MUSA the Kendo Robot

I’m sure this may be old news for a lot of our readers, but who can pass up making a few comments about a robot that does Kendo? I for one can’t wait to put one of these on my Christmas list.

MUSA, a 163cm tall, 70kg robot, was developed by the Manufacturing and Mechatronics Lab of Seoul National University. It was designed to help Kendokas become more proficient with their techniques.

According to Prof.Young-Bong Bang, who led this project, Musa uses sensors to defend and attack his opponents using traditional Kendo techniques. It is the goal of MUSA’s developers to one-day program MUSA to a third Dan level.

As I watched the below video I have to say this project is pretty interesting, though Musa seems to lack a little spontaneity. However, I can clearly see how such a robot could help one with their forms, and who knows what such a robot will be able to do in the future.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=PGzHpZVCEko

After watching MUSA wield what appears to be a katana, I couldn’t help think about Yul Brynner’s deranged robot gunslinger in the movie “Westworld.” I certainly wouldn’t want the liability of a sword-wielding robot in my dojo, even if the developers guarantee MUSA is programmed not to actually strike/injure his opponents.

Okay, a Kendo fighting robot may not be my first choice since I don’t practice Kendo, but until there is a robot that does Kenjutsu or Aiki and has great ukemei (falling) abilities, this robot will have to suffice. Of course ,I’m still hoping that some type of holodeck, as seen in Star Trek, is developed in my lifetime, but that might be just too much wishful thinking.

Until technology catches up with my desire, I guess I’ll just have to do things the old fashion way and use white belts. After all, many of them do move robotically.

K-9 Self-Defense

In the February 2008 issue of Black Belt Magazine there is an article titled, “Karate Vs Canines,” written by Loren W. Christensen. I’m sure many readers, such as I, initially chuckled at the thought of such an article, but this is a topic rarely discussed and worth reading about.

My initial reaction to this article was based more on the title itself, and the image it evokes of a karate-ka sparring with a dog. Fortunately, this article is a serious presentation on the topic, and offers the reader some actual techniques intended to teach people how to defend against/survive a dog attack. While Mr. Christensen’s article is only six photo-heavy pages of basic information, I believe the article is worth reading, especially for someone without any knowledge on the topic.

It’s is especially worth reading when one considers the following statistics:

1. There are currently 74.8 million dogs in the USA.
2. A survey by the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta concluded that dogs bite nearly 2% of the U.S. population, which equals more than 4.7 million people annually.
   • 61% of bites occur around the home (reported cases)
   • 77% of bites involve a family member or family friend (reported cases)
3. Almost 800,000 bites per year -- one out of every 6 -- are serious enough to require medical attention.
4. Between 2001 and 2006, 144 deaths were attributed to dog attacks (National Canine Research Foundation).

Mr. Christensen’s article is fairly basic, something unfortunately prevalent with articles throughout the pages of Black Belt Magazine. I am sure that he has a far greater knowledge of the subject since he claims to have been a US Army Dog handler for 14 months, and I would have to believe he learned a lot more about dog attacks and how to protect himself from them. After all, it’s not unusual for a K-9 handler to be bitten by their own dog--something Mr. Christensen readily admits happened to him--other service dogs, or the random civilian canine they are requested to deal with due to their supposed expertise with canines.

In addition, my assertion that Mr. Christensen’s article provides only basic information is based on my limited exposure to police canines and police canine training (about a year). One of the first things I was taught was how to deal with an aggressive dog. Information I know was not covered in Mr. Christensen’s article. Furthermore, I was also given several long safety lectures, with specific self-defense methods, before donning the padded suit one wears when they help train attack dogs. I’ll be the first to state that these methods are almost impossible to execute during a dog attack, though they are effective in theory.

The dog attacks I experienced were extremely brutal and swift. All I ever saw were charging teeth, and the dogs (German Shepherds, Bouvier Des Flanders, and Belgian Malinois) hit with so much force that there was no way to maintain my balance and/or counter their attack with any sufficient force. Add the pain factor of the jaw pressure, and the fact that the dog is constantly moving in ways people don’t, and the whole ordeal is quite dumbfounding.

