(no subject)
I was recently asked a few questions about martial arts, mine in particular and how one chooses an art and a teacher specifically. In writing a response, I exceeded the character limit for comments and so I figured that I could just post everything here. I might read some of this later and laugh at it, but for now it's a pretty good summary of what I mean when I talk about such things.
I am currently studying three seperate arts and integrating them into my own personal style. This is nothing as esoteric as it sounds; in fact, every martial artist has a distinct style that comes out of their background, training, temperment, and a host of other factors. By the time I reach my 2nd or 3rd degree black sash, I should be able to explain clearly what makes my own style distinct from my teacher's, but for now I think it's enough to list my influences and show what direction they're pointing toward.
The first, and most clearly visible, style is Northern Kajukenbo Tum-Pai kung fu. Some googling will provide more information that I can really summarize here, but the brief version of it all is that the art was originally developed in Hawaii by 5 people who were looking for a more practical approach to martial arts than what was currently available. The slums of Hawaii are a pretty tough place, and those responsible for this particular system tested nearly everything they taught in actual street combat. The result was a brutally efficent art, with emphasis on brutal. The people who came to Professor Emperado during that time were subject to frequent training injuries, with more than one person remembering that "if there wasn't blood on the floor, training wasn't finished." Broken bones and sprains were common, and this all from students who frequently held a black belt in another art. As many second and third generation students developed, they chose different aspects of the art to emphasize, and even now there are a variety of different sub-schools of Kajukenbo. The Tum-Pai variation, which my sigung Professor Bailey taught to my current teacher, is a softer variation of the methods developed in Hawaii. It blends a lot of the influence of the internal martial arts (more on that in a sec) with the combat effectiveness of the original style. The result is an art that is both effective for street combat and personal self-defense, as well as being approachable to those without the physical stamina, endurance, or desire to engage in some of the more "strenuous" training that the original school had to offer.
This comes out in all aspects of how I have been taught. I still remember my first class, learning a simple response to a wrist grab (as well as throwing a lot of punches and kicks until I nearly passed out). We still teach that same combination to new students, and I find it to be just as effective when doing some of the more free-form sparring that we do in the advanced classes. We teach the same things (sometimes simplified a bit) to kids as young as 5 and I don't think I have ever seen a serious training injury in the 2 years I have been training in this art. At the same time, the people I train with are exactly the sort of people I would want watching my back and more than a few are the very picture of what it means to be a real warrior in an age where such a thing is very rare. They walk and interact, work and play all with the bearing and manner that comes from being aware of their surroundings and confident that they can handle bad situations if they arise. I could go on praising my friends, and really that only makes my point. They have been taught well, which speaks highly of the teacher and of the art as a whole.
The other two influences are more minor, but certainly distinct and they make up the more 'advanced' aspects of my training. I have been studying Yang style Tai Chi Chuan for a little over a year now and, while many of its principles are inherent in the Tum-Pai style, I have learned much from studying it in a more isolated context. Tai Chi is often looked at as being closer to aerobics than to a combat art, but that would be a very superficial examination. It is an internal art, maning that most of the 'work' that is done in training is invisible and one can approximate the movements without gaining any benefit from them if the internal forces are left out. I have a hard time describing how exactly one trains without launching into a longer essay. The goals, however, are more clear. A Tai Chi artist is relaxed at all time, using the minimum force necessary to accomplish an action. The body is always balanced, even in positions where that seems impossible. The entire skin is 'listening', with the body ready to dissolve when force is applied, before blending with that force and then redirecting it to some other application. Striking a Tai Chi master is as ineffective as punching a pool of water and a master cannot be held by even the strongest person. With any touch, a master can feel his opponent's center of gravity and can direct even the simplest force in just the right spot to unbalance them completely. As strange and mystical as any of this sounds, I have personally experienced what it is like to have these principles applied and the effect is mindblowing for the opponent and the student the first time one manages to do it correctly. Learning to punch with a 'listening fist' is not something that I can fully grasp yet, but I know those who can and I am confident that I will learn.
The last influence has been Wing Chun, as well as the development of that art that is now called Jeet Kune Do. This is a much harder style than Tai Chi, and it focuses on close range combat (between punching/kicking range and grappling) Wing Chun uses a lot of principles of classical physics (no wonder I like it so much!) and raw speed and blends them with the same kind of listening energy that comes out of the internal arts like Tai Chi. As 'hard' (stylistically) as it can seem sometimes, there is a lot of flow to the art and I can be sparring with someone for a minute or two without either of us throwing a real punch or kick and still be tired from the effort. There is an emphasis on structure in Wing Chun, controlling the central line of attack while displacing an opponent's force so that, if he does attack, it will be less effective. JKD takes that even further, focusing on intercepting in such a way that attack and defense are the same motion. Those core principles can be extended to locks, strikes, or throws at greater ranges, but close range is where the art is naturally at home.
