Is My Style the Best?

[Flying Crane]

I don't really even know what there is to discuss here, honestly.

This topic is a matter of opinion, based on your view of what you do. What someone else thinks of what you do is immaterial and literally does not matter.

I guess some people like to argue for the sake of arguing.

 

[Steve]

I don't really even know what there is to discuss here, honestly.

This topic is a matter of opinion, based on your view of what you do. What someone else thinks of what you do is immaterial and literally does not matter.

I guess some people like to argue for the sake of arguing.

You started the thread. Have you forgotten? And now you're saying, "I don't really even know what there is to discuss." That's pretty hilarious.

 

[jobo]

You started the thread. Have you forgotten? And now you're saying, "I don't really even know what there is to discuss." That's pretty hilarious.

I think he posted an announcement thread rather than a discussion thread, there seems a lot of that on here, were people get uppity if yo u disagree with the op

 

[drop bear]

I don't really even know what there is to discuss here, honestly.

This topic is a matter of opinion, based on your view of what you do. What someone else thinks of what you do is immaterial and literally does not matter.

I guess some people like to argue for the sake of arguing.

Well my only issue is these statements are everything that is wrong with martial art.

That martial art is some sort of belief system and not a practical one.

And that other peoples input is not important.

 

[drop bear]

You started the thread. Have you forgotten? And now you're saying, "I don't really even know what there is to discuss." That's pretty hilarious.

Maybe we were just supposed to appreciate the wisdom rather than look at the statement with a critical eye.

I tend to have these conflicts a bit.

 

[Xue Sheng]

You guy read a lot more into the OP than i did, frankly I interpreted it as if you don't like it change it, if you do like it, train it and as more of an opinion than a statement of sage wisdom.... but then I was not threatened by it either so.... rage on...there are many windmills to tilt with and I have better things to do.

 

[Steve]

I think he posted an announcement thread rather than a discussion thread, there seems a lot of that on here, were people get uppity if yo u disagree with the op

Lots of folks laying traps.

You guy read a lot more into the OP than i did, frankly I interpreted it as if you don't like it change it, if you do like it, train it and as more of an opinion than a statement of sage wisdom.... but then I was not threatened by it either so.... rage on...there are many windmills to tilt with and I have better things to do.

So passive aggressive.

 

[Xue Sheng]

So passive aggressive.

pas·sive-ag·gres·sive
adjective

1. of or denoting a type of behavior or personality characterized by indirect resistance to the demands of others and an avoidance of direct confrontation, as in procrastinating, pouting, or misplacing important materials.

So you define what I believe was meant by the OP and not agreeing with you, nor wishing to feed into your apparent need to argue as Passive Aggressive. You guys really need to invest in a dictionary and start learning the meaning of the words you use.... seriously this is getting old..... you need to come up with a new schtick

 

[Touch Of Death]

I don't really even know what there is to discuss here, honestly.

This topic is a matter of opinion, based on your view of what you do. What someone else thinks of what you do is immaterial and literally does not matter.

I guess some people like to argue for the sake of arguing.

You rang.

 

[Steve]

pas·sive-ag·gres·sive
adjective

1. of or denoting a type of behavior or personality characterized by indirect resistance to the demands of others and an avoidance of direct confrontation, as in procrastinating, pouting, or misplacing important materials.

So you define what I believe was meant by the OP and not agreeing with you, nor wishing to feed into your apparent need to argue as Passive Aggressive. You guys really need to invest in a dictionary and start learning the meaning of the words you use.... seriously this is getting old..... you need to come up with a new schtick

i don't know, man. That definition sounds an awful lot like your post. You may not see it, but indirect resistance, poutiness and conflict avoidance are your bread and butter.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Sometimes, the Harold Hill method just needs to be recognized as a bad way to learn.

Think "chi"?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Well my only issue is these statements are everything that is wrong with martial art.

That martial art is some sort of belief system and not a practical one.

And that other peoples input is not important.

