Explain this!

[Merryprankster]

A thought that's been mulling in my head:

Why is it that the only place you can be considered a master and never have actually executed your supposed mastery is in the MA's?

A master chef's gotta cook... a master painter's gotta paint, a master welder's gotta weld.

Yet, you've got people out there who've never sparred full contact, never fought, never done anything really, to demonstrate mastery--or even competency of any sort--that are teaching.

What gives?

[Former castleva]

Is that a rant? :)

At least in MA,can´t speak that much for other things,master does not necessarily consider him/herself one.
Just like one well-known master Morihei Uesiba states,one keep´s growing constantly trough practice,sky is the limit.
Of course those masters are concious that they have trained hard and for a long time,and are then able to pass their knowledge on for their students.
I think for that mastery,there is most importantly more to it than fighting,I think master´s should be a respect worthy example for others and wise in all areas of MA.

As you obviously talk of technical excellence,I believe that is not neglected neither unless you are talking about these/those imposters that don´t do much for community but are rather thirsty for ranks (which can be a problem these days,but to confuse them with masters,nah)

[Merryprankster]

There is as much art as technique in the craft of cooking--just as in MA...

Welding (believe me) is the same way.

And they are required to actually demonstrate both before earning that title.

Is it unreasonable to expect the same from MAists?

[Royal Dragon]

Welding sux!! Only mixing lead and Tin to from Solder rules!! Yes, that's right, I'm dissing traditional Welding and promoting the Mixed Metal Arts:D

[Ish]

Merryprankster

how would you like this to be demonstrated?
would the so called master have to beat several random apponents, at the same time, blind folded mabe, do they have to have great teaching skills or do they just have to know it themselves.

[No_Know]

Demonstrate to get the title. But do they demonstrate at every demand to prove that they are a Master?

Cooking is entertainment. Like NHB events. It's a hands-on-field. It's a performance field.

Welders are closer but they are commercial. Standardized exams (demonstrations of abilities--certain skills and skill levels).~

In each Kung-Fu System there are System specific Standards. There is a protocol in each System and each form has it's focus. you can tell skills acquired by what form a person is on...The progression is Tiger before Leopard. But if you already have skills that Tiger builds as a foundation to Leopard, you might not learn a Tiger form and get taught Leopard because that's your level of competancy.

They used to not get taught out of order or skipped (much) because going through the System progression you either learned the skill for your level or stayed back in the cirriculum. This is why going to class no matter (just about) what was So Important. The other students would motivate you to practice. There's a positive peer-pressure effect--you get to feel it's what you should do (practice to get that skill (meaning really grasp the form or it's element(s))). You might see people do the form you are on and seen ten times or by ten different people, you can distill the similarities that everyone seems to get, and presume they all had the same teacher or that that's how it's to be done. But realize things you do and don't do by seeing it done again and again. It's a nurturing environment.

Master is different from master of a fighting Kung-Fu. Within a fighting Kung-Fu a person can be considered a Master of a particular technique or skill.

[Helicopter]

What questions does having fought full contact actually answer?


Does the 'master' have the mental attitude for combat?

Does the 'master' have the physical skills for combat?

Can a 'master' read an opponent and use the right technique?

Do the 'master's' techniques work?

I think anyone with a degree of training can make a judgements on a 'master's' skills without knowing whether he's fought full contact or not.

Not every member of the SAS or Navy Seals has actually been on active duty. Hostage-rescue units are 'lucky' if they ever get a real situation to deal with.

[Leonidas]

In order for you to tell if someone is a martial arts master or not is for them to fight. There aren't exactly many reasons to fight these days and no one goes around challenging people to street matches anymore. With a cook, a painter, a welder or whoever else, you can usually tell how good they are by the quality of their work. How good the meal is or how skillfully done the painting is or how strong the weld is, but martial arts skill is all a matter of opinion. Most teachers dont fight anymore and everyone wants to think their teacher is a master or else they wouldn't be learning from them right? It seems like too much trouble to try and go around and prove or disprove everyone. In some cases its just a title. A cultural thing mainly from Asian. If you teach someone they become your disciple, you are their master. Doesn't necessarily mean you learned everything but some people make that mistake and they quit practicing.

[Ryu]

While I do agree with the sparring aspect, you've got to ask yourself just what "martial art" demonstrating is.

A welder, painter, and cook use the skills of their craft, but that doesn't necessarily mean they compete with each other.

