S
Shiatsu
Guest
So do you study at the Portland branch?
Have you ever trained with Demi Barbito I think is his name.
Have you ever trained with Demi Barbito I think is his name.
Reality Based Instructors
- Thread starter MJS
- Start date
B
Black Bear
Guest
I do not have the good fortune to live near one of the established SBG locations in the Pacific NorthWest. I live in the Canadian Prairies, at the site of the first accredited SBG affiliate school in Canada. Matt has done seminars here, and our instructor goes down to SBG gatherings whenever he can, most recently the ISR Matrix certification in Florida.
Our level of training is still a pale shadow of what goes on in Portland, but our grappling skills have shot through the roof, and hey--we're all glad to be on the journey.
Demi Barbito is very knowledgeable in the area of self-defense, especially the application of JKD methodology to the use of modern street weapons such as handguns and OC spray. I have never trained with him, I know him through the internet and "videoland".
Our level of training is still a pale shadow of what goes on in Portland, but our grappling skills have shot through the roof, and hey--we're all glad to be on the journey.
Demi Barbito is very knowledgeable in the area of self-defense, especially the application of JKD methodology to the use of modern street weapons such as handguns and OC spray. I have never trained with him, I know him through the internet and "videoland".
S
Shiatsu
Guest
That's cool, I have e-mailed back and forth with Matt quite a few times, and I must say that I am very impressed. I have only heard good things about Demi.
Very good. Videos used as a "guide" are very much effective.
I think that the majority of people who have a problem with videos haven't reached a level where they can "see technique" in their minds yet. If they were then they would definately understand.
But the real controversy is that they say that one can't learn a "complete" system by video. The argument has merit,
BUT,
1) most "video programs" advertise up to black belt. "We" all must "agree" that "black belt" is just the "beginning" of our real training, our journey in martial arts "mastery" is just beginning.
2) I would have to argue that someone at a "high level" can learn learn a "whole system" by video.
I don't beleive that anyone has yet to date put a "complete" system on video.3) I would a agree that a beginner would be hard pressed to reach a "high level" without prior martial art experience. BUT even a beginner CAN learn from a video.
:asian:
MJS and Black Bear,
You 2 keep on thinking the way you do and your "cup will remain half empty and not half full."
:asian:
You 2 keep on thinking the way you do and your "cup will remain half empty and not half full."
:asian:
Cruentus
Grandmaster
I use this idea when I instruct.
"Martial Arts" can be broken up 3 ways (you have to picture these all in a Vinn Diagram, with 3 overlapping circles:
1. Exhibition: Movie's, demos, pretty drills, forms, etc.
2. Competition: Sparring, kickboxing, NHB wrestling, etc.
3. Combat: Reality fighting.
They all overlap to a degree, and are related, but they are not exactly the same. One important similarity to point out here is with "live training," or training against a resisting opponent. Competition arts are always training against a resisting opponent, even if they are constrained by rules. Combative systems NEED TO HAVE AN ELEMENT OF LIVE TRAINING as well, or else, they are not truely combat oriented. You may not be "competing" in combative arts when you are training with a partner, but you have to have some element where they resist or can move unpredictably to test the technique, because that is what you will face in "reality fighting".
Now tieing this in with how traditional arts fit in...
TMA often train for all 3; combat, competition, and exhibition. There is nothing wrong with TMA, but you have to know where the seperation is with what you are doing. Another thing that you have to understand is the context in which your traditional art is coming from in terms of environment, and how it fits in with the environment that you live in today. Example - My Filipino styles originated from area's in the jungle where there was thick vegitation and not a lot of room to move, so my movements stay very compact and close quarters. This translated well to the alleyways and streets in the barangays (towns), where there are weapons available and S**T on the ground, so not a lot of room to do jumping kick, or submisson wrestling, for example. This then translates well to my current environment where I am mostly in urban or suburban streets or indoors, and there is almost always a weapon of opportunity available. This is different then TKD high kicking and flying kicking techniques, which (as the story goes) originated during a feudel time period in Korea where a flying sidekick would be used to knock someone off a horse, or a jump spin kick might be used to try to reach someone on a higher rock in mountainous terrein. In icy, flat Michigan here, I won't be doing any flying kicks to knock someone off a rock or horse. This does not make TKD ineffective, because there are other TKD techniques that are suitable to my environment; I just have to know which ones and how to seperate them.
