Is knowing one style enough?

[kenpo tiger]

Please help me better understand your question.

Well, Brother John, it isn't so much a question as seeking opinions of other martial artists. My current style is Parker American Kenpo - and my sifu always tells us that the techs are ideas, which I love. We occasionally do a drill where we partner with other students and have to compose our own tech. Our curriculum is a combination of the old and new Parker systems, all 170 techs of it. What it does, in my opinion - please, those of you reading this and getting ready to hit the quick reply - is it teaches us the basic ideas Ed Parker wanted to convey within the scope of any number of attack scenarios. We learn extensions on some of the basic techs once we get to the brown belts, and even then, it's quite easy to do a tech with an extension AND add to it. In other words, it provokes thought and from thought, action. Does that sort of help?
(love your Ninja Turtle avatar - my sons were huge fans when they were little)

 

[Gary Crawford]

What an interesting thread!So many schools of thought here.Let me weigh in on this.I've done tons of cross training in my life,not by choice.After six years of Kenpo and a brand new bb,my parents decided to move to another state that had no Kenpo schools.I toured the schools around my new town and found none of them worked for me,I was young and not open minded enough to accept a new style,so I decided to just be a teenager.When I enter the AF,I got the bug again and when I finally got to my permanant base,I started looking to train again.I met a guy one day who was puting together a MA club.We had four TKD BB's, a Shotokhan BB,and me.At first we all got along very well,after a few weeks we had about 20 guys who wanted to learn,that's where the trouble started.All of a sudden,we had a class to teach and the TKD guys insisted on dominating the whole thing.I liked learning from the tkd BB's,but I also wanted to do more than just kick.My Shotokhan freind and I decided to just train together and learned alot from each other.We were sparring one night in the base gym and got quite a crowd watching us.After we were done,we noticed that most of the TKD guys were there watching.The beginners asked us to do a class for them.We both went and Talked to the TKD BB's about it and finally got them to do a mix.It went great from then on.I learned that every style has a unique and effective aproach.After leaving the AF,life got in the way most of the time until my own kids wanted to learn MA.I decided to let them take TKD classes since that was the most availible(and probably the most fun for kids)in my area.It didn't take long for me to get the bug again.I found a JKD instructor and started training again.Four years later,I find myself returning to Kenpo for awhile to re-learn some things,breaking them down,tossing away what I don't care for,then adding what's left to jkd.Now days, I find myself a subsciber to all schools of thought.In some ways,I wish that I stayed a Kenpo student,but I never had that as an option.I do apreciate the way things have worked out because I have developed a certain "seasoned understanding" that I might not have if I had just stayed with Kenpo.

 

[Flatlander]

Gary. with that kind of multiple background, do you find that many of the people with whom you train currently have particular weakness common to their particular styles? (provided they've been exposed to just one kind) Has this allowed your an easier time with integrating them?

 

[vincehardy3]

I'll chime in on this topic also. I study the "internal" systems of kung-fu (Xingyiquan, Baguaquan, and Taiqiquan). In the past, and I'm talking about 100+ years ago, the internal martial artist "cross-trained" with one another. History tells us that there were Xingyi and Bagua practitioners that crossed fists/palms in the past. After the fight there was a mutual respect for one another's art. So, the Xingyi practitioner would learn Bagua, and the Bagua practitioner would learn Xingyi. Later, Taiqi was thrown in there. All three systems are separate distinct arts with their own governing principles and theories.


With the knowledge base of all three systems the practitioner had a serious arsenal to pull from. Xingyi is considered to be a linear system, which utilizes techniques that drive through (create wedges) the opponent's technique. Bagua is considered to be a circular based system. All techniques are delivered from angles. Taiqi teaches the principle of receive/return. The opponent is getting back double of what they tried to dish out. Now, if you combine these three principles the outcome could be hurtful for the opponent. Systems like Liu He Ba Fa, and my system of study (Yiliquan) have combined these principles effectively.

My point is that most martial artists have cross-trained. Those of us that have cross-trained have pulled what we feel is most effective for us and kept it. I studied Wing Chun in the past, and some of the training that I received bleeds over into what I do now. I must say that this is the case for most of us.


Just some more money added to the pot.


Vince Hardy

 

[OC Kid]

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?

Think you misunderstood what I was saying about kata. I didnt mean that it was useless. I meant that the high kicks and techniques that are incorporated in freestyle sparring arent reflected in the kata.
Kata to me is the root/soul of any system.

