Contributing to bad kungfu

[Royal Dragon]

if your a quality individual you're going to tell them you don't teach just anyone the art and you're going to have to earn my trust to learn the deeper aspects of the art. The more you put into it the more you get out of it.

Reply]
Exactly. If all did this, we might have alot of lower level Kung Fu, but it would be GOOD Kung Fu instead of total crap as seen in so many places.

[red5angel]

Exactly. If all did this, we might have alot of lower level Kung Fu, but it would be GOOD Kung Fu instead of total crap as seen in so many places.

I absolutely agree.

[bamboo_ leaf]

(I think the real question here is, should REAL kung fu (as defined by Ross' idea of REAL since this is the original context of red5's post) only be taught to those judged as 'worthy'?)

Anything high level is only achieved by the very few. The upper levels by there very nature are really only available to a select few. Its always been this way.

Mr. Rosses thread while interesting, must have been pretty rough living through.

[David Jamieson]

Anything high level is only achieved by the very few. The upper levels by there very nature are really only available to a select few. Its always been this way.

b_leaf-

this made me think that i don't know if they are so much -available- as they are -achievable-

i don't think people can give you what is required to have kungfu. you can be shown how to use the tools. you can be taught the theory. you can be taught the principles. to achieve high level is entirely up to you once you have the framework taught to you.

pieces that were withheld, unknown are not there can be found, known and put there with time and practice and mindfulness towards what you are doing.

using other sources is even easier now than ever before in regards to theory and principle.

ultimately, kungfu is in the doing of it.

[sihing]

There should be a period of time to test someone's worthyness per say, but that doesn't mean you have to drastically change something and teach it to someone wrong, like changing a move in a form or whatever. If you don't want someone as a student then don't teach them, or if someone is a student and behaves in an inappropiate manner then kick them out of the school. My Sifu has had students fock him over in the past so he is very reluctant to bring someone in the inner circle, and by that I mean someone into the intimate group of seniors that are close to Sifu personally, but all are taught the samethings and to a high quality level. Whether or not they can make it work for themselves by working at it for long periods of time is another story. To be truthful though about teaching things to students, I could teach them everything about the Wing Chun system, all the tips and tricks, strategies or whatever and they still wouldn't get it. Sooner or later you have to work it for yourself to make it a part of yourself, so it is absorbed in your system. Once there it is yours for life...

James

[Ford Prefect]

Originally posted by lkfmdc
This is the American way, it is NOT the TCMA way, and it's why you get taught BS....

lol! Alright. I've never demanded to be taught anything specific. When asked what I wanted to learn, it was always "whatever you teach me". Luckily for me, I had boxed for years before starting KF. I toiled away on the basics for months to "build my kung fu body" as the instructor would say. I never complained. Finally I get to see my first "sparring" session and saw some senior students. I almost crapped my pants. They couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag. I was shocked because the reason why I signed on with this guy is because I went to his seminar and this guy had skills. I toiled away for longer thinking that it might have been a fluke and I keep my eyes on the seniors. Nothing changed. I basically thought is how his seniors (my instructors) fought, then I wanted no part of it. I left. I went to another school, same thing...

I felt like I wasted over a year of my life doing crappy stances, footwork, drills, etc. I went back to my sport roots. I started focussing on BJJ with sides in wrestling, judo, and muay thai. Got taught effective stuff immediately. I fought immediately. And I got to test my skills in competitions immediately. That's the problem with KF. There is no immediate feedback loop. You can stay in a school for years and even decades and get taught crap. You'll never know because most don't fight outside their studio doors. In sports, what you're doing either works or you get busted up. If the instructor doesn't show the right way to do things and his students are constantly getting beat, nobody will train there. There is something tangible to look at other than hoping that wax-on/wax-off turns into a skill.

My instructors were two well-known KF people too. Sometimes I entertain the idea of going back to find another school, but after remembering these experiences, I quickly forget it. These guys were supposed to be "real". haha! I won't fall for that again. I guess I'd just continue to train my useless sports and be able to tune up those fools that fell for the BS hook, line, and sinker. Oh. I feel so left out.

[red5angel]

(I think the real question here is, should REAL kung fu (as defined by Ross' idea of REAL since this is the original context of red5's post) only be taught to those judged as 'worthy'?)

more specifically, I'm saying that one who wants to teach to the public, should not change or alter what they teach for the general public, especially if it's wrong. The way you teach it can be changed, the amount you teach it can be changed but not the content itself.
If you choose to train people very slowly to weed out the ones who don't have "stickwithitude" that's fine, I'm ok with that, hell I think it's a good idea. however, if you alter the techniques/forms/drills so that they are not what they are supposed to be, then I have a serious problem with that. The line that essentially shocked me from Ross' thread was where he mentions watching an ENTIRE class doing the wrong kind of footwork. Footwork is a basic skill, and it's an integral skill to most martial arts. Teaching it wrong is a betrayal in my opinion, one of the worst kind. While Ross and his teacher looked on bemused at the incorrectness of this class' footwork, I don't think there is anything funny about it. You want to teach and you want to teach publicly, you teach what you know, you don't alter it for some people and not for everyone. You shouldn't alter it at all unless you have a sound reason for doing so in the context of it's effectiveness.

