Controversial....

[william]

Hello,

[Poor, sad, over-whipped dead horse removed, but the overall topic isn't a bad one.]

So the main point of my thread is, would you feel comfortable training with a teacher, who when it came to the crunch, got beat?

Would it not be tempting to track down the guy who beat him and train with him?

I was reading about kung fu teachers hundreds of years ago in china, and apparently they would teach in a village, until another kung fu teacher would come on the seen, challenge them, if they lost they would ‘step down’ and the winner would take over the school.

I know I may be being a bit deluded, my teacher is good, but may well loose a fight to a tough opponent , but he does not have a ‘grandmaster’ title, in fact he doesn’t even like being called sifu!

Be good to know your thoughts,

W.

[KingMonkey]

Would I want to be trained by someone who got beat ?
It would depend on the circumstance, I'd rather get trained by someone that had been in a few real encounters and could parley that experience into effective teaching and good advice even if they hadnt always come out on top.

This is something that is made so much of in CMA's.

Is Lennox Lewis a better fighter than Ali because his trainer could have knocked ten bells out of Angelo Dundee ?

I dont think so. The main thing to ask yourself is can you learn from this person, if the answer's yes then anything else is unimportant.

[Sandman2[Wing Chun]]

show me an instructor who has never been beaten in a fight, and I would bet money that they have either:

1) Never been in a fight.
2) Haven't fought very many times
3) Haven't fought anyone of any skill
4) Aren't telling you the truth about one of the above.

Anybody, of any skill level can lose on any given day. To think otherwise is kind of foolish, IMHO. My own instructor has a story about the first time he fought against a WC practicioner, back when he just did 7star mantis. The guy blasted in, took the center in a fashion he wasn't ready for, and laid him out. A few minutes later when they went at it again he was ready for it, let the guy blast in but dropped down and executed a low sweep, broomed his legs then climbed all over him pummelling away. So who was better there? The guy that got knocked down the first time, or the second time? How ya going to get any better if you don't find people doing stuff you're not ready for? Even though my sifu found a method within the system he was already practicing, he was impressed enough that he decided he'd have to learn WC. I firmly belive that to get any better, you have to do what the Chinese call "investing in loss". My Sifu once said to me "Hey, I'm not ashamed to admit I've been carried out of the ring before." So really, I wouldn't want to learn from anyone who claimed they have never been defeated before. To me, that sounds too much like someone trying to sell you a bridge. Just my opinion. Obviously mileage may vary.

[jesper]

Most of the time the best teachers are not the best fighters, for the simple reason that it takes two different kinds of mindsets to be either a teacher or a fighter.

Although you do have people who are good at both, I have yet to meet anybody who is great at both.

[reneritchie]

If I needed a fighter for an event or because some gang of rowdies was attaking, cheap-B-movie-like, my town, then I would look to win/loss record and overall fighting ability (which may or may not have anything to do with martial arts training).

Fighting and teaching are different skill sets, however, so if I'm looking for a teacher, I want someone skilled at teaching, and will take an okay fighter/great teacher over great teacher/okay fighter any day (and twice for Sunday class ;)

In the end, I don't care what they can do, I care what they can help me achieve.

[Ernie]

this is simple to me

first of course anyone can win or lose

so that is no big deal

but consisitancy is what i would look for

is he able to pull it off in a non wing chun enviroment most of the time ,
meaning he has fought and has won and has dropped people
this way he really understands the use of the tools in the art and the mind and body it takes to pull it off , he has had to adapt to different arts and other fighters on top of there game [ not just bums of the street]
anything less is someone playing make believe and in my eyes that person will always be lacking .

even if the person is the greatest conveyor of infromation the world if that person has not pushed the limits of that information then there is doubt , they are teaching it in a second hand fashion .this leaves room for mis interpitation or unrealistic approach

so first a fighter and from the fighting experience a teacher
this way there is truth and clarity to application

any one else no matter how gifted they seem in the '' training methods of wing chun '' if they have no real fight experience i could not trust to give me honost first hand information .

i also have to get along with this person and the methods of teaching have to fit my needs .

if all this is in place then real growth is possible and if some one better drops him no big deal as long as skill was not the decideing factor , if there is a great difference of skill or application of skill then i would investigate the other person . if it was just better attributes , fitness and so forth then no big deal

[old jong]

I will never consider myself as a "great fighter",I'm not but I see my students developping Wing Chun skills all the times.I just transmit to them what I have learn before that's all!...BTW,some of them are getting good enough for me to practice with them. I will benefit from this because I'm so rusted!...:rolleyes: ;)

So,IMO, the important thing is : Can the guy teach in the first place?...

Ernie.
I don't really disagree with you but...Being very picky about a teacher or too categoric about what you want "for you"...Can result in finding someone who will only teach you what you already know. ;)

[Ernie]

oj
Can the guy teach in the first place?...


i keep it simple in my mind , if he can teach that's great but if he has never really applied it ,
then what is he teaching ?

it's second hand

this applies to me as well , i am not the fighter that my teacher is . i am getting a little older now and my body though fit takes longer to heal , so even though i will still subject myself to testing of skills for my personal journey
i doubt i will ever have the track record that some teachers have

so in that respect i will be lacking .

i also am not a competitive individual . i compete with myself but could care less about beating other people so again i have to accept i will not take my wing chun to the extemes that the early generations did .

you see most of us will just be technitions not fighters and each generation will suffer for it . it is allready happening to ,much lip sau and old stories not enough new guys really proving there worth .

natural progression when an art starts to feed on itself


so as i said i keep it simple can the guy pull it off under real pressure [ not chi sau ]
and then can he pass it on to me

now for the weekend warrior it doesn't really matter as long as your having fun :D

another note i feel you should have more then one coach and should seek out different approaches just for the sake of r & d

[wentwest]

Originally posted by reneritchie
Fighting and teaching are different skill sets, however, so if I'm looking for a teacher, I want someone skilled at teaching, and will take an okay fighter/great teacher over great teacher/okay fighter any day (and twice for Sunday class ;)



Rene, is that a typo there, or am I just missing the real point you're making? I'm guessing (but just trying to be sure) that you meant to type you "will take a great teacher/okay fighter over a great fighter/okay teacher any day."

