whats wrong with an art thats quick to learn
- Thread starter cfr
- Start date
KennethKu
2nd Black Belt
An art that is hard to learn is not practical, in terms of self defence application. Best suited for academic exercise.
Martial art is simple. A punch is just a punch. A kick is just a kick. If you wanna punch, punch. If you wanna kick, kick. The key is whether you can do it fast enough and hard enough. That comes from conditioning, which takes time. You body take times to improve.
Martial art is simple. A punch is just a punch. A kick is just a kick. If you wanna punch, punch. If you wanna kick, kick. The key is whether you can do it fast enough and hard enough. That comes from conditioning, which takes time. You body take times to improve.
W
whackjob-san
Guest
Wasn't the whole Gracie mantra about how "someone who studies Gracie Jujutsu for 1 year can defeat an opponent of 20 years experience in any other art?"
I had a friend who studied aikido and would bust on the credibility of judo because they promoted people too quickly. To him there was no way you were a "real" black belt if you earned it in under 6 years.
I had a friend who studied aikido and would bust on the credibility of judo because they promoted people too quickly. To him there was no way you were a "real" black belt if you earned it in under 6 years.
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
Everything.
W
whackjob-san
Guest
I'm not taking any offense, I'd just like to clarify...
You're saying there is something wrong with judo?
You're saying there is something wrong with judo?
If this was directed at me, no, I was not saying there is anything wrong with Judo. I have a few training partners that train in Judo. I know nothing about the ranking system of Judo. In regards to how long it takes, all I was saying was, is that it takes longer than 6yrs to get a BB in BJJ. Every style is different, so of course the ranking time is going to be different.
Mike
Rob- Not quite sure what you're getting at here. Care to explain?? Actually, I could probably guess at what that meant, but I dont want to assume anything. My guess would probably be something along the lines of-- no katas, no stance work, which I might add, is not correct, because that is something that is included. And, then we have the, as you say, claims of being invulnerable, and the list goes on and on.
Mike
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
My point is that while learning an art "quickly,"--might help to know what that means--MIGHT get you some degree of effective self-defense (after all, there's the legend of wing chun...), the fact is that very, very, very few people have the talent to learn an effective art quickly.
Moreover, to even start to get to the higher degrees of any style/system (let alone to really learn the art), long practice guided by something resembling those wacky forms sets, etc., is absolutely essential. Not enough, but essential.
Those forms, sets, etc., can of course also become a trap. Sure. fetishized knowledge is no knowledge at all. Sure, there's unrealism is martial arts--and it's everywhere, including the currently-fashionable MMAs, grappling arts, etc.
But I stand by my original statements. First, there's still the great question Mr. Parker asked in one of his books: if all you want is very quick self-defense, why not just get a gun? And, as I've mentioned before in echo of Michael Crichton's "Jurassic Park," we've got too many folks running around as it is who have acquired power without responsibility.
Are there folks who can learn an art faster that I can? Absolutely. Are there good folks and good martial artists who study a less-complex, stripped-down system that works for 'em? Absolutely. Are there "street fighters" who can kick my *** in a heartbeat? Absolutely.
Are there folks out there who are stripping down systems and throwing out what they fantasize is useless, just like Daffy Duck tearing out wires under a car hood? Absolutely. Are there people who jettisoned the sets, forms, techniques, etc., because they for whatever reason never learened to even see what they have to teach? Absolutely. Are there people who esentially bully smaller people, make darn sure that they're never in a situation where they might get a healthy shock or three, then claim that traditional arts are useless? Absolutely.
It would be better to take these questions on an individual, precise basis rather than to generalize.
Moreover, to even start to get to the higher degrees of any style/system (let alone to really learn the art), long practice guided by something resembling those wacky forms sets, etc., is absolutely essential. Not enough, but essential.
Those forms, sets, etc., can of course also become a trap. Sure. fetishized knowledge is no knowledge at all. Sure, there's unrealism is martial arts--and it's everywhere, including the currently-fashionable MMAs, grappling arts, etc.
But I stand by my original statements. First, there's still the great question Mr. Parker asked in one of his books: if all you want is very quick self-defense, why not just get a gun? And, as I've mentioned before in echo of Michael Crichton's "Jurassic Park," we've got too many folks running around as it is who have acquired power without responsibility.
Are there folks who can learn an art faster that I can? Absolutely. Are there good folks and good martial artists who study a less-complex, stripped-down system that works for 'em? Absolutely. Are there "street fighters" who can kick my *** in a heartbeat? Absolutely.
Are there folks out there who are stripping down systems and throwing out what they fantasize is useless, just like Daffy Duck tearing out wires under a car hood? Absolutely. Are there people who jettisoned the sets, forms, techniques, etc., because they for whatever reason never learened to even see what they have to teach? Absolutely. Are there people who esentially bully smaller people, make darn sure that they're never in a situation where they might get a healthy shock or three, then claim that traditional arts are useless? Absolutely.
It would be better to take these questions on an individual, precise basis rather than to generalize.