 

[Gary Crawford]

Gary. with that kind of multiple background, do you find that many of the people with whom you train currently have particular weakness common to their particular styles? (provided they've been exposed to just one kind) Has this allowed your an easier time with integrating them?

No,I don't find too many peticular weaknesses within a style,now I have found some within certain schools.I won't elaborate on who.

 

[Flatlander]

No, not a problem on the elaboration. So you attribute the specific weaknesses to particuar instructors? Are there common traits amongst them? (lineage, age, etc?)

 

[cfr]

I guess the real question here is: how much is enough? How much of an art do you need to have to understand its basics?
And, is it worthwhile to train up to Intermediate or Advanced rank and then move on if you find the art isn't a good fit?

[To explain 'a good fit': you are enjoying your training (that's why we all keep going back, isn't it?), you like and work well with the other people in the dojo/dojang, and you like your instructor(s) and have a good working relationship with him/her/them.]

I guess it depends on who you ask. Ive been very criticized by my bouncing around. I left one style after 6 months because I realized that it was a McDojo. I left another after 3 months beacuse I realized that katas just werent for me. I was recently considering changing again because I found out how long it takes to spar. (Though Ive decided to stay for the now because I like so many other aspects.) No matter how bad it is in the eyes of some that I left those 2 schools, Im really glad I did. I dont buy into the mind-set that if you stay in something you think is rediculous long enough you will eventually come to see how wonderful it truely is. Im glad it only took me a relatively short time to realize I was in a McDojo. Im also glad it took even less time to figure out that I hate doing katas. (Please no kata wars here, they just arent for me. I think its great if you like them. ) IMO, if you truely beleive that what you are doing is an absolute waste of time, kick rocks and go elsewhere. Where Im at now is definately not perfect, but I do beleive in it. Which is why Im staying for the moment.

 

[FasterthanDeath]

MCDOJO!!!! ! Man I am sorry I am stealing that from you!! Thats the best way to put it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[FasterthanDeath]

When it comes to mixing arts, if you feel that you are not learning everything you need to feel comfortable than yes. I really dont recommend it because of the simple fact that when we are younger are brains are like a sponge, but when we get older that sponge begins to turn into a rock. We only learn one way at a certain point. And to unlearn something or add it on is not hard, just confusing for some. It wasnt for me, but for the majority of my students it was. But if you want more knowledge, and would like to dive into it, by all means. We can never stop learning.

 

[kenpo tiger]

MCDOJO!!!! ! Man I am sorry I am stealing that from you!! Thats the best way to put it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dear Faster Than Death,

Great screen name.

McDojo, Karate Lite - all the same, especially when you've gotten yourself into one. Been there, done that, HATED IT AND GOT OUT. But I have to agree - McDojo is a good one. KT

 

[Gary Crawford]

No, not a problem on the elaboration. So you attribute the specific weaknesses to particuar instructors? Are there common traits amongst them? (lineage, age, etc?)

Each instructor has their favorite things to concentrate on and tend to vaguely cover or ignor other thing because either they are not good at them or they are not reality self defense based.Take Taekwondo for example,some instructors emphisize front leg sliding sidekicks and others don't,some teach total attack sparring,others teach counter attack sparring.In both instances,both schools of thought are good,but teaching both would be better than just one or the other.When my son was coming up through the TKD ranks,I changed his school when he was a blue belt.The new school (Dojang) was also part of the USTU,but they taught completly differently,they were better,but still lacked something.So I started driving him 100 miles away to Knoxville to train at another school on Saterdays.This gave him several ways of sparring.The result was that he brought home 1st place trophies from every tournament he went tver the years of my own training,I find every school has their own characteristics that every student who has been there for any period of time has varios degrees of.I really don't advocate school hopping unless the school you are at doesn't do something you need to do.I don't think of sparring as the same as real fighting,but a good way to develop reflexes,but sparring with the same people over and over doesn't do you any favors.If you want your sparring experience to benifit you,variety is vital.

 

[FasterthanDeath]

Thats what I am surronded by where I live. Mcdojos. If you pay 2000 dollars in two years you can get your very own black belt! Whats really sad is that you would think that this policy would change when school after school pops up, but it doesnt.

