Is My Style the Best?

[Xue Sheng]

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

But are you using Y as a consonant or a vowel

 

[Flying Crane]

But are you using Y as a consonant or a vowel

It should be a variable.

 

[Buka]

But are you using Y as a consonant or a vowel

It should be a variable.

Oh, sure, confuse me. I'm going right to youtube now, and look those things up. Then I'll be back, you know, as an expert and stuff.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Oh, sure, confuse me. I'm going right to youtube now, and look those things up. Then I'll be back, you know, as an expert and stuff.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

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.

I've seen this argument before in different contexts (business, sports, politics, martial arts, whatever) and I don't think I really buy it.

There's certainly an element of truth in it. Having some belief in what you are doing is generally a necessary (though not sufficient) requirement for having the motivation to put the needed work into a project. Conversely, you can sabotage your efforts in an endeavor by not believing in what you are doing.

That said, reality depends on much more than belief. The universe doesn't behave according to the philosophies of Richard Bach. Gravity doesn't care whether you believe in it.

There are many, many martial artists who have 100% confidence and belief that their system has all the solutions to problems ranging from knife attacks to ground fighting to multiple attackers to anything else you might imagine. In the Boxer Rebellion you had martial artists who believed that their art could make them bulletproof. This confidence tends to last only until it is tested by reality.

I think a better approach (in any field) is to put "belief" aside and just attempt to draw conclusions based on the best available evidence, then continue to test those conclusions and be willing to reconsider them as you gather more evidence.

 

[Flying Crane]

I've seen this argument before in different contexts (business, sports, politics, martial arts, whatever) and I don't think I really buy it.

There's certainly an element of truth in it. Having some belief in what you are doing is generally a necessary (though not sufficient) requirement for having the motivation to put the needed work into a project. Conversely, you can sabotage your efforts in an endeavor by not believing in what you are doing.

That said, reality depends on much more than belief. The universe doesn't behave according to the philosophies of Richard Bach. Gravity doesn't care whether you believe in it.

There are many, many martial artists who have 100% confidence and belief that their system has all the solutions to problems ranging from knife attacks to ground fighting to multiple attackers to anything else you might imagine. In the Boxer Rebellion you had martial artists who believed that their art could make them bulletproof. This confidence tends to last only until it is tested by reality.

I think a better approach (in any field) is to put "belief" aside and just attempt to draw conclusions based on the best available evidence, then continue to test those conclusions and be willing to reconsider them as you gather more evidence.

Nothing is a guarantee.

As I say, make your own decisions. That is all anyone can do.

 

[Martial D]

whatever system you study and train, if you believe it has gaps and holes and limitations and blind spots, then certainly you are correct. If you believe that you can't, then you are right.

And if you believe that your system is flexible and adaptable and offers you good tools to deal with what might come your way, then certainly you are correct. If you believe that you can, then you are right.

Just a thought that may or may not be worth sharing.

Meh.

What someone believes about themselves (or what they can do) is one thing, the reality, often a very different thing.

 

[Flying Crane]

What someone believes about themselves (or what they can do) is one thing, the reality, often a very different thing.

I think you don't understand my point.

 

[Flying Crane]

It looks like most people are missing my point, so I'll try to elaborate a bit. Not sure how successful I will be typing with my thumbs on an iPhone. It's not the best venue for such a discussion.

It's about seeing possibilities and potential vs. seeing limitations.

I'm not talking about living in a fantasy world. There are some harsh realities out there. But do you see possibilities contained in your system, or do you see more limitations? If you see limitations, do you honestly believe them, or is it because those who shout the loudest keep telling you they are there? Even those who actually know little or nothing about your system?

I dunno how to explain it better than that. If this resonates with you, then you get it.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It looks like most people are missing my point, so I'll try to elaborate a bit. Not sure how successful I will be typing with my thumbs on an iPhone. It's not the best venue for such a discussion.

It's about seeing possibilities and potential vs. seeing limitations.

I'm not talking about living in a fantasy world. There are some harsh realities out there. But do you see possibilities contained in your system, or do you see more limitations? If you see limitations, do you honestly believe them, or is it because those who shout the loudest keep telling you they are there? Even those who actually know little or nothing about your system?

I dunno how to explain it better than that. If this resonates with you, then you get it.

Okay, so my second reaction is closer to what you mean. If I think NGA can't include good ground work, I'll miss what is in it that can work, and I'll probably miss how easily BJJ movement meshes with the principles.

I'm with you on that.

 

[Flying Crane]

Okay, so my second reaction is closer to what you mean. If I think NGA can't include good ground work, I'll miss what is in it that can work, and I'll probably miss how easily BJJ movement meshes with the principles.

I'm with you on that.

That's one way of seeing it.

It could also mean that the method already has the tools to deal with a grappler, without becoming a grappler yourself.

I realize your method is a form of aikido, so it already is a grappling variant, in lose terms. But I don't think you need to play someone else's game in order to beat them. Play your own game, and beat them.

 

[Martial D]

I think you don't understand my point.

Yet your follow up clarification seems to be saying the same thing. I get that believing in your techniques make them more effective for a variety of reasons, but no amount of belief will turn poop into roses.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

If you see limitations, do you honestly believe them, or is it because those who shout the loudest keep telling you they are there? Even those who actually know little or nothing about your system?