Fortunately the dogs I worked with were all highly trained, and only attacked specific body parts (normally the forearm), which made protecting one's other body parts easier. That is, I didn’t have to worry about being bitten in the face, neck, or other more damageable parts of the body, which is a real concern when being attacked by an aggressive canine intent on hurting you.

The canine attacks I experienced were extremely controlled drills, but they clearly illustrated the lethal potential a dog could inflict if a dog had the intent to hurt someone. Unlike many humans, when these dogs attacked, they were rarely distracted by any actions one made to fend them off, and their intent to bite and pull their opponent to the ground never wavered. The attack was straight on, full force, unrelenting, with no remorse.

The truth is, once the dog was done and had been commanded to stop, they pranced off wagging their tail like nothing out of the ordinary ever took place. In fact they looked pretty proud of themselves.

The police force was not my first exposure to K-9 self-defense either. My first
K-9 self-defense came, from my uncle who used to raise hunting dogs (Bluetick Coonhounds). My uncle needed these skills since he was often dealing with the “pack mentality.” He was fully aware that if one dog attacked the others would join in.

Since being attacked by the pack would most likely be deadly, he knew several places to hit a dog that would instantly incapacitate them. I’m not proud to admit it, but I’ve tried a few of them--light force only--and they work. Just ask any of the three German Shepherds that I’ve owned.

Of course at this point, I most likely find myself in the same situation Mr. Christensen found himself in. That position being that if we share such techniques publicly every dog lover and/or animal rights activist will be up in arms and condemning us for doing so.

For now. I don’t feel the desire or necessity to share such information publicly, so I’ll close this blog entry by referring to an e-book Mr. Christensen offers for sale on the Internet; “Self-Defense Against A Dog Attack,” by Loren W. Christensen at http://www.lwcbooks.com/books/ebookdog.html While I have not read this book so cannot endorse its contents, hopefully the information contained in it will be a little more in depth.

* * *

Loren Christensen, is a 42-year veteran of the martial arts. He has learned the hard way that real fights are far more explosive and violent than karate sparring matches, a lesson proven over and over during his 25-year career as a police officer in Portland, Oregon and a military policeman in Saigon, Vietnam . He has earned a total of 10 black belts – seven in karate, two in jujitsu and one in arnis – and penned 34 books, 6 DVDs and dozens of magazine articles on the topics of the martial arts, street gangs, police-involved shootings, exercise, prostitution and various street subcultures.

James Williams's Perspective on Martial Arts

James Williams of Nami Ryu Aiki Heiho and Bugei Trading Company has written an essay worth a glance as a response to a message-board argument with neo-traditional martial purists (but skip the comments). It is available at http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?t=38601.

In many ways, the content of what he has written is much less interesting than the language he has used. It is based on the language of Western honor, that would once have been familiar to any fighter in our culture, but now seems reactionary. For example:

'[Writing on the Internet] gives you the feeling that you have a "right" to express your opinion with no consequence. This of course removes the foundations of courtesy and respect. It becomes about how you “feel”.'

In the end, this is not an argument about our culture, not about anything Japanese. I really believe that Mr. Williams is representing traditional Western martial values of honor and individuality, and is using his experience with Japanese culture to better understand that. While what he is arguing against is very modern (or possibly, though I hate the word, postmodern) values of cultural sensitivity and nostalgia.

Black Belt Magazine Article Review -“Deadly Weapons”

I have been a subscriber to Black Belt Magazine for over 20 years. Through those years I’ve seen the magazine evolve, and change along with the various “flavors of the month.”

For the most part, I approach Black Belt Magazine as if it were a Hollywood gossip magazine. There are lots of articles and photos, but little or nothing of substance. It’s basically throne room reading, if you get my gist.

More often than not, articles are poorly written, show bias, and really offer nothing new content-wise. In fact, if you look at many of the authors or who they are writing about, they are often the same people who purchase major ad space in the magazine. But I’m sure that’s just a coincidence.

What really irritates me, even often perplexes the hell out of me, is how often Black Belt Magazine asserts something new and revolutionary has been discovered or created by so-and-so-bigwig. Ninety-nine percent of the time, these articles turn out to be nothing new or innovative at all. For a publication specializing in martial arts, they should just know better.



