Sharing with other Arts

[Gray Phoenix]

Not sharing knowledge means avoiding criticism. A person or organization who is so sure of itself, that it feels it should not share a universal commodity such as knowledge, will surely never improve beyond the mediocrity they adopted along with their hubris.

Share your knowledge and in return you shall recieve it. :asian:

 

[TigerWoman]

That analogy of different coaches/teams is one of competition. They don't share knowledge/secrets because of competition and that bottom line we all know, is money.

I can see that Taekwondo masters do not want to share the knowledge for fear of it getting mixed up into some other art. Maybe a 10% mix, maybe a 80, 20 mix. But then it changes its identity to one of Taekwonaikido. Or mixed martial arts.

The "art" of Taekwondo could be lost if it all got mixed up. Who would be the master of that part of the art...who would be the expert? How would a certain part of a mixed martial art be quality controlled if there were no grading/testing? Anyone could be call themselves proficient and even say they excel at everything and we all know that would be very difficult. Some of us, actually I believe alot of us, do not train for self defense but enjoy the practice of one particular art. TW

 

[Zepp]

However, it is one thing to leave your Tae Kwon Do status at the door and be an aikido student. When I practice aikido, I very seldom mention Tae Kwon Do because it is not relevant and I am in the aikido world. I wear an aikido uniform, use aikido weapons, and practice aikido philosophy. We never talk about Tae Kwon Do.
It is quite another for a Tae Kwon Do Instructor to hang out with other stylists AS a Tae Kwon Do Instructor, talking about TKD technique, philosophy, and politics. If you really want to understand a different art, leave your TKD rank, ideas, attitudes, and thinking behind at the door and practice that art. Do not go to their class with an "I'm also a Tae Kwon Do Instructor who is practicing X martial art." If possible, minimize your TKD background because it would be irrelevant.

Michigan, in this, I completely agree with you. However, what I don't think I understand is why you believe a Tae Kwon Do instructor couldn't get together with an Judo instructor for a casual training session and "compare notes." I don't see both instructors as being in competition with each other. In fact, the way I see it, the only competition a Tae Kwon Do instructor really has to worry about is with the students of other Tae Kwon Do instructors (with the exception of commercial schools competing for business).

 

[TigerWoman]

Michigan, in this, I completely agree with you. However, what I don't think I understand is why you believe a Tae Kwon Do instructor couldn't get together with an Judo instructor for a casual training session and "compare notes." I don't see both instructors as being in competition with each other. In fact, the way I see it, the only competition a Tae Kwon Do instructor really has to worry about is with the students of other Tae Kwon Do instructors (with the exception of commercial schools competing for business).

If one percent of the population did martial arts and there were ten different schools in your town, that would be still be competition if you were the owner/master of a school. For those black belts who don't worry about income or whether a school will survive, they have the luxury of going to another school to learn another art. But like some have said an instructor still could learn another art on the side with a friend. I would think you just can't bring it back and incorporate it necessarily into the TKD curriculum. TW

 

[Adept]

However, if the coach from MSU asked the coach from U of M to compare notes and hang out at practices, the U of M coach would like at him like he were insane.

The two universities are in direct competition with each other. Martial arts schools are not, or should not be.

The coach's future at a school depends on his being able to defeat his rivals. How is he going to do that by hanging out with them and sharing his secrets and knowledge?

An instructors future at a school does not depend on him being able to defeat his rivals.

I can see where you are coming from with regards to cross-training. It is simply common curtesy to not try and correct the instructor of the 'new' style, or to over-rule him. But I sense that this isn't the issue we have here.

You seem to have an issue with martial artists from different styles comparing notes and styles in order to improve both styles. Why is this?

Try this for a mental exercise. Instead of TKD< OR Hapkido, or Aikido, or BJJ, instead use the words 'Martial Art'. Replace the name of every style with the same words.

Imagine that everyone in all organisations has the same rank. Not necessarily the same skill, but the same rank.

Now, in this mental construct, what would be the problem with two senior martial artists comparing notes, cross-referencing, and trying to improve their training?