Now, lets break down "combat" further. There are different ways to classify combat (same vinn type diagram):
1. Street Defense
1a. Street defense as a LEO, or security.
2. Dueling defense
3. Battlefield defense
These 3 types of combat overlap, but are not the same. A civilian on the street has to defend themselves much differently then a soldier on the battlefield, for instance.
What pertains to the discussion regarding TMA is how dueling fits in. Dueling is combat, in the sense that I am talking about. If we meet at high noon to fight to the death with knives, then this is combat. Yet, it isn't the same as street survival, or battlefield survival; its a different animal. We have had dueling for as long as we could fight; Wild West and England did it with pistols, spain, france, etc., did it with rapiers, Filipinos did it with sticks, knives, short swords, etc., etc., etc. Every culture has a dueling past.
Most TMA focus on dueling. In many of my filipino styles, we are working on fighting single stick vs. single stick, or knife vs. knife, or sword and dagger vs. sword and dagger, or whatever, but just fighting one opponent. This isn't to be underestimated because dueling systems are a great way to improve your attributes and martial abilities. That is why TMA focus on dueling....because in the long term, that is how you will get better.
Yet, it is not the same as street or battlefield survival. Many RBSD systems have taken out these other elements that TMA have, focusing only on combat, and focusing only on street or battlefield survival. TMA does nto fall short...they can focus on these as well; but like knowing what environment your art is designed for, you need to know whether your combative techniques are for survival or dueling, so you can seperate it when needed.
I hope this insight was useful!
:asian:
"Martial Arts" can be broken up 3 ways (you have to picture these all in a Vinn Diagram, with 3 overlapping circles:
1. Exhibition: Movie's, demos, pretty drills, forms, etc.
2. Competition: Sparring, kickboxing, NHB wrestling, etc.
3. Combat: Reality fighting.
They all overlap to a degree, and are related, but they are not exactly the same. One important similarity to point out here is with "live training," or training against a resisting opponent. Competition arts are always training against a resisting opponent, even if they are constrained by rules. Combative systems NEED TO HAVE AN ELEMENT OF LIVE TRAINING as well, or else, they are not truely combat oriented. You may not be "competing" in combative arts when you are training with a partner, but you have to have some element where they resist or can move unpredictably to test the technique, because that is what you will face in "reality fighting".
Now tieing this in with how traditional arts fit in...
TMA often train for all 3; combat, competition, and exhibition. There is nothing wrong with TMA, but you have to know where the seperation is with what you are doing. Another thing that you have to understand is the context in which your traditional art is coming from in terms of environment, and how it fits in with the environment that you live in today. Example - My Filipino styles originated from area's in the jungle where there was thick vegitation and not a lot of room to move, so my movements stay very compact and close quarters. This translated well to the alleyways and streets in the barangays (towns), where there are weapons available and S**T on the ground, so not a lot of room to do jumping kick, or submisson wrestling, for example. This then translates well to my current environment where I am mostly in urban or suburban streets or indoors, and there is almost always a weapon of opportunity available. This is different then TKD high kicking and flying kicking techniques, which (as the story goes) originated during a feudel time period in Korea where a flying sidekick would be used to knock someone off a horse, or a jump spin kick might be used to try to reach someone on a higher rock in mountainous terrein. In icy, flat Michigan here, I won't be doing any flying kicks to knock someone off a rock or horse. This does not make TKD ineffective, because there are other TKD techniques that are suitable to my environment; I just have to know which ones and how to seperate them.
Now, lets break down "combat" further. There are different ways to classify combat (same vinn type diagram):
1. Street Defense
1a. Street defense as a LEO, or security.