However for all the magazine’s faults, every now and then they do produce something of value and worth reading.

In this instance it’s a two-part article titled, “Deadly Weapons,” by Scott Marrs and Andy McGill, which appears in the August and September 2007 issues.

Basically, the articles are written to inform people how the law really views the martial arts, the liability of combatants, self-defense issues, and how hands and feet are viewed as deadly weapons.

While I feel the articles are too short to do full justice to the topic, the authors did a good job answering a lot of questions martial artists may have about the law. Certainly, this is one of the few occasions where I’ve seen these questions--man of which I’m asked in class--covered to any extent. It’s also nice to see someone actually addressing known fallacies, and setting the record straight.

I, for one, feel it is extremely important to teach my students the law as it relates to using martial art skills, even in a life and death situation. This is especially important given the fact that any civil suit filed regarding possible excessive force has the potential to include me, as the teacher of those skills.

Unfortunately, very few schools discuss martial arts and the law. As a result there is a lot of misinformation out there. I can’t start to tell you how many times I’ve been asked if my hands are really registered as deadly weapons.

I know I will encourage my students to read this article. Not because we haven’t covered most of this material in class already, but just so they can get another perspective on the material.

I also recommend anyone involved in the martial arts should also read it. However, like the authors state, “Don’t’ rely on this article as legal advice. The jurisdiction in which you live may have different laws and standards than discussed here.”

View the article in PDF format: Part 1, Part 2.

In The Company of “Thieves”

“Talent borrows, Genius Steals”

Unknown

Several months ago I was publicly accused of “stealing” martial art techniques/concepts from Don Angier. Per the “Martial Arts Police, Koryu Division,” my case is still pending, though they did as much as they could to convict me in the court of public appeal.

Clearly, old news is old news. But ever since these public accusations were made, I been considering things in the light of the old Biblical proverb which states, “Let he who's without sin cast the first stone.”

What I mean by that is that almost every martial artist before me, most of my contemporaries, and yes even those that made accusations against me are all guilty of such a crime to some extent or another. We all are the sum of many parts. We all take bits and pieces away from the various teachers we have had the ability to train with. Whether that training was long term, or just a few seminars doesn’t matter.

Now, I’m a firm believer that no one individual, no matter how gifted, knows everything. Because I believe this so strongly, I have taken every opportunity to expose myself to numerous martial art systems and teachers. I have especially tried find teachers who have the ability to make me understand the art that I do better, and make me an overall better teacher and practitioner.

But back to my point.
.

A Chain of Yoshidas

Since I’ve been accused of “stealing principles” from Don Angier, I'd like to use the same absurd logic to see whom else I’ve stolen from. While we are at it, let's go another step and see whom they "stole" their knowledge from.

Let's start with Don Angier.

Now, I have already stated numerous times how big an influence Mr. Angier has had on me, and what I do as a martial artist. I’ve clearly admitted to adopting a lot of his terminology, and adjusting/correcting some of my techniques based on his corrections. Maybe too much in some people’s opinions. However, that is not a crime that is called “good judgment.” His skills and knowledge is clearly superior to mine.

But where did Mr. Angier get his information.

While I don’t have specific details about his life and training, according to his very own autobiography he writes:

“Bill (William Hepler) worked graveyard shift at the main Los Angeles Post Office. For almost nine years he came into the dojo three hours before class. Together we worked on categorizing the basics of the art and how to make them as precise as possible. We worked out pragmatic counters to all of the forms and counters to the counters. It was only with his help that I was able to systematize the art and start listing its scientific principles.”

“My Career in Yanagi-ryu Aiki Jiu Jitsu” by Don Angier

Mr. Angier further states:

“Slowly, he (Ark-Yuey Wong) began showing me some of his skills. It would be very easy to underestimate this mild-looking, elderly man. He was indeed a wonderful man and artist, and I must admit that some of the things he showed me helped me understand my own art more fully.”