Does "martial art" equal fighting only, or does the master's "skill" cover more things?


That's the thing. People have different opinions on just what a "master" should show.

Ryu

[FatherDog]

Actually, when I was in college, one of the main complaints of myself and many of my classmates in the computer science courses was how many of our professors had never worked in the industry, or ever used their programming knowledge for anything useful (or, frequently, anything at all.)

Although I'm sure this varies greatly by subject, in many cases, the professors teaching a subject are all the people who never did go out and test their knowledge... because they instead stayed at college to teach.

Not exactly the same thing as a Master, but certainly a parallel.

[rubthebuddha]

very much a parallel.

compare the old days -- a master martial artist often had to prove his stuff to other masters, and then the title was given by them. same with a mason. they worked and worked and worked their stone, and when their skill was one of a certain level, their fellow masons granted them the title.

not sure how it is with masons (the stoneworkers, not the lodgemembers down the street) these days, but anyone these days can start calling thsemvelves master right now, and with a little fudging, they can have the "certification" from a few associations to show it.

basically, it comes down to a checks and balances system. we have none these days, and thus shmucks can call themselves what they want and get paid for it.

speaking of masons, i wonder how many of the current guild's membership has actually worked with stone to any degree. :confused:

[apoweyn]

merryprankster and me have just been discussing this via email (before he buggered off to go and take a nap or something).

thought i'd post the gist of it here:


me: thing is, in all fairness, we DO demand proof. the real question is how compelling that proof is to everyone else. think about it. in WTF taekwondo, 'master' is a title given to 4th-degree black belts. and despite my personal misgivings about the title, and perhaps even about the requirements for a 4th-degree black belt, the fact remains that there is a test. and
depending on the individual school, the evidence presented will be more or less compelling.

if a master chef is well known for his thai dishes, but i find thai food unpalatable (i don't), then i may consider this guy a master of jack and sh*t. but that's a subjective assessment.

you know me. combat effectiveness is an issue for me. but not for everyone. (anyone that makes semantic debates about MARTIAL arts can help themselves to a big, steak-flavoured piece of my arse.) i believe that, if you're going to use that accursed word at all, proof should be provided. i just don't expect that i'm personally necessarily going to find that proof very convincing. and that's fine. i'm not going to find a 'master chef' in french cuisine very convincing either.

merryprankster: Exactly. And I don't have a problem with that. But the thing is that any idiot who starts up his own school calls himself master and we (collective) don't ask for proof.

Now, the truth, and I think you know it, is that an MAist should be able to handle themselves in a violent confrontation. I don't think we ask for proof of that.

stuart: but if i went into a restaurant that pimped itself by saying, "all meals cooked by master chef pierre stinkybottom", i wouldn't ask to see credentials before ordering.

merryprankster: No but you would if you wanted to train with him.

here's the point, as i see it (and i think it's a good one): if someone says he's a master welder, perhaps we ask for certification of some sort. but we all know how not difficult it is to get paper certification for martial arts. you can literally order it out of the magazines.

more likely, we ask for examples of his work. welding. we can look at something the guy welded and say, "boy, yeah, that looks well done. doesn't seem to leak. excellent."

same thing with a master chef. he says he's a master at french cuisine. i taste it and say, "yep, that's good french cuisine."

but when master joe mcdojoe says, "i'm a master of martial arts", the analogous experience for us is different. and here's why:

the purpose of welding is relatively precise, right? within a given context, we know what welding is supposed to accomplish. water still leaking from that pipe? yes? not a great welding job. did the thing fall off? no? excellent. good welding, pal!

cuisine is a little more subjective. but assuming i know my cuisine, i can make an educated call on whether the guy genuinely is a master.

but it requires a certain degree of knowledge on the part of the student to know whether the master is a master or no. me personally, a master chef could serve me braised dog poo in a bernaise sauce and i wouldn't know it wasn't 'authentic.'

and that's the problem with martial arts masters. the people asking the questions don't know what the answer's supposed to look or sound like. if a newbie asks, "does this work for self defense?" and then the master demonstrates a series of killer moves on his assistant, a more experienced martial artist might understand that this is choreographed, or that the opponent is leaving his hand extended, or that a punch to the stomach won't necessarily finish someone, etc. but to a newbie, that's proof.

add to that the inherent ambiguousness of our standards. am i interested in how well this master adheres to the aesthetic or stylistic details of the art? am i more concerned with his ability to stop the shoot? are weapons a concern? etc. what one person considers a master, even after demanding proof and getting it, isn't necessarily going to correspond with another person's requirements.