 

[arnisandyz]

Some reasons why schools don't want you to share:

"pollute the system"
"conflicting theories and principles"
"give away secrets"
"lack of respect to the Master"

THE TRUTH IS THAT THEY WANT YOU TO STAY BOXED IN, BELIEVING THAT THEIR SYSTEM IS SUPERIOR TO ALL. THAT THE SYSTEM IS BIGGER THAN ANY ONE PERSON OR YOU PERSONAL ADGENDAS.

Why you SHOULD share:

to find the truth FOR YOURSELF regardless of style. That being said, if one is going to share, all egos must be set aside. You must go into the situation willing to be beaten or proven wrong, only when you can do that will you grow beyond what the system your in holds you to.

 

[MichiganTKD]

Adept,

To a certain extent I agree with you about informal practice. I don't see much wrong with one Instructor having casual or informal practice with another of a different style, especially if they happen to be friends and the same level. In other words, a Master Instructor should not be having casual practice with a junior grade black belt of another style for the same reason that an adult does not hang out with 15 year olds. Two different levels. If one of my friends happened to be a judo Instructor, I would probably practice with once or twice to see what worked against him.
What I do have a problem with is Instructors who openly associate with Instructors of a different style, belong to martial art organizations unrelated to their style, encourage their students to practice with students of a different style, and host/attend events open to all styles. The Tae Kwon Do instructor near where I taught, and some of you would probably know his name, belongs to karate, kung fu, and various "Soke" organizations. I really would not even classify him as Tae Kwon Do since he seems determined to belong to everything. His students are the same way-determined to belong to everything.
As an Instructor, you have very high obligations to present your art and your organization in a positive light. People take what you do and say seriously. Additionally, Tae Kwon Do has a culture, history, etiquette, philosophy, and mindset different from the other arts. A Tae Kwon Do mind is not the same as a kung fu mind or a judo mind. So to attempt to associate with other organizations as a Tae Kwon Do instructor is impossible. You also send your students and the public mixed signals: You are a Tae Kwon Do instructor yet you belong to a Chinese Kung Fu organization AS a Tae Kwon Do instructor, and they know you are a Tae Kwon Do instructor. Don't think for a minute they aren't thinking of ways to beat you. It is the nature of human competition.

 

[Teh Tot]

I think that it goes back to goals that you have for your martial arts experience. one is to be in top physical condition, two is to be able to adequately protect myself should the need arise, and three is to share martial arts with others. so if you follow goals like that it should be perfectly aceptable to train with people from other martial arts. i look forward to when I get the chance to train with those trained in other styles of martial arts and share what I know with them.
Thats my take

 

[glad2bhere]

"......THE TRUTH IS THAT THEY WANT YOU TO STAY BOXED IN, BELIEVING THAT THEIR SYSTEM IS SUPERIOR TO ALL. THAT THE SYSTEM IS BIGGER THAN ANY ONE PERSON OR YOU PERSONAL ADGENDAS....."

Not sure how I feel about this observation accept to say that maybe it works that way in commercial schools, I don't know. I bet there a probably a lot of people who are heavily into "turf wars". I can only speak for myself. I will say that part of what learning a martial art is about is realizing that one is always part of something that it bigger than oneself. Thats a big piece of what martial training is suppose to draw us towards--- that view.

I teach and train in YON MU KWAN Hapkido. I have been part of this kwan for a goodly number of years. While I have been a member of this kwan I have occasionally spent time with other folks, but I always come back to the art in which I train. Sometimes I share what I do with others, but its on a pretty selective basis. I don't view what I do as simply a constellation of techniques which can be passed around like some tray of canapes that people can cherry-pick through. Nor am I particularly interested in what other folks do, by and large. I have enough material in my own art to keep me busy for more than a little time to come, and my BB indicates that I have made a committment to the art that I practice and left my leap-frogging from this bit to that bit behind. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[Adept]

a Master Instructor should not be having casual practice with a junior grade black belt of another style for the same reason that an adult does not hang out with 15 year olds. Two different levels.

