Questions for those who started their own system/ style

[oftheherd1]

I believe that killing someone is a different application than winning. Which is covered in my reasons.

From Steve:

1. What am I trying to accomplish that isn't accomplished by another art?
2. What is the goal of my art (i.e. defense, art, sport, wellness)?

If I am wrong correct me please. But the above are the closest I could see to your answer as also quoted above.

I think most arts started out with a goal of disabling/damaging or killing an opponent (martial). That would not be true for a purely sport oriented art, but I think most arts want to accomplish that, at least in their initial form. Granted, killing isn't as socially acceptable as it may have been before (thankfully).

If an opponent is trying to kill you and you kill him instead, you have won.

I like your well thought out comments and particularly the lists you had. But I don't think your answer above is quite correct, while I think that @Kung Fu Wang's post is very valid.

And my comments are probably all a whirlwind in an overturned bushel basket.

 

[Kababayan]

The weakness in your system is that it revolves around you.

Sorry I haven't responded earlier. I haven't been on for a few weeks. I understand what you are saying and it is a very valid point. That was a main issue that I had to overcome when first creating the system. I didn't want it to turn into "Kababayan's Karate"...meaning just a mix of my favorite techniques. If I had done just that (a mix of my favorite techniques), then the system would have revolved around me. By creating it around a principle that the system revolves around, and I am taken out of the equation. That way a student of any size and strength can apply the system effectively. That holds true with most martial arts systems that revolve around principles. I think strong examples would be TKD and and Ed Parker's Kenpo. Because TDK revolves around the principle of kicking, anyone no matter size or shape can effectively learn how to kick well. Because Ed Parker's Kenpo revolves around the principle of speed hands (sorry, I simplified the principle) anyone no matter size or shape can effectively develop really fast hands.

A perfect example of revolving a system around a group of "favorite" techniques (hybrid art) would be the Kempo system that I studied and taught for many years. I'm a tall, thin person and my friend (and fellow dojo owner) is a short, very stocky person. We both taught the same techniques but perform them very differently. My students tend to reflect my style whereas his students reflect his style. We both taught the same system but performed it very differently. My students had better kicks but his students focused more on power. That would be a perfect example of a system revolving around a particular instructor rather than a particular principle.

 

[Kababayan]

[QUOTE="ShotoNoob, post: 1933340, member: 33216". Sounds like a specialized self defense system. With all that complexity, how do you expect everyday students to remember all that theory in the heat of a self defense battle? I could see maybe some professional mastering what you propose.[/QUOTE]

I don't know how to multiple quote, so I am just separating the responses from your post. I understand what you are asking, but you are presuming that the self defense system is too complex to memorize. Because the system focuses on just a few key movements at each rank, the students are creating the muscle memory needed to perform the techniques in high stress situations. It's a similar principle to Krav Maga, which I have to admit I modeled after. It's also a similar idea to Tony Blauer Outside 90 principle or Michael Janich's Knife system: simple moves to use in high stress situations.

In contrast, the Kempo system that I used to teach required ten overhead clubs and ten side clubs defenses for Black Belt. That's twenty different club defenses that a students needs to scroll through within the split seconds of being attacked. In my system the overhead club defense has similar movements to a hook punch defense (or essentially any attack coming from the upper-side of the body...minus a gun attack). The students will have performed the movements so many times that it become a natural response no matter the attack. Here's an example from my system:

I have a technique that I teach for in-for-your-face threats. It involves pushing the threat across your body while hammer striking the opponent's nose and face multiple times (then push and run away). I originally learned the technique years ago in a Panatukan/Silat system, and it is also similar to the old-school Krav Maga Toy Soldier technique. That one set of movements can be applied to:

- Knife to the face
- Gun to the face
- Finger threat in the face
- Push
- Single Lapel Grab
- Third person defense
- Straight punch defense

I'm sure that there are others that I am forgetting to mention. Rather than having the students memorize a defense to seven different situations, they memorize one set of movements that can be applied to multiple attack scenarios.