2. Dueling defense
3. Battlefield defense
These 3 types of combat overlap, but are not the same. A civilian on the street has to defend themselves much differently then a soldier on the battlefield, for instance.
What pertains to the discussion regarding TMA is how dueling fits in. Dueling is combat, in the sense that I am talking about. If we meet at high noon to fight to the death with knives, then this is combat. Yet, it isn't the same as street survival, or battlefield survival; its a different animal. We have had dueling for as long as we could fight; Wild West and England did it with pistols, spain, france, etc., did it with rapiers, Filipinos did it with sticks, knives, short swords, etc., etc., etc. Every culture has a dueling past.
Most TMA focus on dueling. In many of my filipino styles, we are working on fighting single stick vs. single stick, or knife vs. knife, or sword and dagger vs. sword and dagger, or whatever, but just fighting one opponent. This isn't to be underestimated because dueling systems are a great way to improve your attributes and martial abilities. That is why TMA focus on dueling....because in the long term, that is how you will get better.
Yet, it is not the same as street or battlefield survival. Many RBSD systems have taken out these other elements that TMA have, focusing only on combat, and focusing only on street or battlefield survival. TMA does nto fall short...they can focus on these as well; but like knowing what environment your art is designed for, you need to know whether your combative techniques are for survival or dueling, so you can seperate it when needed.
I hope this insight was useful!
:asian:
You have deep insight into combat. I would say that you are able to produce very good students who reflect you. That I am still trying to do. I have good students but they have yet to reflect me. And I don't beleive that I am a good reflection of my instructors either.
:asian:
B
Black Bear
Guest
Have a second look. I really doubt that the majority of video series advertise "to black belt requirements". It's just that when someone does make such an irritating statement, it sticks in your memory. Take a current magazine. Count the ads for video programs that do and do not make this claim, I'm sure you'll find most do not.
When you look at the sheer volume of videos done by folks like Yang Jwing-Ming and countless others, I'm sure that you'll find that somewhere, someone has put an entire system on video. All the forms, all the apps, all the... everything.
That said, that doesn't mean I believe that a person could learn the entire system by having watched it on tape enough times, and trying to monkey it.
It's just like basketball. Can you improve your basketball skills by watching pro games on tape? Somewhat, depends on a number of factors, mainly your pre-existing ability and capacity to learn. Can you learn to play basketball from watching pro games? No. Can I play like Kobe Bryant by watching Kobe Bryant enough times? Goodness no.
When you look at the sheer volume of videos done by folks like Yang Jwing-Ming and countless others, I'm sure that you'll find that somewhere, someone has put an entire system on video. All the forms, all the apps, all the... everything.
That said, that doesn't mean I believe that a person could learn the entire system by having watched it on tape enough times, and trying to monkey it.
It's just like basketball. Can you improve your basketball skills by watching pro games on tape? Somewhat, depends on a number of factors, mainly your pre-existing ability and capacity to learn. Can you learn to play basketball from watching pro games? No. Can I play like Kobe Bryant by watching Kobe Bryant enough times? Goodness no.
And this is referring to what exactly???? If you're referring to the tapes, let me enlighten you on that. I DO NOT use tapes as a sole learning source. I have pleanty of people who I train under. Do I have tapes? Yes. I use them as a reference, and that is it.
mike
Based on my opinion of your posts. It has nothing to do with videos in general. My quote with the cup is referring to you being open to other arts rather than being close minded about the subject.
:asian:
I see videos as a healthy "guide" in ones journey.
:asian:
LOL!! Now thats a good one. Being open to other styles? My friend, let me tell you, I am a HUGE advocate of cross training. Look back at some of my other posts and you will see this. I, unlike some of the other people in Kenpo, who seem to think that you dont need to crosstrain, am all for it, and constantly push for it. I crosstrain in BJJ and Arnis. Being a 1 dimensional fighter today, is, IMO, a very big mistake. Being as well rounded as you can, by having a good balance of all of the ranges of fighting is the way to go. Granted, there are some arts that I'm not crazy about, but I've ALWAYS said that there is something to be learned from all arts. Just because it might not suit my needs, does not mean that someone else shouldnt take a look at it.