“My Career in Yanagi-ryu Aiki Jiu Jitsu” by Don Angier

Now it’s my understanding, and forgive me if I am wrong, that Mr. Angier also studied martial arts with other instructors in Japan and Los Angeles. If this is true, and his own statements about his life are factual (which I’m sure they are), then Mr. Angier’s art is a sum of various sources. He did not get all of the art he now teaches, or at least all the insights into that art, from one source. In fact he clearly states, “We worked out pragmatic counters to all of the forms and counters to the counters. It was only with his help that I was able to systematize the art and start listing its scientific principles,” which shows a progression and departure from what he was originally taught.

Like many of us, Mr. Angier sought out others who could help him better understand the core information he had. As I have, he used the information he gathered to make himself better.

However, I don’t hear anyone accusing him of thievery. I don’t see anyone questioning where he obtained the sum of his knowledge. But maybe he is just an exception, or perhaps he is just above reproach.

Of course, Mr. Angier’s approach to improving himself via other sources isn’t unique, even within the particular martial art style he teaches. Yoshida Kotaro (1883-1966), the father of Mr. Angier’s teacher, Yoshida Kenji (1903-1954), was skilled in more than one style of martial arts. Not only did he teach Daito Ryu to the public, he was also known to have denso (transmission scrolls) in several different arts. He possessed technical skills in Kito Ryu Jujutsu and Onno-ha Itto Ryu Kenjutsu, which I’ve read were evident in his public teachings.

I have no idea if any one can say with any certainty what influences one martial arts style had upon any other for Yoshida Koatro, but his history shows a certain level of cross training and exploration. Clearly, he saw the value of training with various other instructors, who must have had something worthy to offer him.

Since Yoshida Kotaro took the time and effort to train with others, I think it would be very hard to believe that he didn’t embrace and incorporate new methodologies or concepts he felt were more effective and efficient than what he previously possessed.

Nor would it be beyond the realm of possibility that over the years he incorporated other methodologies into his core base as his abilities and comprehension of scientific principles improved.

However, I’m sure there is no one out there that would accuse Yoshida Kotaro of theft. Nor in my opinion should they.

Small Circles

So how about all the insights I gained from training with Wally Jay.

Prof. Jay was never my instructor, but I did attend numerous seminars he gave. I also have his books, and a video, which I’ve read and watched countless times.

I’m no Small-Circle Jujutsu expert, but I believe I understand the concepts Prof. Jay taught. I know for certain I employ some of them when doing certain techniques.

In many cases, the information Prof. Jay taught at these seminars helped to clarify things I already knew. Sometimes I was shown a subtlety that just made old techniques even more effective. In other cases I disagreed with his assertions, and although I will admit he is more of an expert than me, I never did techniques again after learning them at a seminar.

Basically, I thank Prof. Jay for enhancing what I already knew. I also thank him for exposing me to techniques and concepts that with practice and some trail and error eventually added new dimensions to old forms.

Most of all, I thank Prof. Jay for adding to my martial arts lexicon, and giving me the tools to break down and explain various techniques to my students in a much more concise manner.

The funny thing is that while Wally Jay is credited with developing “Small Circle Jujutsu,” his creation was nothing new or revolutionary. It was based on the martial arts he had learned from others, as well as his own research/trail and error. He may be the person responsible for propagating “small circle” methodology in modern times, but he didn’t create it all on his own.

This is not my just opinion, either. In the article “The Founder of Small Circle Ju Jitsu,” Michael Belzer states:

“In 1962 Jay attracted the attention of a 22-year old martial artist from Seattle named Bruce Lee. Lee was amazed how someone with little formal training in judo could go on to produce champions. However. from the many long hours that Lee spent at Jay's dojo (training hall) with friend Jimmy Lee, the legendary martial artist saw the value of Jay's broad background in the fighting arts. Jay had adopted various techniques from boxing, wrestling, judo, kung fu, weightlifting and jujitsu, and brought them together in what he called his Small Circle Theory Jujitsu. Like Jay and his innovative instructors before him, Bruce Lee knew that talent, technique, and style knew no traditional boundaries and that excellence carried no single banner or flag. The three martial artists spent many long hours exchanging theories, fighting principles, and techniques, and over the following years, a strong bond of trust and friendship developed. As their reputations grew, they remained friends, and while Bruce Lee went on to take Hollywood, Hong Kong, and the martial arts world by storm, Wally Jay established the ten principles that would set his mark in the world of jujitsu.”

