wouldnt reconize eath other for example, They all had their own "distinct techniques" as well as TKD. Then Bruce started taking from other styles and incorporating them into his own. His JKD system took elements from all those martial arts includeing boxing and incorporated them into a fighting system. BUT his style means "The Way of the Intercepting Fist" When it was demonstrated to me by a friend of mine who is first generation Dan Innosanto Kali/JKD it looked very much like Wing Chung based. So even though he incorporated elements of other arts he stuck to the basic principals of his art.

Now with that being said. The tournaments of the 70's 80's and 90's has a very strong in pact on martial arts today. TKD to be competitive had to learn to be good punchers, Japanese/Kempo folks had to be good kickers for example. I learned how to put my kicks together at a Kempo school, High/Low/ Spinning/ Double and combined them with punching. Now this isnt reflected in the forms but it is reflected in the fighting philosophies of the systems.
There I go babbling again

 

[7starmantis]

I guess some of the differences come in the definition of martial arts. When I use the term MA I'm describing a system of fighting. There are no martial arts which teach counter ambush driving, in order to learn that you should search out the people qualified to teach that skill. Maybe a police led course or someone who has experience in that skill. A martial arts instructor just deciding to teach counter ambush driving to "complete" his system isn't going to be what your wanting anyway. I think people are using the term martial arts more loosely than I am, allowing it to encompass these other skills. I tend to use the term martial arts to apply only to pure physical self defense. If I wanted to train in shooting I wouldn't search the martial arts section of the yellow pages but rather go down to my local gun shop where the owner (a former SWAT member) teaches gun courses with much greater skill than any Martial Arts instructor I've yet seen. I think its a matter of focusing skills. With more knowledge comes less understanding - from an old Chinese proverb. So to me, when thinking about one system of MA being "enough" I say it most definitely can be, because to me the "enough" we are talking about is pure physical "fighting" self defense. These other skills are outside the realm of MA to what I'm referring to.

7sm

 

[Shinzu]

i think if you are fortunate to crosstrain than go for it. i am in the middle of switching myself. i am still looking for a dojo that is right for me. i know it will be another style and i welcome that. i am not too proud to wear a white belt again and consider myself a beginner. once you stop learning, you stop living.

 

[Flatlander]

I would add that I would personally prefer to become qualified to instruct in my primary art before I endeavor to cross train in another. Reason being that I would like to remain focused on this, for now, to "get it" as best as I can.

 

[kenpo tiger]

But I think that the question is more oriented towards finding out where we all stand on this, and less about wanting our advice. (Is that correct, Tiger?)
It is and it isn't, Flatlander. On the one hand, I DID make the original post just to see what other martial artists think. On the other, I am ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS open to good advice and listening to other people's opinions. My grandfather used to tell me that each day is worth living for what we learn in it. He was a wise man - and a boxer! (Guess I had to catch the 'bug' from somewhere.) I have found that what one style I've experienced may lack, another I've done makes up for it in other ways. Which is the best? Whichever makes you happy and feel like you're whole, as I do when I'm training. I just wish I'd begun when I was younger.

 

[Flatlander]

My grandfather used to tell me that each day is worth living for what we learn in it.
I just wish I'd begun when I was younger.

Me too. Me too.:asian:

Your Grandfather's quote is awesome.

 

[kenpo tiger]

Now with that being said. The tournaments of the 70's 80's and 90's has a very strong in pact on martial arts today. TKD to be competitive had to learn to be good punchers, Japanese/Kempo folks had to be good kickers for example. I learned how to put my kicks together at a Kempo school, High/Low/ Spinning/ Double and combined them with punching. Now this isnt reflected in the forms but it is reflected in the fighting philosophies of the systems.
There I go babbling again
Oh OC. It's not babbling. It's your opinion and it's valuable because everyone's insight into MA is slightly different. I WILL say that keNpo folk do not rely on our kicks. I'm the exception because I've had some tkd and still love using it. My favorite techs for the most part are those involving multiple kicks.

I do disagree with you about kata. All forms are imaginary fights against an imaginary attacker (Kenpo Mama - he's loose again!) or attackers. You can hardly practice fighting with full power when you spar - I know the men in my dojo won't against us women - but you CAN and SHOULD do your forms as if you mean it. Therefore, the fighting philosophy of a style IS reflected in its kata, correct?

 

[kenpo tiger]

Your Grandfather's quote is awesomeHe was an awesome and wise man.