dangers of flakey teachers and the rise of internet fu

[JadeDragon]

If I take what I learned in training, and then show it to one of my younger cousins, does that make me a "teacher"?

To me, a teacher is someone with a license or certification, belonging to a school. Someone who apprentisted as a brown belt, did all the grunt work in the dojo, then tested for and was made a teacher by some sort of association. Do you fit ANY of that criteria, TG?
Please answer both questions.

Mr. Arieson, with all due respect but why do you think that someone has to belong to some type of association or have some type of certificate to say you can teach?

I taught for my teacher when I was a brown belt as part of my training. Then when I got my black sash in kung fu I taught for him. I later got my 2nd level black sash but now my teacher has moved to China. I don't have him here to ask if I can teach, does this mean that I can't teach? Of course not. Even if he didn't approve of me teaching I could still teach if I wanted to. He does know I'm teaching though because I've been in contact with him through e-mail. His response to me was "good, make you some extra spending money."

[JadeDragon]

fair enough.

[TigerClaw]

You have a point. My instructor holds no credentials, except a long time as bouncer. I have every confidence that he would hold a black belt in many different arts, if tested. However, my instructor is not on this forum claiming anything, so to me, that's the distinction. If he was, I would expected him to be challenged on it.

By TG's definition, I have been a Martial Arts instructor for over 25 years as well...but I hardly believe that about myself, just because I have been showing friends, relatives and co-workers techniques I learned from other people does not make me an expert. Who is to say I have mastered the techniques myself, or even showed them correctly to others? I don't think I have at all.

My definition of a teacher in Martial Arts generally follows the criteria I mentioned above.

An expert and a teacher are not exactly the same. Like i said, if a person teaches anything they know, even if they have one class and can teach another what they learned in that one class. They are technically a teacher of their knowledge. But the ones learning may not trust his ability or he may not have perfected it to make it work for him.

But you know a strange thing. If I met a man who had two classes in a, lets say, Tai Chi mantis club and he learned the first 10 moves of a form. I could ask him to show me and I could learn them very quickly. I an not trying to boast, but because of my learning and training I would be able to learn the form from him most likely better than he could teach it. I am sure that many instructors could do this. Just another angle on this talk.

[TigerClaw]

Here is the clip I was talking about

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Faz1yjEQM4k&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]

[Ben Grimm]

I have nothing to prove. Didn't you post that clip on another thread. Back to the same old shit that got you booted from DL. You never learn.

[DaleDugas]

TK,

Who did you study with?

Do you have a website, just curious.

[Ben Grimm]

He claims to have trained with Sterling Lin in Canada, as well as Brian Leishman and an anonymous CLF instructor. Nobody can find any information on Sterling Lin or E Chuan Mun. Hopefully this helps Dale.

[Middleweight]

I don't need 900 hours. Just one picture of you, teaching a class in a formal setting.

Who cares? and WHY do you?

Just askin'

[Middleweight]

No you haven't, but that doesn't stop you from going on and on about silly shit you saw in old movies or heard in old stories. You are a clown.






I have been to remote villages in China. Most people there - by necessity - are practical people and would laugh even harder at you than we do here.

You need to grow up, jubaji. I have seen your taunts and innuendoes on this thing since I first signed on 3 days ago. I find you a source of irritation, only because I hate pettiness. Seems to be your specialty

You are lucky that I am not a moderator

[jubaji]

Whew! Dodged a bullet there!

[TigerClaw]

Well now, at least we know what you mean when you call yourself a "teacher". I am glad we were finally able to clear that up!

No, you missed , or deliberately did not quote the rest of my post, where i said i went through the ranks to a teacher. Also a senior class and helped in that club as well. But this is typical of you to omit things that rebuke you and to take things out of context. I really hope your out of here for good.

[sunwukung]

If othes believe me, well, thats good , it makes things easier to discuss.

I'm sure it would make things 'easier', but if others believe you then there is nothing to discuss, just a sermon to listen to. Surely one of the fundamental aspects of debate is providing adequate proof for your opinions?