besides, even when we get proof, how do we know what we're looking at? as a teenager, the knife defenses i learned in taekwondo seemed perfectly viable to me. it wasn't until i got to eskrima that i started thinking, 'boy, that wasn't like self-defense sequence no. 3 at all! that was random and chaotic and ugly!' and, in truth, my eskrima experience was probably far from the reality mark too. so how am i, who's never experienced a real knifefight, supposed to judge whether joe mcdojoe has mastered knifefighting?

there are too many degrees of separation between perception and reality. personally, i think part of the solution would be a better-educated public. and that would require breaking down the mystique we like to attach to martial arts.


stuart b.

[ShaolinTiger00]

I'm going to open my big yap and say this.

(kungfu) If your sifu isn't a proven bonefide ass-kicker then find one that is. Otherwise you are wasting time.

You train kungfu to fight. If you wanted a positive role model go hug a research scientist or nun.

Internal hippies please continue...

[No_Know]

In Fighting Kung-Fus, you are noticed and improvements can be seen As you progress it is obvious who can do what to what degree. The proving of mastery is done throughout one's training. With enough Skill and Time-in, word of mouth will announce your mastery automatically, if you have it. They wouldn't saty if it wasn't true. Sorta thing. Rumor establishes Respect.

The Chinese were so, procedural that acquisition of a position, unless rumored or stated otherwise was presumed to have the preoutlined general skills or characteristics for That position.

Position in China was earned by Skill with Time-in. By the time someone ascended to a high position, they had acquired the skills of the positions below that and were superior. This was almost without exception. By the time they got to a position, you had an idea of their skills without them having to prove to the No_Knows. They proved themselves to the appropriate superior, literally, All along the way. No need to prove what has already been established.

One can tell a person's training by their musculatures, hand, forearm, shoulders, calves, thighs, breast design. Skin texture (apparant quality). I can only speak of skills. And a skilled person can be suspected of Mastery (In a Fighting Kung-Fu).

As the skill improves it filters in to everyday actin and becomes virtually indiscernable from just doing something except for the perfectnss of it. One can understand that there is skill, without having that level of it. And one might just thionk Wow or there's something special about that person, and not know conciously exactly what it is. (Read apoweyne's say, and recalled this aspect and put it here).

Pouring tea...
How they walk...
How they step...
The way their arms and hands move together...
They might move quietly or lightly.
They are usually reserved (beware of the quiet ones~)
They might move heavy things effortlessly.
.
.
.

A Master in Kung-Fu seems to be not a status thing. In China~ (ancient) you are not a sifu because or when you have the title in front of your name. You are a sifu when The People Call you Sifu. People you never met will address you that way type-of-thing. Relevantly perhaps, Master is not a self appointment, but a social awareness.

There perhaps is a lightness to them (one movie refers to this as the Glow. While not quite as pronounced as that perhaps you get an idea. They look special in a not bad way. These are perhaps Masters.

I'll look for a more credible description. But I answered as to why they don't have to prove themselves. There was a description of a Master...not what you asked but seems appropriate-ish, in a blue book on staff and flute.

[apoweyn]

'go hug a nun,' is about to become my new catch phrase. you've been warned.

[guohuen]

Oh boy! I get to write it first!

"Those that can, do. Those that can't, don't. Those that wish they could, teach."

Certificate or not, it's word of mouth that gets you known for real.
After all if someone says, "I heard such and such is a great, fighter, chef, musician." it really doesn't mean much. Now if they say, " I've seen such and such fight, or tasted their food, or heard them play and they're really good." that may have some weight. Particularly if the people saying this are known themselves.

[apoweyn]

right. but if an enthusiastic newbie says, "i've seen him fight and he's good", what does that mean, exactly?

[rogue]

Just being able to kick butt doesn't make one a master. I consider my TKD master a true master. His execution of technique is perfect, his forms are so clean and crisp you want to cry, his dedication to the martial arts is deep and wide (holds bb rank in judo, karate and WTF TKD and masters rank in ITF TKD), people of advanced rank I respect outside of his system who've trained with him consider him a master, his sparring is excellent, and when the need or desire hit him can be a real butt kicker like he was when he was younger.

I also know several "masters" who are awful, and got their rank from some after market or home grown federations. Of course the excuse most often used was they don't have the time or money to go to the Kukikwan to take their masters test.