“The Founder of Small Circle Ju Jitsu” by Michael Belzer

Now, following the arguments the "Martial Arts Police" made in their allegations, it must be true that Prof. Jay was also a thief. After all, it's clear that many concepts he taught and incorporated into his “small circle system” came from other sources.

In fact, I would argue that he is a better thief than I am, since he profited from what he “stole” more than I ever have, or will.

But maybe Prof. Jay is too famous to be publicly accused of “stealing.” Maybe, what he taught has been so widely accepted as being something he “created,” he is above incrimination.

So let's move on.

Janet Gee

Another instructor I’ve gained valuable insights from is Sifu Janet Gee, Yang Style Tai Chi Chuan/Choy Li Fut. Once again, she has never been my instructor, but I’ve attended several seminars she has taught, and had the opportunity to talk with her several times about martial arts in general.

There is no question that her approach to martial arts is very different from mine. Yet as different as things may appear on the surface, the science that makes the techniques she teaches work is the same.

What I like most about Sifu Gee’s teaching method is her no nonsense approach when explaining the way things work. She also has a great talent for breaking down techniques and demonstrating the different nuances that can cause different results.

While I may lack the physical skills (speed and definitely the flexibility) to be able to do her martial art in the manner she can, I still always gain valuable insights on how things need to be done in order to be effective.

More importantly, she has definitely taught me to approach and examine things in a different manner, and to think outside of the box.

I’ve never been privy to Sifu Gee’s training history, but according to her bio, she started training in the martial arts in 1971. Her principle styles have been Choy Li Fut Kung Fu and Tai Chi Chuan, but over the years she has also studied Aikido, Tae Kwan Do, Jujitsu, Kempo Karate, Indonesian martial arts, and Judo.

Is there anyone out there who doubts the fact that Sifu Gee incorporates concepts, principles, and techniques from numerous sources when she teaches? Of course she does. She studied other arts to improve her skills, and now passes on her combined knowledge to those fortunate enough to train with her.

Furthermore, Sifu Gee states that she has incorporated elements of the “Alexander Technique,” (a method that develops sophisticated conscious coordination designed to improve ease and freedom of movement as well as teach practitioners how to use appropriate amounts of energy for a particular activity), into her martial arts teaching. Now I’ll admit, I don’t know a lot about the “Alexander Technique,” but last time I checked, it's not even a martial art.

But wait, wouldn’t all this cross training and incorporating new ideas make her a thief too? After all, she is combining and propagating information derived from other individuals. I mean, is she doing anything more or less than I’ve been accused of?

Vital Point

Another instructor who has had a direct impact on the way I teach is Prof. Rick Clark, Ao Denkou Kai. Like the other instructors I’ve listed already, Prof. Clark has never been my instructor, but I’ve attended several of his seminars and have hosted him to teach in the Bay Area several times.

While his knowledge of vital point striking is superior to mine, we often exchange concepts and principles. I would like to think I’ve offered him several ideas to contemplate and explore. At least, that is what he has told me several times.

Prof. Clark’s main contribution to my art was exposing me to the upper level of vital point usage, without wasting my time teaching me all the metaphysical mumbo-jumbo many instructors like to perpetuate.

More importantly, Prof. Clark clarified many of the things my teacher Hiroshi Yachigusa taught me, by explaining them to me in simple to understand English. Since there was nothing lost in translation, I have a better understanding of the material now. Nuances which I may have missed because of language barriers, or the poor comprehension skills of youth, were finally pointed out to me. As a result I’m more effective and efficient when performing techniques.

Prof. Clark also helped me a lot with terminology. Because of this, I am able to discuss vital point striking more professionally, and to a general audience.

Of course, even with all the help Prof. Clark has given me over the years, I now have to say he to is a thief. I mean, he originally trained in Korean systems and judo/jujutsu, and then Arnis. He even admits that what he teaches now is an accumulation of the knowledge he has gained over many years, from many sources.