Let me try to clear up a few things Rob. As for learning "quick". First, I'm not sure what you're def. of quick is. Take Krav Maga for example. It teaches you effective SD in a short amount of time. Will the student learn the entire system in a month? No of course not due to the fact that there is much more to learn. The fact of the matter is, is can you say the same about another art, such as Kenpo? After 1 month, can the student walk around and be confident that they can defend themselves?? Another example is BJJ. Why is it that a BJJ student with as much as a year of training can beat a guy with 3 times the training?
The reason that people CAN learn the art effectively, is that the material that is being taught is simple and does not really require alot of thought. For example, a front, rear, and side choke. In Kenpo, you are going to have at least 3 different responses- 1 for each attack. With Krav Maga, the way they go about releasing the hands is the same no matter if its a choke from the front, rear or side. Do you really think, that if youre being attacked, that you're going to have the time to think, "Ok, this is how I'm being attacked from the front. Which one of the 20 front choke defenses am I going to use?" That Rob, is where the simpleness of it all comes from.
Another big thing, is the aliveness and the resistance that the reality based and so called quick systems have. If there is no ressitance, how can you possibly be getting a realistic attack? Take a punch tech. Do you think that someone on the street is going to stand there while you go through 10 moves? What about a grab. Are they going to just stand there? Of course not. Instead they will be pushing into you, trying to slam you around, etc. You're going to fight like you train!!
Mike
good post
This has been touched on but what do we consider quick?
Is this a black belt in 1 year, a twenty class green belt, etc.?
Is it a clas that makes you think your unbeatable in less than a year or 6 mo?
Sometime it depends on what a person is looking for. If you are in it or self defence your learning time may be different than those that are in it for excersise and a little knowledge of self defence. If your in it for knowledge of the art and the martial arts in general it will take longer
This has been touched on but what do we consider quick?
Is this a black belt in 1 year, a twenty class green belt, etc.?
Is it a clas that makes you think your unbeatable in less than a year or 6 mo?
Sometime it depends on what a person is looking for. If you are in it or self defence your learning time may be different than those that are in it for excersise and a little knowledge of self defence. If your in it for knowledge of the art and the martial arts in general it will take longer
Thanks for the compliment and your post was good as well! Again, as you have said, and as I have said many times, it all depends on what the person is looking for. Some are looking for weight loss, something to do after work/school, a place to meet new friends, etc. Just because one person does the art for the tradition, forms, etc. does NOT mean that everyone else who does not share those views is incorrect. We are all our own unique person, NOT robots!
Mike
Another excellent point!! Look at when BJJ first came on the scene. EVERYBODY was being dominated by this art. As time went on, others looked at the art, and began to train it, learn the counters, etc. and they themselves became one of those unbeatable people. Now, you have sooo many people training in BJJ and other grappling arts, that nobody can say that they are unbeatable due to this fact.
I always say, and I believe that there is ALWAYS gonna be someone whos better than you. To think that you're unbeatable is gonna do nothing except make you lose alot faster!
Mike
K
KanoLives
Guest
I totally agree here.
I have a question though. What is wrong with someone getting a Black Belt in one year? I mean as a long as the person doesn't claim to be something their not or claim to be the end all be all. Or better yet that they are a master of so called art. As long as they are being true I don't see a problem with it. BB is a mentality not "Oh I have a BB I can kick anyone's butt". And a BB doesn't mean that you've mastered anything rather you have the knowledge or requirements for that rank. What the person does with it as far as application is up to the individual.
To sum it up. As long as a person who gets their BB in one year realizes that there is still plenty to learn and train. That there is always room for improvement and has the mentality of a BB to do so. What's wrong with getting a BB in one year?
It's not the color of the belts right? It's the attitude, knowledge, willingness, skill, etc....
What are your thoughts? :asian:
Good points here. Again, as I've said, every art is different, so depending on what you're studying, will determine how long it takes. In BJJ for example, by the time you reach BB level, most people in other arts are probably getting ready for their 2nd BB.
I'm a firm believer that the belt means nothing. Let me explain. Just because someone might be a BB, does not make them a superman. They can spar a white belt, which IMO, is more dangerous than an upper belt due to the fact that they have not developed any control yet, and get hit many times. Its no different than someone with no training. A BB might still get his a** kicked. I would hope that having a BB, or any skill for that matter, would give you the edge, but thats not always the case.
The point I'm trying to get at here, is that the belt makes no difference. I dont care if you have 1 stripe or 10 stripes. What matters is, can you do the material effectively and make it work?? If you cant defend yourself effectively, then all the stripes in the world are not going to help you.
Mike
My current Sensei remarked to me one night after class during a discussion that belt color is not for the student it is for him. The belt color is simply a way for an instructor to walk into a class and know at a glance what knowledge each student should possess and at about what level of ability the student should be. Other than that forget about them.
I found that for myself, once I attained rank in my first art that attaining rank in others lost it's luster. This has been a great asset to me as I've changed styles. I'm able to admit to myself and my instructor that I may not be ready to test for the next level because I simply want to take more time to work on technique for that level or the one previous a little while longer to get more comfortable. Our tests are cumulative and each test includes the techniques from all the previous belts. The instructor must see a progression in your ability for EACH set of techniques. Not that you simply remember all the previous stuff and have learned how to do the new.
Similar threads
Latest Discussions
-
-
éåæ ZhĆ²ngxÄ«n center of gravity
- Latest: Wing Woo Gar
-
-
-