And I know of one TKD master who is an excellent kickboxer and teacher but not up to the same all around level as my schools master and received his advanced rank from a school that was a borderline mcDojang.

But the question boils down to what makes a master a master. My master is a safe bet on being a master. The guys and gals in the second example have schools, fancy belts and certificates from "federations" that say they are a master. And the last a good fighter who is a sincere and good teacher who gained his rank from "masters" that may be from example two.

[guohuen]

I was talking about an informed opinion. Forming an opinion without enough information is called rationalization, or a national election.

[Braden]

Who cares? It's just a title. Anyone calling themselves master should be taken with a huge grain of salt to begin with. But this is hardly something limited to martial arts... for example, the bulk of Grammy award winners don't and can't write music, but they recieve the highest accolate for muscianship. That's just society. Best worth ignoring.

[apoweyn]

Originally posted by guohuen
I was talking about an informed opinion. Forming an opinion without enough information is called rationalization, or a national election.

LOL :D

[respectmankind]

so you're saying that you need to practice the stuff you learn, what gives? are you retarded?!?! thats not what all the movies have told me.

[Royal Dragon]

here's the point, as i see it (and i think it's a good one): if someone says he's a master welder, perhaps we ask for certification of some sort. but we all know how not difficult it is to get paper certification for martial arts. you can literally order it out of the magazines.
Reply]
You can be a "Certified" welder?? I just sort of learned how because I worked around metal, now I'm a "Master Welder"

>>more likely, we ask for examples of his work. welding. we can look at something the guy welded and say, "boy, yeah, that looks well done. doesn't seem to leak. excellent."

Reply]
Yeah, this is almost always how it's done. every job interview I ever went on I showed up in army fatigues an ugly a leather welding jacket and my welding hood.

Oh another note, my MMA (Mixed Metal Art) joke was THAT sad that I didn't even get a comment on it???:confused:

>>"
There perhaps is a lightness to them (one movie refers to this as the Glow). While not quite as pronounced as that perhaps you get an idea. They look special in a not bad way. These are perhaps Masters."

Reply]
Would we be talking about the "Last Dragon" here?? Bruce Leroy was the lead charecter, and Cindy Lauper was one of the bad guys girlfreind? What was the evil masters name?? Was it ""Sho Nuff!!"?? I remeber one of the charecters calling him "Mr. Nuf":eek: I LOVED that silly movie!!!:D

Whooooooooooos da Mast'aaaa!!!?????? (All respond) SHO "E" Nuff!!!!!!!:p

[David Jamieson]

You can be a practicing medical Doctor and only have passed in the bottom percentile of your class with a 65%.

This is more disconcerning than someone who has mastered kungfu.

Masters of Kungfu have indeed demonstrated their skills and continue to do so with their students at every lesson they give.

Does a master chef have to compete to hold his title of "master chef"? Perhaps early in his career and maybe even periodically throughout it for the fun of it.

I believe the same is true of any field.

Besides, who is anyone to "demand" proof. He's not "giving" you your Kung Fu, he's only helping you find it for yourself. If he can help you find your kung fu, then that's all a "master" needs to do for you.

peace

[Merryprankster]

Well, Kung Lek, you can concoct potions of herbs, make balms, supplements, etc and sell them by putting a shingle out without any personal study in an institution/quality control at all, just about. I'll take my chances with the Doctor at the bottom of his class.

Ok.

I don't think I made myself very clear here.

First, I'm not suggesting we ask this guy go kick somebody's ass.

However, master chefs and master welders and the like allow their work to be held up to public scrutiny by people "in the know." You get to be a master chef or welder by developing a reputation for exceptional product and craftsmanship. I don't think these guys have to run around and "prove," themeselves all the time.

Why do we not seem to demand the same of a Master MAist? For so many, when we question how, when, why and what capabilities as a fighter and a teacher a Master posesses, we get the "that's disrespectful," response, or some variation on that theme, ala


Besides, who is anyone to "demand" proof.

Heck, somebody claims to be a master chef, a sommelier, or a brewmeister, I want to see/hear their resume, examine their work, find out about their rep, and maybe go through a few trial runs before I latch onto them in any fashion.

[David Jamieson]

But are you knowing enough to see the mastery in the simplest things?

That's what I mean by stating "who is anyone to demand proof".

A singular demonstration is not enough to show anything comprehensive about a martial arts master and their level of mastery.

To compete or proove ones mastery over and over again is not necessary. In MA, to master others is strength, but to master the self is power.