But all we can do is tell our history, describe techniques, post pictures of us showing the techniques and video etc

In the examples you've posted, your opponents are not resisting, and they are not skilled in the arts you compare kung fu to in these threads. So all they demonstrate is a technique, but not the situation.

if people believe it good, if not, .....oh well, it doesn't really matter.

Really? So why on earth do you continue to post in these futile discussions across several threads - each of which now number in the 100's. You say you have nothing to prove, but submit post after post in which you try to do just that.

The fact is that you make strong claims, then refuse to back them up and then get upset when people don't believe you. There's a simple solution. Stop posting arguments you cannot verify, or provide demonstrations in a more realistic setting.

[TigerClaw]

In the examples you've posted, your opponents are not resisting, and they are not skilled in the arts you compare kung fu to in these threads. So all they demonstrate is a technique, but not the situation.

I have seen many pictures in magazines, both Kung Fu and MMA magazines where all we have to go by is pictures of how the technique is done. This is a forum and the pictures show clear applications.

Really? So why on earth do you continue to post in these futile discussions across several threads - each of which now number in the 100's. You say you have nothing to prove, but submit post after post in which you try to do just that.

Like I said I enjoy to discuss techniques and other aspects of Kung Fu etc. And I find it very useful and I hope helpful o those that are not biased or who are actually interested in Kung Fu's answer to the MMA grappling questions. Also, i like to expose liars and those who really don't know what they are talking about. I do this in hope that they will change their thinking and I hope that those who are new to martial arts, particularly Kung Fu, will continue on in Kung Fu and learn how to apply the many techniques for every situation.

What I mean by I don't care, is towards men like Ben Grimm, or Jubagi, who , even after having ample prof of things still persist in attacking and denying. I don't care if they really believe who i am or that i really am a Kung Fu teacher. But I persist in answering them to expose them as liars. To be exposed as a liar and to be humbled publically is good for the soul, if they will learn from it and change.

The fact is that you make strong claims, then refuse to back them up and then get upset when people don't believe you. There's a simple solution. Stop posting arguments you cannot verify, or provide demonstrations in a more realistic setting.

I back up almost all I say, I have shown pictures, videos, flyers, pictures of some of my instructors, and my students, etc etc. And my attackers have shown nothing. They make claims and show no techniques or pictures or videos etc.

As far as the claims I make about grappling, I showed only a small sample of escapes, and they are rock hard, solid escapes and very effective in combat. I backed up my techniques and my whole attitude towards grapplers with some experts I quoted from the martial arts world who agree with me. I also posted video clips and discussion about women in self defense situations which, I though proved my point clearly. But, what some mean by, me proving things in here, is that they want me to pick a fight with a MMA guy and use my deadly techniques on them. Those who ask for such things are , In my opinion, the worst kind of martial artist, they are scrappers and violent people. I am never going to do this, ever.

But as far as a strong kick in the groin against a grappling attacker not working, let me say, it works. And all the other vital strikes I mentioned, they works also. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure that out. But again every defense has to have proper technique to make it work right.

I believe that one of the reasons that some may contnue to mock and attack me and to lie, is because they have commited themself already to it and they have been rebuked openly by me and rightly so. To admit they were entirely wrong after all that has been said will make them look real bad. Thier pride and arogance will not allow them to admit to their error and to be shamed publically in here. So they persist , unreasonable in attacking me.

Also, some are really ignorant about what Kung Fu has to offer and they have a wrong misunderstanding of what Kung Fu is. They think Kung Fu is weak, flowery, soft and not good for fighting and that it is more of a dance and for form and exercise. They also think that MMA sport fighting on TV with the rules etc., is better because it has aggressive attackers and they see blood etc. They may see these men as rough fighters who fight realistically. So any Kung Fu teacher that even for a second, implies that the TV sport fighting of MMA is not as combative as the real life survival combat Kung Fu, they take issue with and immediately attack. Most of their attacks, however are unfounded against me.

Some may have also seen one or two of those pathetic videos on the net, where the so called "Kung Fu man" was fighting a Brazillian jujitsu fighter and how he got beat, as gracie talks in the background. They may mistakenly think that that was kung Fu. Let me tell you, I saw no kung Fu at all in that fight, or the few others I have seen on the net.