 

[Flatlander]

Each instructor has their favorite things to concentrate on and tend to vaguely cover or ignor other thing because either they are not good at them or they are not reality self defense based.Take Taekwondo for example,some instructors emphisize front leg sliding sidekicks and others don't,some teach total attack sparring,others teach counter attack sparring.In both instances,both schools of thought are good,but teaching both would be better than just one or the other.When my son was coming up through the TKD ranks,I changed his school when he was a blue belt.The new school (Dojang) was also part of the USTU,but they taught completly differently,they were better,but still lacked something.So I started driving him 100 miles away to Knoxville to train at another school on Saterdays.This gave him several ways of sparring.The result was that he brought home 1st place trophies from every tournament he went tver the years of my own training,I find every school has their own characteristics that every student who has been there for any period of time has varios degrees of.I really don't advocate school hopping unless the school you are at doesn't do something you need to do.I don't think of sparring as the same as real fighting,but a good way to develop reflexes,but sparring with the same people over and over doesn't do you any favors.If you want your sparring experience to benifit you,variety is vital.

So then, would you conclude that if someone was, in fact, enjoying their art, but felt that they were stagnating somewhat, that a good idea might be to check out another instructor's approach to the same art? If so, then I completely agree with you. I think that this is the only way to truly claim knowlwdge in an art. By looking at an issue from many angles, we can better understand the qualitative truths of the issue, and thereby address it more effectively. Kind of like looking at a soup can from the top. You see a circle, but if you look from another angle, you see a rectangle. Mesh the ideas, and you understand the cylinder. Open it up, mmmmmmmm soup.

 

[Gary Crawford]

Flatlander,with you being a JKD guy,you should know that philosiphy applies.All ideas are good sooner or later.

 

[MisterMike]

As Musashi put it, "Become aquainted with every art."

Key word, aquainted.(Of course this is form the best translation I have on hand)

I look at it as we are all studying the same thing but for different reasons, which is why people get hung up on questions like this.

If it is solely for self-defense, then yes, you'd better study everything as deep as you can and even if you do you are still not going to be #1 out there.

If you use your martial art training as a Way, then you will reach the same place as the carpenter who studies his trade. He may be an expert framer, but he better know a little about interior finishing.

 

[Gary Crawford]

Nice analogy Michael!

 

[Tgace]

http://www.samurai.com/5rings/

 

[Dronak]

How much is enough probably depends on what you're after. For example, if you mainly just want exercise and to stay in shape, I'd imagine that almost any art could do that for you even if you only stick to the beginner/basic level. If you're looking for self-defense skills, you might need to try a few styles so that they cover each others' weaknesses. I'd think it would be hard to find one style with no weak points; if that existed wouldn't everyone study it, leaving most other styles to fade away? If you're trying to dig as deep as possible and learn everything you possible can about an art, you may check out a few to see what you want to study, but then study only that one art for the rest of your life. If you want a broad, general knowledge, it might pay to study a lot of different arts, as many as you could over time, in order to learn the basics of as many arts as you could. You might not advance very far in any particular one, but you'd have a lot of varied basic knowledge and experience to use. So I don't know. I think you should just do whatever suits your needs at the time. Do what's best for you.

 

[7starmantis]

I'm really getting curious as to why the prevailing idea is that one system or art cannot be enough. I'm not against "cross training" I know several people that do it and are extremely good fighters, but I also know several who don’t and also are extremely good fighters. Why is it we can't believe that in one art or system the principles can apply to any situation? The biggest argument I hear is ground fighting. You have to supplement some ground fighting art in order to be effective. Why? Why can't your current system's principles still apply from standup fighting to ground fighting? I can see the idea that if you never ground fight your doing yourself a disservice and I completely agree, but why is it we believe so strongly that you can't stay in one system and learn both stand up and ground fighting? If you study one art that is pretty inclusive, and you stick to the principles of the system, those principles should adapt to any situation and work with any type of attack. If not, maybe that system isn't as inclusive as we thought. I'm not trying to say I know it all, but I have seen a 60 year old man who has studied nothing but taiji his whole life throw a 225 pound 22 year old MAist who is competing in full contact fighting and winning. If it is true that one system cannot be "enough" then I don’t see how this could possibly be happening. I know, the old guy's skill level is above the young guy’s level. I can see that to a point, but that can't always be the answer. I've seen fighters come in to our school who have been training in many different systems, sometimes with multiple black belts. They all take a class and then want to fight my sifu. Rarely does he even give them the time of day, but sometimes he lets them do a little fighting with him. I've never seen one spend more than a few seconds with him before either tapping out or lying on their back. Many have become students, many have not, but why is it he has such a high skill level and can use his principles with any style fighter and he has only studied one system? It has to be that it is possible to adapt your principles, even those of one system to any given situation.



Ok, I'll stop babbling, I'm just interested to see why we believe we must learn so many different system in order to be a really good fighter. Thoughts?




7sm