Besides, anyone who claims mastery can likely demonstrate it for you in some fashion.

Are you saying that you have seen a greater percentage of people claiming mastery that have no skill? Because those folks are quickly exposed for what they are and aren't worth the effort worrying about them.

peace

[Royal Dragon]

"You get to be a master chef or welder by developing a reputation for exceptional product and craftsmanship. I don't think these guys have to run around and "prove," themeselves all the time"

Reply]
I prove myself in the shop 5 days a week, sometimes even on saturday. it's part of the profession. I think a Kung Fu master should do the same. I also think many of them do prove themselves day in and day out on the floors of thier schools.

As a welder, I don't go out and publically weld for the industry, I demonstright my skills on a daily basis inside the shop where only my superiors and underlings really see the proof on a regular basis. The same goes through with Martial arts masters.

Just because they don't prove publically does not mean they don't prove themselves at all. It's done the same way a welder does, in the shop and not in public view becuase THAT is where it really counts.

[HuangKaiVun]

"Those that can, do. Those that can't, don't. Those that wish they could, teach."

That is the most utterly WRONG thing I've ever heard. I'm not saying that guohen is wrong, I'm saying that I hate that line.

If that were truly the case, we might as well drop out of school now and just give up on life.

Teaching, like kung fu, is something in which a guy either DOES IT or he DOESN'T. It takes a special type of personality and a great deal of ability to become a teacher, even a so-called crappy one.

The greatest masters of any field got to where they are because they learned how to teach themselves. That's why they're so terrific at what they do.

I prefer to say, "Those that can, do. Those that can't, don't. Those that KNOW they could and wish that OTHERS could as well, teach".

[Former castleva]

Well actually there is only one oriental art that I know in which it´s exponents may openly call themselves a "master".
That´s Reiki-japanese healing art :D (I´ll stick my ankle between the door to say that at least in KF and certain other MA you also have to know how to heal,no generalisation and I´m not starting a thread on it)
Let´s put some more depth into this,taking an example from aikido.
At lower teacher levels,you will have to do certain belt tests (like in any other art,and those tests can be hard) when at very high levels,there are no belt tests but ranks are given out (not lightly) if you are able to spread the name of art in a positive manner or/& develop it (in a way that a single person can)

[Daredevil]

Shaolintiger wrote:
If your sifu isn't a proven bonefide ass-kicker then find one that is. Otherwise you are wasting time.

You train kungfu to fight. If you wanted a positive role model go hug a research scientist or nun.

Internal hippies please continue...

I agree with this sentiment 100%. I can't believe what other folks are thinking.

However, I understand that the many times problem is ... what is proof enough?

Oh, not all internalists are hippies, either. ;)

[looking_up]

"If you wanted a positive role model go hug a research scientist..."

Not.

[Merryprankster]

Sigh...I'm obviously not getting my point across. No fault of anybody here, I'm just not articulating well, I guess.

RD,

I know. But you develop a reputation. And if somebody is looking for a person to apprentice under--well! Don't you think they'd want a good welder? Somebody who's stuff stands up to destructive and non-destructive testing? Somebody whose stuff doesn't look like chewing gum?

Kung Lek,

Who said a single demonstration? You don't develop a rep for excellence based off one incident. You develop it over time. People keep coming back to your restaurant, your dishes are lauded by food critics--you wow people with your ability to discern vintage, region, grape, year, etc, consistently.

You prove you know your stuff.

And if you were right about people whose knowledge is shallow getting exposed quickly, well HELLO MCDOJO--none of those running around in the U.S.!


To compete or proove ones mastery over and over again is not necessary. In MA, to master others is strength, but to master the self is power.

Please--spare me the neo-hippy philosophizing. I don't really need it. Trite phrases do not amount to learned--or even thoughtful--insight.

[Braden]

I'm not getting your point either, MP.

For instance, with chefs... every restaurant in town will tell you they've got the goods. McDonalds, for goodness sakes, has international ad compaigns saying they have the juiceiest, freshest burger. What do you expect, though? That they put signs in their window "We pretty much suck and will clog your arteries, come on in!"? Thing is... everyone who eats out knows McDonald's sucks, and if they want a fast burger they go to Wendy's or Harvey's.

Same deal here. Except, way less so. Almost no one in the kungfu community makes any claims whatsoever about being a master, or anything of the like. And regardless of claims, or lack thereof, word of skilled practitioners and teachers gets around, provided you're in the training community - just like with McDonalds, you only know they suck if you happen to be in the community of people who eat fast food.