[old jong]

Ernie

i keep it simple in my mind , if he can teach that's great but if he has never really applied it ,
then what is he teaching ?

I understand what you are talking about but, (again!...);) The teacher can be a very good technician,transmitting good principles and techniques,along with good training drills,strategy,all proven by other more "real" fighters. Many good boxing coaches have only experience in these departements anyway and,their trainies jab and cross like any other boxers. The techniques will work for the students even if their coaches would not be able physicaly to perform them.

Think of all you have learn from school teachers who did not have to reinvent everything to prove it all over again. This is second hand teaching and it works in all fields. There are theorists and experimentators.Both need eachothers.The experimentator will try what the theorist think and the theorist will find new theories based on the experimentator's results.

An other Yin/Yang thing IMO :D ;)

[Ernie]

i agree to a degree

as training methods improve , you can achieve'' near'' fighter results


but if a man has never been really hit and if he has never really hit a skilled person and dropped them

then how can he in his heart really know what is important

in training many things work that in pressured application suddenly don't

it comes from seasoning ,

you can tell when you meet a man that has had real fighting experience
be it boxing or wing chun or just war combat

there is something different about them

they have no doubt ,

wing chun has many great theories that can be tested and refined in wing chun drills be it chi sau or some other drill


but when you face a man that has seasoning he can be completely wrong and just drop you

now add this same seasoning to a wing chun fighter and you have form function intent and experience working together

this to me is the man i would seek to learn from .

but sadly these men are dieing off or getting to old , so wing chun will weaken until the next surge of fighters are born

i guess it's up to us normal people to keep things as honest as we can until then :D

but remember jong my only interest in wing chun is application . some people might be into history or lineage or form or what ever to them a fighter/teacher may not be the right mix

i understand and respect people are different , just developing basic skill is more then enough for them and they have no desire to really get put in a pressure situation .

[old jong]

It really depends on your goals. And I could say:" All goals are not for everybody"
Got to go...Salut!...;)

[Ultimatewingchun]

While I agree that fighting and teaching are two different skill sets...

Why choose?

If you're a lousy fighter - why would I want to learn fighting from you?

And if you're a lousy teacher - why would I want you to teach me?

Am I missing something here?

[anerlich]

Would it not be tempting to track down the guy who beat him and train with him?

In many (but all hypothetical) circumstances this would show the student to be a shallow individual concerned only for themselves.

OTOH, if the teacher who was beat was shown to be a charlatan, rather than a guy who struggled valiantly but was overcome by bad luck, age, or even higher skill than his own, then I'd run not walk.

If your instructor's stopped losing, he's stopped learning.

People who go from school to school challenging instructors in modern times belong in mental institutions.

And in BJJ, if every student who's instructor was tapped by another instructor changed schools, there would be a continual tide back and forth across suburbs, cities, countries and the world. Every BJJ school would have to have several revolving doors to handle the constant two way traffic.

[Ernie]

the student to be a shallow individual concerned only for themselves.



what else is there , when it comes down to it ?

if you cut out all the b.s. and look at it from a combative percpective .


do we get into martial arts just to join a group or follow a individual

i know i didn't

only thing i'm concerened with is my skill and how to improve it

as long as the people i train with keep that goal i'll hang out and give my all

as soon as the path takes another direction

i'm out :D

[william]

I realize that the moderator has a right to cut what they choose (so much for free speech!)

But one thing he cut was, if this person who was beat was supposedly a 'Grandmaster'? And to get this title then, do you have to be an amazing teacher? Or an amazing fighter? Surely teaching is just the side product of being a martial artist, a way to help others, make a living, but MARTIAL arts is about fighting skill??

Master? and you get beat? fair enough? call your self Grandmaster and you get beat (relatively easily!) maybe a reality check is in order!!

Thoughts?

W.


I've not mentioned any names! please don't cut it!!

I wondered why that other post about ******** vs******** went missing so quickly. Surely if people dont want read something, they don't have to! no one has to reply, people can call you a d*ck for still talking about it, silencing people is a bit extreme!

[Phil Redmond]

It's obvious where you were going with this. This subject is so old now that mature people don't talk about it anymore. There are sifus out there with titles higher than Grandmaster. A title can simply be a way of establishing the head of an organization. Most of us here post on how to better ourselves as martial artists instead of idle gossip. How did your post help you in "your" training?
Phil

[william]

I hear what you are saying and I will give it a rest.

I guess that when invovled in martial art, where one of the main issues fighting, it's sometimes possible to get lost in the egoistical world of winning or losing, or who's better than who. 'idle gossip' or discussion about two skilled fighters, I guess sometimes I get a little lost in it. But I am aware of that, and a lot of the posts to my thread have been quite interesting, they may have not helped my training as such, but have increased my understanding of why i do martial arts.

Sorry for the lame thread,

Back to training...

W.