So I have set out to encourage those who want real self defense to take another look at kung Fu, from a different perspective and consider it.

[sunwukung]

I have seen many pictures in magazines, both Kung Fu and MMA magazines where all we have to go by is pictures of how the technique is done. This is a forum and the pictures show clear applications.

I don't think you're grasping what I'm getting at.

The specific problem is that those demonstrations are drilled, rehearsed, compliant. The vital element that requires proof is kung-fu applied against an MMA style fighter IN A NON-COMPLIANT SCENARIO.

It's one thing to demonstrate an arm-bar or a parry in the context of a drill, another thing entirely to demonstrate it against an opponent that is trying to take your head off.

It doesn't have to be a 'real fight', sparring would do. You don't have to kick them in the nuts or claw their eyes out either. I'm just interested in seeing 'form-fighting' under RELATIVELY realistic conditions.

Put it this way, say I went to a boxing class, and the teacher showed the boxing techniques, but then refused to demonstrate them in the ring, I'd be very wary of trusting this teacher. For the same reason, I'm very wary of trusting what you have to say. This is partly because, despite it's vast repertoire of techniques, there are virtually no traditionalists who succeed in MMA competition (let alone enter one).

They make claims and show no techniques or pictures or videos etc.

You're the one talking about the kung fu difference - it's up to you to demonstrate that. We've been over this.

But, what some mean by, me proving things in here, is that they want me to pick a fight with a MMA guy and use my deadly techniques on them. Those who ask for such things are , In my opinion, the worst kind of martial artist, they are scrappers and violent people. I am never going to do this, ever.

That's ridiculous. There are many,many,many competitive kung fu events - san shou, lei tai etc. They feature grappling, full contact etc. If the people that invented kung fu don't mind a scrap - then what's your problem. Looks like you've learnt that other great lesson from the chinese masters..."saving face".

I believe that one of the reasons that some may contnue to mock and attack me and to lie, is because they have commited themself already to it and they have been rebuked openly by me and rightly so.

It's not that mate, it's because you're a broken record, you write a LOT of text, but say very little. You talk about past deeds, amazing feats - but interesting as they are (i.e: not very) they are of NO USE in this debate, since without proof they are just padding.

They think Kung Fu is weak, flowery, soft and not good for fighting and that it is more of a dance and for form and exercise.

Despite the fact that most of them practice Kung fu?? Haven't you worked that out yet? It's not kung fu that is in question, it's YOU.

So any Kung Fu teacher that even for a second, implies that the TV sport fighting of MMA is not as combative as the real life survival combat Kung Fu, they take issue with and immediately attack.

The simple truth is they haven't seen a kung fu master walk into a ring and defeat an opponent in the classic kung fu fashion, and there have been NHB bouts around for ages which are open venues for them to do so. Lei tai bouts look amateurish by comparison.

Kung Fu suffers from "saving face", lots of teachers spouting great powers but refusing to test them publicly (unless they have a clear advantage). If you've trained in China, you'll see a lot of it. As a result, a lot of people learn kung fu in a weak and compliant, drilled environment, and so it becomes diluted and untested, theoretical not practical.
In contrast, traditions like Kyokushinkai, Boxing, Judo etc are taught full contact and so their arts are kept lively and useful. The truth is that most people who learn self defense in a non competitive environment don't want to get hit, and are inevitably weaker fighters than those that are willing to endure that kind of pain in pursuit of skill.

I saw no kung Fu at all in that fight, or the few others I have seen on the net.

And thus - like Bigfoot - it is hard to believe it exists. I have no doubt strong kung fu exists, but I think cultural factors and a western love of chinese oriental fantasy and a dislike for getting hit have made it very, very rare.

[Ben Grimm]

It's a shame. But it's true. CMA is more or less seen as contemporary wushu and just form based. Forms have applications, but it's not in the form fighting that TC is explaining. He only has a small part of the picture. Doesn't sound much like a teacher to me, just a LARPer wannabe.