[scotty1]

I agree entirely with Red5.

Omitting advanced techniques or endless drilling of the basics is one thing, but teaching someone 'wrong' is another.

[Ford Prefect]

That's what I'm gettin at Scotty. Some people get things quicker and spend more time training. Naturally this would lead to more instruction. To teach people the wrong things off the bat until they've "proven" themselves is BS and shouldn't happen.

[FngSaiYuk]

And if you continue from there, those students who've been taught incorrectly will go out and start their own schools and teach the incorrect techniques w/o knowing it and eventually their students will do the same and so on and so forth...

So I guess if you REALLY wanna fight, stick to the places that put out full contact sports competitors... "cuz ya never know what yer gonna git"

[Mika]

I think historical and cultural aspects should be treated as such, in other words, we shouldn't judge people - we really can't, we might not fully understand the big picture, especially if a lot of time has passed - but to learn from their actions and especially motives.

Now, when the time is here and not in the past and when the cultures are mixed, then we have a problematic situation. Whose point of view matters?

I for one cannot answer that, not at least in a way that I could proudly say is "the truth and the only truth".

So, I can only give my 2 cents. And by that I mean that if the matter is of principal nature to me, as this matter definitely is, then I will do what I can to make sure the circumstances with which I am involved respond to what I see correct - or at least that they don't resemble what I consider incorrect. And I can only speak for myself, I can't judge someone else for taking another course of action.

Teaching someone step by step is the best way, IMHO. How many steps can a person take in a given time? Who knows, but that really is up to the person, not the teacher. If the person gets tired of waiting AND is not putting forth the effort, then so be it. Prostituting yourself and the art is NOT the answer, it's morally and ethically wrong, not to mention what kind of problems it creates. The style might get a bad name, for starters. If people are taught the wrong way for money, the character of the person doing so could be questioned - in martial arts, especially, the teacher is supposed to be a role model of sorts. Perfect? Heck no, but where anyone draws the line is his call. I draw it here. No teaching crap, not for money, not for any reason.

A role model. If a person is just a tough fighter and learnt that from another tough fighter, then that's one kind of role model, even if these folks have no other desirable attributes - and even if they possess some questionable characteristics.

By role model I mean someone who is more well-rounded and can be trusted to some degree to a positive guiding force in general. Not Mother Theresa, but just AVERAGE enough that no really bad stuff comes out of the kitchen.

But that's just my 2 cents, all just very IMHO, and it only applies to my surroundings, I am not judging or "giving advice" (Gor forbid!), OK?

And I am not referring to the person being discussed in the other thread. I enjoy reading that as much as anyone else

Cheers

//mika

[Ray Pina]

In the end its really simple....

1) You get what you get and think its alright and never really know or think about it.

2) You get what you get, go out and test and find out some things aren't working. You then
a) ask why and see if an upgrade is available and work it, or b) asky why, see the guy has no answer for you and is a fake and go somewhere else.

To me, my natural evolution has been to study something until I find its limitation and then go elsewhere to build on the overall foundation.

People get upset when they were told X is the good stuff and they believe it and go around thinking they have the good stuff and pointing a finger at this type of karate, that type of TKD or kung fu or wrestling and get called on it. When someone says, well show me, they are taken back. Because that type of vocabulary was just not part of the training, the prove it to me stage.

A student can then do two things. Rationalize this away because they feel they have gained some position or rank and stay where they are or move on. It's that simple.

Guys who don't want to fight will never know what they have or don't have. So as long as its fun nobody gets hurt and 90% of MA schools survive by this. Those that want to fight find out real quick and find what suits them.

I don't want this to be taken as a "sport" vs "non-sport" post. It's a matter of a teacher knowing you're going out and arming you, or you arming yourself.... I'm one for taking responsibility for myself.

How do you study martial arts and not get dirty?

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by EvolutionFist

People get upset when they were told X is the good stuff and they believe it and go around thinking they have the good stuff and pointing a finger at this type of karate, that type of TKD or kung fu or wrestling and get called on it. When someone says, well show me, they are taken back. Because that type of vocabulary was just not part of the training, the prove it to me stage.

I think part of the problem is people's obsession with having "the good stuff"...

[Ray Pina]

When it comes to MA I'm a glutton

I want it good, I want it cheap (easy) and I want it to last (easy to maintain).