I think you and I are mostly on the same page on this one (though I'm not sure we agree on what that page is! ). I don't care if someone's training isn't practical, if they aren't looking for practical. If those folks studying Yellow Bamboo were just looking for some togetherness, I'd think it was crazy, but wouldn't really care. But since they are being told it's effective for a purpose it clearly isn't, I have a problem with it. Training that's supposed to be effective for combat/fighting/defense should have some demonstrable effectiveness in that area. We can (and often do) disagree about how to define and measure "effectiveness", but I think we agree on the principle.

 

[Steve]

Think "chi"?

Just visualize playing the clarinet.

 

[Xue Sheng]

i don't know, man. That definition sounds an awful lot like your post. You may not see it, but indirect resistance, poutiness and conflict avoidance are your bread and butter.

Frankly I think you are seeing what you want to see to justify your inflammatory and somewhat childish posting style..... you also appear to enjoy chasing certain posters around the site to throw the occasional jab at them and when you don't get your way, you resort to name calling and the occasional untrained psychological assessment..... you need a time out kiddo..... so I will give you one

You use to be a good poster steve, use to enjoy reading your posts, but you have changed and now all you want to do is argue and try and start problems.....not sure you are worth dealing with any longer....the only question that remains is whether or not to make you a permanent resident on my ignore list or a temporary one.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

What I don't get is peoples need to rundown, berate, belittle and disparage other arts, and practitioners of other arts, they know little about beyond YouTube.

If one sees hole in their chosen art then quit complaining, shut-up, train and fix them or find another art to train. If one is happy with their chosen art who gives a damn what anyone else has to say about it.

I like that people are vocal. If someone thinks that an art is crazy or harmful then I rather for them to say so than to remain quiet. If you think something is a hoax then say so. At the very least it will allow a person to be cautious about what they are getting into.

If that is the case then fine, that would mean they have some knowledge of the art in question. But there are more than a few that seem to need to rundown, berate, belittle and disparage other arts, and practitioners of other arts, they know little about beyond YouTube, just because they can, or because it does not fit the training methodology that they understand.

It's kind of a balancing act for me.

On the one hand, there is a lot of stuff being taught in many martial arts schools which, in my opinion, is very poorly suited for its claimed purpose. If someone thinks they are learning how to fight or to defend themselves with this sort of training, then they could get hurt.

On the other hand, my opinion is not always correct. Even if it is correct, it does no good shoving my opinions in the face of someone who has no interest in them or inclination to believe them.

The way I balance this is that I am happy to offer my thoughts on a given technique or tactic or training method if someone expresses an interest in my opinion (or outside opinions in general). I try not to go out of my way to tell people how they should be doing things differently if they have no interest in hearing it - it's a waste of my time and counterproductive. If people feel like they're being bullied, they are likely to become more set in their ways.

I also try to be up front about the basis for my opinions. If I have 20 years of experience in something I'll say that. If I just know what I've seen from a YouTube clip, I'll say that. This way people can have some idea of how much weight to give my thoughts on the matter.

 

[Steve]

Frankly I think you are seeing what you want to see to justify your inflammatory and somewhat childish posting style..... you also appear to enjoy chasing certain posters around the site to throw the occasional jab at them and when you don't get your way, you resort to name calling and the occasional untrained psychological assessment..... you need a time out kiddo..... so I will give you one

You use to be a good poster steve, use to enjoy reading your posts, but you have changed and now all you want to do is argue and try and start problems.....not sure you are worth dealing with any longer....the only question that remains is whether or not to make you a permanent resident on my ignore list or a temporary one.

Okay. When you stop actually posting passive aggressively, like the quote below, I'll stop pointing it out.

but then I was not threatened by it either so.... rage on...there are many windmills to tilt with and I have better things to do.

Regarding the rest, I'm not responsible for you, and am not overly concerned about it. The ignore list is a beautiful tool, but I want to assure you that whether I am on yours at all is not something I'm going to give any further thought. It kind of seems like you think getting off your ignore list is a big deal. Temporary or permanent... really makes me no nevermind.

I do think it's odd that you accuse me of chasing posters around... occasionally. That doesn't make a lot of sense. Who are these posters? Have you reported me for violating the ToS? I think you're accusing me of breaking the rules. If you think I'm violating the rules, there's a right way to do it.

 

[Flying Crane]

Well this is all kind of amusing because I think maybe some people have seriously misunderstood what my message was meant to be.