I prefer the RBMA over the TMA more, due to the fact that the RBMA are not limited by the things that the TMA are. The RBMA tend to address fighting in a more realistic fashion. They focus more on whats going to work rather than what might work.
Mike
We think a like! Although I still have a few traditional instructors as well.
:asian:
B
Black Bear
Guest
In terms of technique, there is a lot of overlap between RBSD and some TMA's. The training method makes a big difference as to whether a person will be able to use the skills well in managing an assaultive situation.
And sadly, there are many, many TMA studios that just do stuff that does not contribute in the least to a person's ability to protect themselves. Now, I'm not saying that protecting yourself from violence is the most important thing in the world, in fact most people in North America can, if they're reasonably smart, go through their entire life without ever being seriously assaulted. (Yeah yeah, incidence/prevalence rates differ depending on who tells them, but it really depends on how "assault" is defined. If we use the legal definition, "common assault" or something, then we all get assaulted many times in our lives, but most of us never testify in support of charges.) *ahem* sorry, tangent. The point is, what is objectionable is that the instructors lead these people to believe that training with them is enhancing their safety.
Right.
I can walk into most martial art places, pretend to be shopping for a place, and get a free trial class, and in one evening I can tell that they are wasting their students' time.
And sadly, there are many, many TMA studios that just do stuff that does not contribute in the least to a person's ability to protect themselves. Now, I'm not saying that protecting yourself from violence is the most important thing in the world, in fact most people in North America can, if they're reasonably smart, go through their entire life without ever being seriously assaulted. (Yeah yeah, incidence/prevalence rates differ depending on who tells them, but it really depends on how "assault" is defined. If we use the legal definition, "common assault" or something, then we all get assaulted many times in our lives, but most of us never testify in support of charges.) *ahem* sorry, tangent. The point is, what is objectionable is that the instructors lead these people to believe that training with them is enhancing their safety.
Right.
I can walk into most martial art places, pretend to be shopping for a place, and get a free trial class, and in one evening I can tell that they are wasting their students' time.
Maybe waste your time. But not for some of the others. There are all different kinds of students. Not all take MA for the sole purpose of self-defense. I do know of some who view their training as a study of style (artistically). Some are just "belt collectors" as their goal.
There was a thread somewhere buried in MT that discussed different types of students and their reasoning of studying martial arts.
- Ceicei
B
Black Bear
Guest
Try a little harder to catch my meaning here. Belt collecting IS a waste of time. Yes, going to a McDojang will meet this person's goal, but their goal is itself a pretty pathetic exercise of their human potential.
The other issue being that when I'm there for the night, I can tell that many of students are motivated by the goal of self-defense, even if--and get this, this is funny--even if some of them are reluctant to say that that is their goal. Yes, some martial art places make people feel embarrassed to say that they want to feel safer with respect to street violence. "It's an art, it's not for fighting" is often stated less as a disclaimer than a rebuke. It's ridiculous.
Yes, there are many other REAL reasons why certain people want to do martial arts. But with the preposterous regimens of movement that are prescribed within some arts, you've got to know there are better ways to get in shape. I mean, I look at some of these instructors and think, where did YOU get your degree in exercise physiology? Or your personal trainer accreditation? Your only credential is that you have two IQ points above a napkin so that you can repeat the drills that your "master" taught to you.
And there are better ways of meeting people. And there are better ways of achieving spiritual peace and wisdom. It's not a simple matter of "well they're not all in it for self-defense, so they're not necessarily wasting their time."
B
Black Bear
Guest
Matt Bernius, which Blauer coach did you train with, what location? I worked out with PDR coaches Calen Paine and Robb Finlayson. I met Blauer in a couple seminars.
Similar threads