[rogue]

What's the point of being a master? It's to have desciples(aka students) isn't it? Which means that a master may be better defined by the results in his students and not in his personal fight record. But if you're going to train fighters you better have done some fight time somewhere at sometime.

Here's the definition that I think sums up the term master in how I think about the word.
"A worker qualified to teach apprentices and carry on the craft independently."

[eulerfan]

A good friend of mine is a painter. He sells and is fairly pricey, too. He apprentices under a guy who couldn't sell a painting to save his life. My friend knows this but will still tell you that the training he has recieved under this man is priceless to him. People apply to him constantly but he only accepts a choice few apprentices. Nobody cares that his paintings suck. He is still a master.

So, MP, mas are not the only place where you don't have to be proven to be a master.

I'm sure that, if you went into the world of welding or cooking you would hear similar stories.

[Merryprankster]

eulerfan (nice name by the way--I like it!)

The guy's clearly a master teacher--with a reputation as such, yeah? Lots of guys out there are good at the nuts and bolts, but totally artless. I know a few mechanics--some can only do things "the way it's supposed to be,"... then others can put anything together and tweak it just right and improvise when something absolutely must 100% work. There's an art to it. Anyway...

Rogue has the definition I think I was looking for. Fits me quite well, and I think I'll take it! :)

Personally, I'm starting to wonder if I thought about this well enough to ask a proper question to begin with.... *looks around nervously for Braden to descend with +5 rapier of rhetoric, runs screaming off into the distance.*

[eulerfan]

Thank you! I'm doing a lot of complex analysis right now. It really makes you appreciate the man.

And, I agree, when an argument comes down to semantics, it is best to remember the old adage, "Sometimes the only way to win is not to fight."

[rogue]

Rogue has the definition I think I was looking for. Fits me quite well, and I think I'll take it! Just remember the royalties MP.;) OK I'll admit that I got the def off of dictionary.com, my second favorite web site.

MP, good topic. Considering that I have a TKD master I had to think about what the title meant to me and how he's represented himself to his students, and that definition was it. We're not his slaves and while IMO he has mastered several systems he never talks about what he's mastered but what he's learned.

Anyways, I believe that anybody who considers themself a master of a martial art would have had to do some hard fighting(combat, street, ring, even within the school at least) and some hard training. Unfortunatly today anybody that opens a school considers themself a master.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Royal Dragon
"You get to be a master chef or welder by developing a reputation for exceptional product and craftsmanship. I don't think these guys have to run around and "prove," themeselves all the time"

Reply]
I prove myself in the shop 5 days a week, sometimes even on saturday. it's part of the profession. I think a Kung Fu master should do the same. I also think many of them do prove themselves day in and day out on the floors of thier schools.

As a welder, I don't go out and publically weld for the industry, I demonstright my skills on a daily basis inside the shop where only my superiors and underlings really see the proof on a regular basis. The same goes through with Martial arts masters.

Just because they don't prove publically does not mean they don't prove themselves at all. It's done the same way a welder does, in the shop and not in public view becuase THAT is where it really counts.

good post. Here's the thing though. when someone says "Our style is the deadliest" or "we are badasses because grandmaster Wun Dum Gai could do chi blasts and was 5009345345 - 0 in challenge matches" and you say that to the public, you do have some standing up to do. Stories have been passed down for years, and when it's time to pay the piper, alot of practitioners bounce the check. Consequently, the TMA has been tarnished in the eyes of many.

[old jong]

IMO, a master is someone who is good in his chosen art. He does'nt usually have to care if his thing is proven or not,he knows!...;)

[David Jamieson]

MerryP-

Whatever your standards are then that is what I suggest you follow.

I will spare you any "trite" phrases. :D

Can't agree with you on the whole "gotta be an asskicker to be a master" in Martial arts.

Some master's asskicking days are long gone, that doesn't mean they are not masters of the art anymore. Some good fighters who win lots of competitions are quite frankly far from any form of mastery.

There seems to be this whole 2 camps idea that only those that ring fight are worth considering while those who pursue the whole art are not.

this is myopia at its most glaring, and i must say this point of view is strongly pushed by those who are competitive to begin with.

This is not an issue for the person who just practices to make better. It is however a big issue with the UFC/NHB type followers.