There are some people who's posts I no longer read, so I suppose I don't have the complete "discussion" that has been going on, but it is still often possible to read between the lines.

Anyway, there is a saying, when you contemplate doing something new, or difficult, or daunting, that your success is in large part influenced by your attitude. If you think you can do it, then you are right, you can do it, you will find a way. But if you have already decided it is too difficult, too daunting, and you cannot do it, then you are right, you cannot do it.

Think about that for a moment. If you think you can, you are right. If you think you cannot, you are right.

I see room for that simple thought to be applied in martial arts. We see all kinds of discussions here about what one style or another is capable of, or not capable of. Wing chun is a short striking method, so it's no good at longer range. I need a long striking method to complement my wing chun. Or the ever popular argument that a striking method that does not have a significant grappling aspect is surely useless against a grappler. Or if someone does not follow a XYZ training habit, then there is no way that they can develop good and useful skills.

Well, I guess if you have already decided that your system has deficiencies, then you will never be fully successful with it, and you will always fail in these situations.

But if you believe in your system and your methodology, then you will find solutions to these problems within your system. You might find that wing chun can be applied in all ranges and situations, and a wing chunner does not need a long range system to supplement what he does. Or a striking method can successfully deal with the challenges of a grappler. Or training methods that differ from XYZ are remarkably fruitful.

So, either you believe in what you do, or you do not. Make up your mind about it. Either way, you will be right.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Well, I guess if you have already decided that your system has deficiencies, then you will never be fully successful with it, and you will always fail in these situations.

I don't think this is necessarily the case, in either the positive nor the negative version, FC.

If I decide NGA has some deficiencies in ground work (and it does, as commonly taught), that doesn't impair my ability on the ground. It just means I need to figure out what to do about it. I can just study BJJ separately, and integrate them in my own usage, and that solves my problem. But not my students'. So, my alternative is to improve my abilities on the ground and integrate some solid new principles and practices into the art as I teach it. Perhaps this integration is what you're talking about. If I decide NGA is inherently flawed in its ground work (as in, the art cannot contain good ground work), then I have a problem. But if I just decide the art is lacking in its current form, that doesn't limit me.

On the other hand, if I decide that NGA is quite good in its ground work, as I learned it (and it wasn't very good), that does not make me better at ground work. Just because I decide the art is good on the ground, that doesn't make me more capable on the ground. But once again, maybe I'm missing your actual point. If you're saying that I could decide there's capacity in the art for good ground work, then I have room to figure out what parts of the art translate to effective ground work.

I guess my point is that there's a difference between my belief of what the art's current state is (that's not a "belief thing", as DB put it), and my belief of what the art's capacity is (here, belief can drive response).

 

[Flying Crane]

I don't think this is necessarily the case, in either the positive nor the negative version, FC.

If I decide NGA has some deficiencies in ground work (and it does, as commonly taught), that doesn't impair my ability on the ground. It just means I need to figure out what to do about it. I can just study BJJ separately, and integrate them in my own usage, and that solves my problem. But not my students'. So, my alternative is to improve my abilities on the ground and integrate some solid new principles and practices into the art as I teach it. Perhaps this integration is what you're talking about. If I decide NGA is inherently flawed in its ground work (as in, the art cannot contain good ground work), then I have a problem. But if I just decide the art is lacking in its current form, that doesn't limit me.

On the other hand, if I decide that NGA is quite good in its ground work, as I learned it (and it wasn't very good), that does not make me better at ground work. Just because I decide the art is good on the ground, that doesn't make me more capable on the ground. But once again, maybe I'm missing your actual point. If you're saying that I could decide there's capacity in the art for good ground work, then I have room to figure out what parts of the art translate to effective ground work.

I guess my point is that there's a difference between my belief of what the art's current state is (that's not a "belief thing", as DB put it), and my belief of what the art's capacity is (here, belief can drive response).

Ok. Make your own decision. That's my point.

To clarify what I am saying, it isn't for me to debate what you may or may not be able to do with your system. So you decide. And no matter what you decide, you are right.

 

[Buka]

I love my XYZ art. I think I want the accented syllable on the Y, though. Sounds funkier.