While their level of skill is different, how does this impact their relationship? To my mind, it doesnt

The Tae Kwon Do instructor near where I taught, and some of you would probably know his name, belongs to karate, kung fu, and various "Soke" organizations. I really would not even classify him as Tae Kwon Do since he seems determined to belong to everything. His students are the same way-determined to belong to everything.

But why do you find this distasteful?

As an Instructor, you have very high obligations to present your art and your organization in a positive light.

I would say you have a much more important obligation to ensure your students recieve the best education they can.

A Tae Kwon Do mind is not the same as a kung fu mind or a judo mind.

In terms of tactics, this is partially true. In terms of actual mindset, it is not. The way we think and our behavioural patterns are largely set by the time we are seven.

So to attempt to associate with other organizations as a Tae Kwon Do instructor is impossible.

Not so. One of the instructors at our TKD school is also a third dan instructor of Jiu Jitsu. This fact is well known, and he incorporates a lot of JJ techniques and thoughts into our TKD training, which has only grown as a result.

You also send your students and the public mixed signals: You are a Tae Kwon Do instructor yet you belong to a Chinese Kung Fu organization AS a Tae Kwon Do instructor, and they know you are a Tae Kwon Do instructor.

Again, why is this bad?

 

[MichiganTKD]

Adept,

You are a mixed martial artist-someone who, by definition, associates with and practices with students of other styles. As a result, I don't really expect you to emphathize with my position as a traditional stylist. An MMA takes what he can get from every style, and has problem admitting it.
Now, if you declare yourself an MMA, I understand what that entails, for better or worse. However, if you declare yourself a Tae Kwon Do stylist, especially a traditional Tae Kwon Do stylist, yet you openly associate with and invite all styles to practice with you and share, I truly believe that is wrong.
Why? Because traditional Tae Kwon Do stands on its own and should remain apart from the other arts, as should traditional karate, traditional kung fu etc. I don't think the lines should be blurred, otherwise it is not Tae Kwon Do anymore.
There is nothing wrong with being curious about kung fu etiquette in relation to Tae Kwon Do. My own Grandmaster was explaining a little about kendo mannerisms and why they think the way they do. But we don't have have kendo students over, we don't visit kendo schools, and he doesn't demonstrate kendo. We are Tae kwon Do, apart from kendo and the others.
Anyway, traditional martial art etiquette, manners, and philosophy takes a lifetime to understand and master. How would you even have time to openly share with other styles, unless it is totally superficial. If I really wanted to share traditional karate with a Master, I'd have to be with him 24 hours a day. I don't exactly have time for that.

 

[Adept]

You are a mixed martial artist-someone who, by definition, associates with and practices with students of other styles.

Yes.

As a result, I don't really expect you to emphathize with my position as a traditional stylist.

I dont empathize, you are correct. But I am still curious.

An MMA takes what he can get from every style, and has problem admitting it.

Most have no problem to admitting it. In fact, most espouse it loudly from the rooftops. Take what works, and leave the rest behind.

Why? Because traditional Tae Kwon Do stands on its own and should remain apart from the other arts, as should traditional karate, traditional kung fu etc. I don't think the lines should be blurred, otherwise it is not Tae Kwon Do anymore.

Okay, so preservation of the style is our goal here. Fair enough, I can understand that even if I dont share that goal. What I disagree with is that training in a second (or more) style, and making it known that you also train in TKD, will in some way affect the purity of your TKD.

 

[Han-Mi]

EVOLUTION! - that's why we share, we do not usually teach others our art unless we are getting something in return. Also, there are plenty of things that we do not train the same way or at all, that are helpful to learn in case the proper situation arises. The whole point is for the art to evolve while remaining true to the traditions and history. That is why you learn the basics and then you are opened up to the full scope of the art and the Martial arts as a black belt.

And it isn't like we have any big secrets, watch enough tapes and read enough books you can learn pretty much everything about the art, it's just better to have a living breathing person there to help you with the details of it.