Must be the mullet I guess. ;)

peace

[Merryprankster]

Some master's asskicking days are long gone, that doesn't mean they are not masters of the art anymore. Some good fighters who win lots of competitions are quite frankly far from any form of mastery.

No arguement. I don't expect somebody as old as Julia Child to rush around the kitchen like she did 50 years ago.

I'm not asking they demonstrate it NOW. I believe I discussed reputation, did I not? At some point in the past they should have "done well," by whatever standards you are using to evaluate their mastery. I don't expect that every master is the world's best fighter. I do expect a certain level of competency. Their students should also be capable of kicking a little ass ;)

This is about the 8th time in this thread somebody has pointed out the age issue, or they're no longer competing or they've paid their dues. I agree wholeheartedly. I don't expect a 70 year old instructor to go out there and beat somebody up to prove a point. I DO expect they have an established reputation for being a tough old cuss of a trainer who knows his stuff.

Side Note--Braden, restaurant example's not so hot--look at it less from the standpoint of a hungry customer and more from the standpoint of "who do YOU want to learn from?" Would you not do your research? Would you not expect to ask about prior job experiences, prior teaching experiences, resumes, etc?

[Braden]

Yes, and I did exactly that with my teacher before and during learning from him. So what's the problem?

[Merryprankster]

Nothing at all, if that's what you did--but you demanded proof that the guy could "do what he claimed." Sure, you didn't challenge him to a fight, but you got the proof you desired.

My question is more along the lines of "why is it that if you ASK for proof, it's somehow a bad thing, according to many MAists." I mean, I hear it on here all the time--it's disrespectful to ask about the veracity of an instructors claims. I don't get why that's a problem.

I realize that's not a problem with EVERYBODY, but it does seem to be common in MA. However, to continue using the Chef analogy, you wouldn't dream of apprenticing to somebody who told you it was disrespectful to inquire about their previous ability/experiences, etc.

[Braden]

Who's saying this is a bad thing?

[old jong]

CMA's have a very old history and tend to stick to a certain mentality based on the respect of the Sifu.It is like that and nothing is forcing us to accept that fact.I would not go to my Sigung, Augustine Fong and ask him'' Hey man,can you stop a punch!''...Or...''You're not a master because I never saw you in the UFC!''...
On the other hand, we all saw Tank Abbott can kick some ass but does that makes him a master?...
The MMA's mentality is different and nothing is forcing MMA's guys to think or act like CMA's practicioners.
Just act accordingly to your world.

[Budokan]

Well said, Old Jong!

[Braden]

I think if people want to discuss this topic seriously, they have to avoid extremism.

Investigating/questioning your teacher does not mean telling him he sucks for not being in UFC. And respecting your teacher doesn't mean never questioning what he says.

FWIW, there's an old chinese saying about it taking three years for a student to find a teacher. What do you think that implies, regarding this topic?

[Merryprankster]

It is like that and nothing is forcing us to accept that fact.I would not go to my Sigung, Augustine Fong and ask him'' Hey man,can you stop a punch!''...Or...''You're not a master because I never saw you in the UFC!''...

I don't recall suggesting this. I suggested investigation, research, and inquiry. It is the very ACT of inquiring w/respect to skill level (not directly--you don't ask somebody how good they are--you ask about their experiences, etc) that seems to present a problem for some. I don't think that being careful in your selection, by way of serious determined inquiry w/regards to experience is disrespectful. Some here seem to think it is. Is it simply a fact of more "traditional" systems?


FWIW, there's an old chinese saying about it taking three years for a student to find a teacher. What do you think that implies, regarding this topic?

I think it implies more people need to follow that one :D

[old jong]

Sorry for that bit of humor Merryprankster!...I exagerated a little!
I know what you mean and I am aware that there are many fakes out there and under qualified clowns looking for some easy money.There are no real ranking or federations that can garantee a teacher legitimacy and we all have seen those ''wankerpark grand-masters'' with mail ordered high ranks certificates!...We have to be cautious and be on the look for these phonies.
The best thing is looking at the students and talking to them a little.It is possible to fell the seriousness of a school this way most of the times.
This forum is also a good place to ask questions. A web-site link can be posted here to get the opinions of many knowledgable people here.We can help each others this way and we did it many times in the past.