I don't know if I've seen that (believing your system is limited because of outsiders saying it is) too often. Most martial arts students get much more input from their instructors and other practitioners of the same art than from practitioners of other arts. They also typically give much more credence to the input from those in their own art. Those instructors and fellow practitioners are much more likely to unrealistically puff up the capabilities of the art than to unrealistically downplay its potential.

In fact, I'm not sure I can think of a single instance where a martial artist of my acquaintance has started believing their art was limited just because an outsider told them it was. Any time I've seen someone come to that conclusion, it's been based on their own experience.

In the Wing Tsun group I'm currently training with, there have been a couple of times where someone has posted video of Emin Boztepe demonstrating his approach to groundfighting. I did feel compelled to express my opinion, as politely as possible, that what he was showing in that context was ... suboptimal, at best. As far as I can tell, my words did nothing to shake anyone's faith in the validity of what was shown. I don't think that I would have been more likely to convince anyone by being louder and more insistent. I expect the only way they are likely to change their mind is if they spend some serious time doing live sparring in those positions, preferably with opponents who are bigger and stronger. If they don't have that personal experience, I don't think I am going to convince them with words.

 

[Flying Crane]

Yet your follow up clarification seems to be saying the same thing. I get that believing in your techniques make them more effective for a variety of reasons, but no amount of belief will turn poop into roses.

nope, you still miss the point. That's ok.

 

[Flying Crane]

I don't know if I've seen that (believing your system is limited because of outsiders saying it is) too often. Most martial arts students get much more input from their instructors and other practitioners of the same art than from practitioners of other arts. They also typically give much more credence to the input from those in their own art. Those instructors and fellow practitioners are much more likely to unrealistically puff up the capabilities of the art than to unrealistically downplay its potential.

In fact, I'm not sure I can think of a single instance where a martial artist of my acquaintance has started believing their art was limited just because an outsider told them it was. Any time I've seen someone come to that conclusion, it's been based on their own experience.

In the Wing Tsun group I'm currently training with, there have been a couple of times where someone has posted video of Emin Boztepe demonstrating his approach to groundfighting. I did feel compelled to express my opinion, as politely as possible, that what he was showing in that context was ... suboptimal, at best. As far as I can tell, my words did nothing to shake anyone's faith in the validity of what was shown. I don't think that I would have been more likely to convince anyone by being louder and more insistent. I expect the only way they are likely to change their mind is if they spend some serious time doing live sparring in those positions, preferably with opponents who are bigger and stronger. If they don't have that personal experience, I don't think I am going to convince them with words.

I see it all over here in Martialtalk.

 

[drop bear]

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

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...

of or denoting a type of behavior or personality characterized by indirect resistance to the demands of other

. 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.

an avoidance of direct confrontation, as in procrastinating, pouting, or misplacing important materials.

 

[drop bear]

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.

Almost but not really.

The Pros and Cons of Stainless vs. High Carbon Steel Knife Blades

Still not about belief.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I see it all over here in Martialtalk.

Really? I see plenty of folks being critical of other systems, but that usually provokes defensive justifications from representatives of the systems being criticized, not self-doubt. I can't recall an instance of someone coming in believing that their art could do it all, but then changing their mind after being lectured by a proponent of a different tradition.

I do sometimes see people acknowledging what they see as limitations in their primary art, but as far as I can tell that comes from their own experience and observation, not from being yelled at on the forum by an evangelist of a different style.

 

[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...

of or denoting a type of behavior or personality characterized by indirect resistance to the demands of other

. 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.

an avoidance of direct confrontation, as in procrastinating, pouting, or misplacing important materials.

Nice use of color, come up with that all by yourself did you

You have no idea do you....you keep swinging but you keep missing

Where is there even demand of others to resist...oh wait...there isn't

and telling someone they are threatened by a thing is a avoidance of direct confrontation how...oh wait...it isn't

You see, just because you don't get the desired response you are after does not make it passive aggressive and the fact that you think any of what I posted can be defined as such;.... it does show you do not have any idea what the term means and that you also, like you buddy steve, simply trying to force an argument, which I have no intention of giving you.....

 

[drop bear]

Nice use of color, come up with that all by yourself did you

You have no idea do you....you keep swinging but you keep missing

Where is there even demand of others to resist...oh wait...there isn't

and telling someone they are threatened by a thing is a avoidance of direct confrontation how...oh wait...it isn't

You see, just because you don't get the desired response you are after does not make it passive aggressive and the fact that you think any of what I posted can be defined as such;.... it does show you do not have any idea what the term means and that you also, like you buddy steve, simply trying to force an argument, which I have no intention of giving you.....

Ok. simplified version.

We are wrong but lets not argue. That is passive agressive.

You can't be conciliatory and still hold your position is correct. It is effectively an oxymoron. It is a cheaper and more childish stunt than just using argument. Because you are trying to engage in emotional blackmail.

You will notice I didnt take pot shots at you. But you still feel justified in taking them at me.

Nice use of color, come up with that all by yourself did you

You have no idea do you....you keep swinging but you keep missing

I was explaining in detail how your post fits the description of passive aggressive.

When you come up with a contrary position you have allready engaged in an argument. I dont know why for you that is so weird. I fully expect people to have their own opinions.

And of course you are wrong but lets not argue.
you also, like you buddy steve, simply trying to force an argument, which I have no intention of giving you....