 

[glad2bhere]

".... Take what works, and leave the rest behind....."

I had fully intended to sit quietly until this little bit raised its head. Commonly attributed to Bruce Lee I find this quote used as the maxim to support many things, but I never hear anyone actually discuss its implications. I believe that the operational part of this quote ("what works") is the most troublesome since even Bruce Lee himself never actually defined what was meant by something "working". Allow me to use my own training as an example.

In the kwan to which I belong we train in a martial art. This means that we use a particular kind of activity to develop the ideal of realizing that the individual is part of something greater than himself and works to come out of the best part of himself so as to give that greater whole better service. On a physical level this is often realized as various S-D techniques, drills and practices, and these are almost self-evident when done. However, what is not so obvious are the effects on the intellect, emotions and spirit of the individual. These may not become apparent until months--- maybe even years--- after one enters into training. When they do become apparent I suppose that one can say that the training has "worked". What one cannot do is "cherry-pick" what he wants to do and what he does not want to do because the effect of a particular part of training may not be known until long after the event.

As I mentioned before I have no problem with people doing what it is that they want to do, in fact I have no actual control over their behaviors. If a person wishes to identify what they do as little more than a group of techniques that can be passed back and forth, I suppose that is fine for them. I think it would be inaccurate to call such activities "martial arts" but we all have our illusions to deal with. To my way of thinking Bruce Lee was to the Martial Arts community what Elvis was to American music, or Paris Hilton is to American society. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[hardheadjarhead]

What one cannot do is "cherry-pick" what he wants to do and what he does not want to do because the effect of a particular part of training may not be known until long after the event.

On the contrary, one can "cherry-pick." Novices would not be advised to do so, but advanced students/instructors/fighters not only can, but ought to. As we age we have no choice but to cherry pick, and if we're smart coming up through the ranks, we learn to discard that which is of no use to us.

Should you talk of the novices that cherry pick, those dilettantes who flit about and never settle on a particular system, these are typically unfocused and ill-disciplined youngsters who make no impact on the martial arts community at large. They've been coming in, and going out of the schools I've taught at for two decades. They're hardly the contemporary founders of progressive systems such as I've listed below.

If a person wishes to identify what they do as little more than a group of techniques that can be passed back and forth, I suppose that is fine for them. I think it would be inaccurate to call such activities "martial arts" but we all have our illusions to deal with.

Hardly an illusion, Bruce. I hate to say this, as I've always respected your posts in the past--but like MichiganTKD--you're coming off as a stylistic bigot, reserving the title "martial arts" for what you conceive it to be. The term itself is western in orientation, often attributed to systems from well over a dozen countries and comprising countless different philosophies. You're not a gatekeeper for that rather large community.

To my way of thinking Bruce Lee was to the Martial Arts community what Elvis was to American music, or Paris Hilton is to American society. FWIW.

Insofar as entertainment and movies, that's debatable. As far as engendering a fighting system and inspiring millions to train...I wouldn't dare minimize his contribution.

I would find it difficult to say that Lee's protege Dan Inosanto isn't a martial artist. He studied classical systems in-depth along with Lee's methods, and was responsible for helping launch the careers of a number of noted instructors. Erik Paulson studied Tae Kwon Do for years (3rd dan, I believe), as well as Aikido. Now as an MMA fighter and coach, he "cherry picks." I suspect he's rather qualified to do so.

Neither of these two ever, EVER criticize the Korean arts as you and others here on MT have cracked on MMA. I find this revealing, and ties in with what I wrote earlier...and I'm disappointed.