Selecting an art would really be the ideal way to go if all teachers were equal. They aren’t. The simple fact is that teachers are as human as anyone else, the only major difference being that you know, by virtue of their rank, that they have demonstrated the ability to train for long enough to get whatever teaching credentials are necessary to start their school. Some teachers are as foolish, shortsighted, or lazy as any other human being, despite the fact that their training discourages these qualities. I have heard about many people’s bad experiences with martial arts teachers and I can only respond with how glad I am to have been training under someone of such high character. Some things that I would look for in finding a good teacher include:
- They are interested in your personal goals and reasons for training.
- They teach most (preferably all) of their own classes.
- They are concerned about the character of their students.
All of these things would describe someone who is truly engaged in teaching, rather than simply running a business using skills that they have acquired. Also, the emphasis of the school as a whole is always a consideration. Some schools (and even entire arts) require participation in tournaments or competitions in order to advance in rank. While this may be something that many students look forward to, it’s not for everyone and should be something to consider in selecting a school. Conversely, if a student is looking to participate in competitions or seeking to learn the art as a “combat sport”, then there should be a teacher available who has knowledge in that area.
Finally there is the issue of the arts themselves. Some general knowledge is good to have in being able to know what arts are taught primarily as sport (i.e. Taekwondo, Judo, some hard style karate branches), which ones are designed to be highly practical (i.e. Krav Maga, Brazilian Jujitsu, Kajukenbo), and which are most highly traditional/cultural (i.e. Bagua/Hsing-I/Tai Chi, Shotokan Karate, most weapon arts). Note that what I have listed is the tendency for these arts based on my own research. A specific school or teacher may well teach a deeply cultural program while teaching judo and so no school should be discounted solely because of the reputation of the art. It is cliché, but nonetheless true, to say that there is no superior martial art, only superior martial artists and I have personally met people who have earned black belts in some arts who are not comfortable in a fight. I do not suppose that they failed to earn their rank, but I also do not think that I would want to be a student of their teacher as my goals are clearly incompatible with what comes out of the school.
Consider that it takes anywhere from 3 to 5 years of continuous training to achieve the rank of black belt, and consider also that it is at this rank that most serious artists would say that your training has actually begun. Selecting a school and a teacher is the making of a long term commitment if one is serious about training (and if one isn’t serious about it then any school will serve). Switching styles before achieving at least a black belt is not recommended, as there is much that would have to be unlearned in order to fully accept the new art. I cannot say enough about how fortunate I have been to find such an extraordinary teacher and school and I would hope that my experience is helpful to those who read about it.
I am currently studying three seperate arts and integrating them into my own personal style. This is nothing as esoteric as it sounds; in fact, every martial artist has a distinct style that comes out of their background, training, temperment, and a host of other factors. By the time I reach my 2nd or 3rd degree black sash, I should be able to explain clearly what makes my own style distinct from my teacher's, but for now I think it's enough to list my influences and show what direction they're pointing toward.
The first, and most clearly visible, style is Northern Kajukenbo Tum-Pai kung fu. Some googling will provide more information that I can really summarize here, but the brief version of it all is that the art was originally developed in Hawaii by 5 people who were looking for a more practical approach to martial arts than what was currently available. The slums of Hawaii are a pretty tough place, and those responsible for this particular system tested nearly everything they taught in actual street combat. The result was a brutally efficent art, with emphasis on brutal. The people who came to Professor Emperado during that time were subject to frequent training injuries, with more than one person remembering that "if there wasn't blood on the floor, training wasn't finished." Broken bones and sprains were common, and this all from students who frequently held a black belt in another art. As many second and third generation students developed, they chose different aspects of the art to emphasize, and even now there are a variety of different sub-schools of Kajukenbo. The Tum-Pai variation, which my sigung Professor Bailey taught to my current teacher, is a softer variation of the methods developed in Hawaii. It blends a lot of the influence of the internal martial arts (more on that in a sec) with the combat effectiveness of the original style. The result is an art that is both effective for street combat and personal self-defense, as well as being approachable to those without the physical stamina, endurance, or desire to engage in some of the more "strenuous" training that the original school had to offer.
This comes out in all aspects of how I have been taught. I still remember my first class, learning a simple response to a wrist grab (as well as throwing a lot of punches and kicks until I nearly passed out). We still teach that same combination to new students, and I find it to be just as effective when doing some of the more free-form sparring that we do in the advanced classes. We teach the same things (sometimes simplified a bit) to kids as young as 5 and I don't think I have ever seen a serious training injury in the 2 years I have been training in this art. At the same time, the people I train with are exactly the sort of people I would want watching my back and more than a few are the very picture of what it means to be a real warrior in an age where such a thing is very rare. They walk and interact, work and play all with the bearing and manner that comes from being aware of their surroundings and confident that they can handle bad situations if they arise. I could go on praising my friends, and really that only makes my point. They have been taught well, which speaks highly of the teacher and of the art as a whole.