;)Here's a good example of fraud!...A third degree BBin BJJ sanctionned by an ''american JJ'' federation!!!!...Mail order certificate included! (http://www.howebjj.homestead.com/index.html)

[Chang Style Novice]

"I don't recall suggesting this. I suggested investigation, research, and inquiry. It is the very ACT of inquiring w/respect to skill level (not directly--you don't ask somebody how good they are--you ask about their experiences, etc) that seems to present a problem for some. I don't think that being careful in your selection, by way of serious determined inquiry w/regards to experience is disrespectful. Some here seem to think it is. "

I don't recall anybody ever saying anything remotely like this. Most folks around here (with some notable fill-in-your-own-opinion exceptions) seem pretty levelheaded and down to earth. Can you point me to a post where something like this is said, or even implied?

FWIW, I chose my taichi teacher in no small part because a friend of mine with a pretty fair amount of experience in systems including TKD, Kali Escrima, and high school wrestling said he was real good. Also because his school was right by campus, but that was way secondary, after going to meet the guy and his throwing me (a much bigger guy) around with no trouble at all. Which he still does!

[Daredevil]

FWIW, there's an old chinese saying about it taking three years for a student to find a teacher. What do you think that implies, regarding this topic?

This could have meaning on many levels.

First of all, you will not know what to look for in a teacher immediately. You can't judge if someone is truly skilled or just appears so to your eyes.

Second, you will not know what you personally want. Different styles/schools/teachers can give you different things. Is it what you want though? Sometimes it takes a little time to realize what you really want.

Third, maybe you shouldn't just accept what comes first? This shouldn't be taken to an extreme though and you should dedicate yourself to what you eventually will do. But it's okay to look around a bit, to get your feel.

I know all these things have contributed to my search and finding of the master (which curiously took just that 3 years) whom I've decided to dedicate myself to.

[Braden]

I think it has alot more to do with the faux-traditional culture spawned in contemporary north america than any legitimate chinese martial culture. History, anecdotes, and sayings all point to a very different kind of tradition than is typically regarded as 'traditional.'

[Daredevil]

While you may have a good point, there is no harm to looking for wisdom where one may find it. I still stand by the points I made, never mind their origin, and (re: this thread more generally) very much think one should be critical in looking for a place to train and to dare to look for some authenticity.

However, I wish to second Braden's earlier comment about avoiding extremism in the conversation and in practise. Don't go just punching your would-be-teacher. In that case, you may have found a good teacher, but you have certainly not become a good student. :)

[Merryprankster]

Chang--with regards to my comment, I wish I could point you to specific examples. I'm sure they are out there, but I'm not going to rifle through a bunch of old posts to find em. It's more of a feeling I get when I read some posts. I'd also like to point out that the majority of the regulars do NOT think this way, with a couple or three notable (but ignorable) exceptions.

I could just be projecting ;)

[apoweyn]

For instance, with chefs... every restaurant in town will tell you they've got the goods. McDonalds, for goodness sakes, has international ad compaigns saying they have the juiceiest, freshest burger. What do you expect, though? That they put signs in their window "We pretty much suck and will clog your arteries, come on in!"? Thing is... everyone who eats out knows McDonald's sucks, and if they want a fast burger they go to Wendy's or Harvey's.

then we're acknowledging that martial arts schools are businesses, essentially like any other. and, as such, their marketing should be taken with a heaping spoonful of salt. rather than as the sagelike advice of a benevolent teacher. (i know you're not suggesting otherwise. but that's sadly the image that many laymen have of martial arts teachers. and one that teachers are often happy to capitalize on.)


Same deal here. Except, way less so. Almost no one in the kungfu community makes any claims whatsoever about being a master, or anything of the like. And regardless of claims, or lack thereof, word of skilled practitioners and teachers gets around, provided you're in the training community - just like with McDonalds, you only know they suck if you happen to be in the community of people who eat fast food.

i'm not sure it's a question of sucking though. i've known teachers that were very good at what they did. guys that could smack me up and down in taekwondo sparring. but to advertise that they teach self defense and hold up their sparring successes as evidence is kind of a bait and switch. that's why i'm inclined to think that most people of this level have provided evidence of some sort. the only question is how compelling we find that evidence. problem is that the less a consumer knows, the more compelling they're likely to find any evidence.

that's not very well stated. what i mean is that to a person with no experience, a rising block versus a downward knife stab seems perfectly viable. to anyone that's been in that situation, they may feel differently. they may perceive that attacks like that simply don't happen. or that the defense simply won't work. based on their experience. but with no experience, a consumer is more likely to accept whatever a perceived authority figure (i.e., sifu or sensei) tells them.


stuart b.