Regards,


Steve

 

[arnisandyz]

[QUOTEDo not go to their class with an "I'm also a Tae Kwon Do Instructor who is practicing X martial art." If possible, minimize your TKD background because it would be irrelevant.It would be the same if a kung fu or aikido student came to my school. I would tell them flat out "leave your aikido mentality at the door. You are not an aikido student in this class. And don't constantly tell me what an aikido student would do in this situation unless I specifically ask." [/QUOTE]

Sounds like a bit of "Eddie Haskelism" (from Leave it to Beaver). You put on a strait Mr. Nice guy mask in from of the parents and the wise guy act in front of friends. Every martial arts you study should become a part of you that shouldn't be so easy to take off like a shirt. People boxed into a system say "i am a TKD stylist" or i am a "Kung fu man" (the style is more important than the man). People who are liberated say I am a man who studies TKD, Kung Fu, BJJ. (or simply a martial artist)

People that come into my classes that have background in another style, I say great! Don't forget what you have learned and find a way to integrate it into what you will be learning here. That is a part of you nobody can take away. Classical styles have a way of being very linear in both technique and conceptualization. You finish one thing, put it away and move on to another - linear. A more circular concept would be working on multiple things at a time, stirring the pot and seeing how one set of rules may oppose or help another.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Adept,

You are a mixed martial artist-someone who, by definition, associates with and practices with students of other styles. As a result, I don't really expect you to emphathize with my position as a traditional stylist. An MMA takes what he can get from every style, and has problem admitting it.
Now, if you declare yourself an MMA, I understand what that entails, for better or worse. However, if you declare yourself a Tae Kwon Do stylist, especially a traditional Tae Kwon Do stylist, yet you openly associate with and invite all styles to practice with you and share, I truly believe that is wrong.
Why? Because traditional Tae Kwon Do stands on its own and should remain apart from the other arts, as should traditional karate, traditional kung fu etc. I don't think the lines should be blurred, otherwise it is not Tae Kwon Do anymore.
There is nothing wrong with being curious about kung fu etiquette in relation to Tae Kwon Do. My own Grandmaster was explaining a little about kendo mannerisms and why they think the way they do. But we don't have have kendo students over, we don't visit kendo schools, and he doesn't demonstrate kendo. We are Tae kwon Do, apart from kendo and the others.
Anyway, traditional martial art etiquette, manners, and philosophy takes a lifetime to understand and master. How would you even have time to openly share with other styles, unless it is totally superficial. If I really wanted to share traditional karate with a Master, I'd have to be with him 24 hours a day. I don't exactly have time for that.

Hmmm, I study FMA.

I was at a seminar for another FMA style. They were also promoting WEKAF sparring. They divided people up into grops by size, and we sparred. Some of the people there did not want to spar me, for I had a flyer up for giving a benefit seminar. I then had to explain to them that when the pads go on you get hit. no matter what level you are. This is a controlled test environment, you go out with a game plan and you see if it worked. If it did not work , why ? is what you ask later and try again.

If becuase someone decided to call me a master in a school or an art, and now I cannot get on the floor and work out with out people and or spar for fear that I might get hit, then there is no more reason to train at all. You are only a paper tiger, with nothing to offer but coaching at best, to make sure your ego is not bruised.

Maybe I have a different mentality, for you see I bounced and did security and street faught. Not the smartest thing to do, but you know it was the college age and I was in college and I thought it was ok to pay the bills to keep my in college. Yet, one punch form an untrained fighter can knock you out just as one from a trained fighter. I still study a traditional art, and I believe it works. I just do not hold any wierd notions that at some point no one is going to be able to touch me.

Now I do agree that in your school, you are teaching TKD and it is expected that it will be TKD. I have no problems with that. There is always people with questions, some people call them the What If Bunnies, for they keep coming and coming, and never stop. I explain that different arts ahve different approaches and then demonstrate using my timing and experience to show how it can be done in the art I am teaching. If they do not like this, they can go elsewhere. Just as if I step onto their teaching floor I expect it to be about their art. Unless I am an invited guest, in which case then it is about their art, only I am given the respect of my rank in the other art.

But, this does not mean I cannot go to the bar or their wedding or watch the latest UFC at their house with them. I see nothing wrong with hanging out with people of other arts. And No I am not a fan of MMA for myself, for I think they miss the point of fighting. There are great atheletes and martial artists that MMA practitioners, but there are rules. I practice for no rules myself. I do teach in a progression of safety and understanding so that students do not hurt each other or themselves, yet I do not limit their minds with rules for their practice. I support my friends who do this type of fighting and work outs, and it is a good work out. I even watch, and if their is a fight I can make it too, I try. I see nothign wrong with this mixing unless, it is back to the ego of the Master Instructor, and not wanting to look bad, or weak, or human. Dude, I make mistakes, I laugh at them and move on. This is why I continue to train, for I do not think I have it all. I hope I can always learn.