The other two influences are more minor, but certainly distinct and they make up the more 'advanced' aspects of my training. I have been studying Yang style Tai Chi Chuan for a little over a year now and, while many of its principles are inherent in the Tum-Pai style, I have learned much from studying it in a more isolated context. Tai Chi is often looked at as being closer to aerobics than to a combat art, but that would be a very superficial examination. It is an internal art, maning that most of the 'work' that is done in training is invisible and one can approximate the movements without gaining any benefit from them if the internal forces are left out. I have a hard time describing how exactly one trains without launching into a longer essay. The goals, however, are more clear. A Tai Chi artist is relaxed at all time, using the minimum force necessary to accomplish an action. The body is always balanced, even in positions where that seems impossible. The entire skin is 'listening', with the body ready to dissolve when force is applied, before blending with that force and then redirecting it to some other application. Striking a Tai Chi master is as ineffective as punching a pool of water and a master cannot be held by even the strongest person. With any touch, a master can feel his opponent's center of gravity and can direct even the simplest force in just the right spot to unbalance them completely. As strange and mystical as any of this sounds, I have personally experienced what it is like to have these principles applied and the effect is mindblowing for the opponent and the student the first time one manages to do it correctly. Learning to punch with a 'listening fist' is not something that I can fully grasp yet, but I know those who can and I am confident that I will learn.
The last influence has been Wing Chun, as well as the development of that art that is now called Jeet Kune Do. This is a much harder style than Tai Chi, and it focuses on close range combat (between punching/kicking range and grappling) Wing Chun uses a lot of principles of classical physics (no wonder I like it so much!) and raw speed and blends them with the same kind of listening energy that comes out of the internal arts like Tai Chi. As 'hard' (stylistically) as it can seem sometimes, there is a lot of flow to the art and I can be sparring with someone for a minute or two without either of us throwing a real punch or kick and still be tired from the effort. There is an emphasis on structure in Wing Chun, controlling the central line of attack while displacing an opponent's force so that, if he does attack, it will be less effective. JKD takes that even further, focusing on intercepting in such a way that attack and defense are the same motion. Those core principles can be extended to locks, strikes, or throws at greater ranges, but close range is where the art is naturally at home.
Selecting an art would really be the ideal way to go if all teachers were equal. They aren’t. The simple fact is that teachers are as human as anyone else, the only major difference being that you know, by virtue of their rank, that they have demonstrated the ability to train for long enough to get whatever teaching credentials are necessary to start their school. Some teachers are as foolish, shortsighted, or lazy as any other human being, despite the fact that their training discourages these qualities. I have heard about many people’s bad experiences with martial arts teachers and I can only respond with how glad I am to have been training under someone of such high character. Some things that I would look for in finding a good teacher include:
- They are interested in your personal goals and reasons for training.
- They teach most (preferably all) of their own classes.
- They are concerned about the character of their students.
All of these things would describe someone who is truly engaged in teaching, rather than simply running a business using skills that they have acquired. Also, the emphasis of the school as a whole is always a consideration. Some schools (and even entire arts) require participation in tournaments or competitions in order to advance in rank. While this may be something that many students look forward to, it’s not for everyone and should be something to consider in selecting a school. Conversely, if a student is looking to participate in competitions or seeking to learn the art as a “combat sport”, then there should be a teacher available who has knowledge in that area.
Finally there is the issue of the arts themselves. Some general knowledge is good to have in being able to know what arts are taught primarily as sport (i.e. Taekwondo, Judo, some hard style karate branches), which ones are designed to be highly practical (i.e. Krav Maga, Brazilian Jujitsu, Kajukenbo), and which are most highly traditional/cultural (i.e. Bagua/Hsing-I/Tai Chi, Shotokan Karate, most weapon arts). Note that what I have listed is the tendency for these arts based on my own research. A specific school or teacher may well teach a deeply cultural program while teaching judo and so no school should be discounted solely because of the reputation of the art. It is cliché, but nonetheless true, to say that there is no superior martial art, only superior martial artists and I have personally met people who have earned black belts in some arts who are not comfortable in a fight. I do not suppose that they failed to earn their rank, but I also do not think that I would want to be a student of their teacher as my goals are clearly incompatible with what comes out of the school.
Consider that it takes anywhere from 3 to 5 years of continuous training to achieve the rank of black belt, and consider also that it is at this rank that most serious artists would say that your training has actually begun. Selecting a school and a teacher is the making of a long term commitment if one is serious about training (and if one isn’t serious about it then any school will serve). Switching styles before achieving at least a black belt is not recommended, as there is much that would have to be unlearned in order to fully accept the new art. I cannot say enough about how fortunate I have been to find such an extraordinary teacher and school and I would hope that my experience is helpful to those who read about it.