Just not sure, what your real point here is?

Master Instructors of TKD should not work out with lessors.

Explain to me why? Other than it just is so. Still confused

 

[okinawagojuryu]

Perhaps it is insecurity , in the knowledge , or teachings he has recieved ; or maybe it is out of ego , that he thinks he knows it all . Who knows , who cares . Let him have his narrow minded way of thinking , & keep to his lil' Dojang , & let him stay stagnant in his knowledge .
His comments of the TKD mind vs this mind , vs that mind make no sense . He should think for himself , & stop being controled , & stop trying to control others . I've spent years training TSD , before training Goju Ryu , & before that I trained TKD as a teenager , & child . The way of thinking in TKD , is the same as TSD . They try to control you due to money . It has nothing to due w/ being loyal , respectful , not watering down the art they learned , etc .
As I've stated in my previous post's Gen Choi Hong Hi , the founder of TKD trained in both Ishhin Ryu , & Shotokan as stated in his book . Now , the founder of Isshin Ryu-Tatsuo Shimabuku , trained w/ Miyagi Chojun , Chotoku Kyan , & Taira Shinken . The founder of Shotokan , Gichin Funakoshi studied under both Itosu , & Azato sensei . The founder of his own Kwan , Won Kuk Lee , studied Tae Kyon , then went to japan where he trained Shotokan w/ Funakoshi Gichin . I just dont understand how a person who trains in a style that is created by an instructor that cross trained , & their instructors cross trained , can say it's wrong to cross train . I guess men like Choi Hong Hi , Won Kuk Lee , Tatsuo Shimabuku , & Gichin Funakoshi were all wrong , due to his way of thinking . It seems odd to me , that it was ok for them , but not this generation , that is absurd !

 

[glad2bhere]

I know what you are saying and I am sorry the tone of my post is not clearer, but I also cannot take responsibility for the misuse of a terms lo these many years. People throw the concept of following a "martial art" or practicing a "martial art" like it was candy. And as if that is not bad enough there are also those instructors who feel that "martial art" means running their classes like "Hell Week". The whole idea of martial training is to imbue the practioner with a particular way of dealing with situations--- Life if you will. For want of a better way of saying it, one goes through "martial training", call it "Basic Training" or "Boot Camp", call it "probationary period" or "orientation" to get all of the individualism under-control such that everyone is on the same page. Now why am I making such a point of this?

The fact is that everytime I start representing these facts to the public the feedback that I get is uniformly negative. Some people suggest that I am being "too philosophical". Some people suggest that I am being too intellectual. Of course, there are folks like yourself who may suggest that I am being down-right "snooty" or elitist. Actually I'm not doing any of these things. What I am doing is making a case for the Korean MA to be what they have always been and what has been forgotten in the process of trying to make traditional KMA "all things to all people". They aren't. Suggesting that Hapkido is just so many revised AJJ tricks, or Kum-Bup is just reorganized Kenjutsu is not unlike saying all TKD or TSD is just Karate under another label with the money going to different pockets. The Koreans had/have a reason for selecting the material that they incoporated into their martial science and for training the way that they do. To follow these lines of thinking is to practice Korean Martial Arts. I won't pretend that everyone needs to think the way that I do, nor do I pretend that everyone is GOING to think the way that I do. I do have some understanding of the Korean value system and I know that while it must look as though the Korean arts are little more than borrowing this and that, Life experience has demonstrated that this is not the case. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[Teh Tot]

Master Instructors of TKD should not work out with lessors.

I disagree. If master instructors did not work out with those of lesser rank, then how would anyone learn? its very important for masters to teach. that is why they are called master INSTRUCTORS.