Yes, it’s true that Prof. Clark has done an awful lot of research on his own, but not everything he teaches was self-taught. Not every principle, or scientific method he employs and teaches is his original work. It is an ACCUMULATION of many things, from many sources.

Once a Thief

Lets face it, I could keep going on and on, naming and discussing numerous teachers I’ve had the great fortune to train with in the last 35 years. There are many instructors who have had a long lasting impression on me, and on the methodologies I now employ. No matter who I would name, no matter what style they taught, they can all be accused of “stealing” information and/or techniques from someone else.

They can all be accused of “stealing,” because they are all individuals who cross-trained, searched out, or researched the martial arts in order to improve what they already knew. They all incorporated knew information they discovered to improve their skills, fill gaps in their primary training, or make themselves more efficient.

Basically they’ve all done what I’ve done.

Yes, I admit I was taught a lot of things by a lot of people, but I didn’t “steal” anything. If anything I took what I was shown, examined it, studied it, tried to figure out how it did or did not relate to what I already knew, and after trail and error either incorporated this information or discarded it.

Furthermore, I didn’t “steal” anything because the information I was given was shared with countless others in public forums. People present were under no restrictions, secret blood oaths, or threats not to disseminate what they were told.

The fact that I elected to share such information in a public forum, on this weblog, while others either do not share or do so more privately, isn’t my concern. Nor is it something I should be condemned for.

To accuse me of “stealing,” is ludicrous. If I am guilty, than so is everyone else past and present because since very ancient times no one has come with an original thought or method in regards to fighting methodologies (except perhaps firearms).

Sure things are explained and presented differently, depending on the style, but we martial artists all do the same things. THERE ARE NO SECRETS, AND SCIENCE IS SCIENCE.

Hiroshi Yachigusa taught me a lot, but he didn’t know everything, nor did he claim to. Looking back, I feel Hiroshi Yachigusa tried his best to teach me what he knew, but because of my age and maturity at the time, and the language barrier between us, that information wasn’t as thorough as it could have been.

I realized this long ago. As result, I have made it my business to seek out and train with others no matter what their rank, affiliation, or martial style. As a result I’m not a parrot who repeats the mantra of one sole individual, no matter how much respect I may have for them.

Nor am I the type of person who isn’t willing to change/alter techniques within the martial system I was taught. If I discover a better, more effective method I will adopt it. Fortunately, this is something Yachigusa Sensei would have approved of, he always felt that the essence of his art that was more important than any of the techniques themselves.

So if the above behavior constitutes “stealing” like I’ve been accused of, I’m guilty. Guilty as Hell!! But though I’m admitting my “guilt,” I’m not doing anything that centuries and centuries of martial artists of the past didn’t do.

Clearly, martial artists such as Musashi, Mitose, Ueshiba, Kano, Funakoshi, Chow, Parker, and even Bruce Lee also sought out better ways to improve their abilities, from any source available to them. They too incorporated and embraced new knowledge. And eventually, they taught their accumulated knowledge to others. Often they did this without giving credit to their various sources.

Their direct students continued these progressions, as did future generations of students after them. To make the claim that your style of martial arts has gone unchanged for centuries is ridiculous. Every instructor, no matter how traditional, makes changes or omissions, based on their ability and comprehension. That’s the human factor.

To make the claim that your system, style, or teacher has exclusive rights to some technical information is insanity. Is anyone so delusional to really believe their way is the best, absolute method, and that their aren’t others doing the same things elsewhere? How conceited, arrogant, and self-righteous can someone be?

To those individuals who accused me of theft, and those that thought there was merit to their accusations, I say you should examine what you do, and really explore how “pure and untainted” your martial art style is. I’m sure you’ll discover that your teacher… Ahem… “Stole” things too.

Maybe worse yet, you’ll discover that you are also the sum of many parts. Perhaps you will find that consciously or unconsciously, you’re as big, or even a bigger thief than I. At least I publicly admit what I do.

Coda:

Just in case you didn’t get it--if one of the instructors I’ve named above happens to be your teacher, and you now find yourself fuming that I had the audacity to accuse them of being a thief, you missed the point. None of the above, including myself, “STOLE” anything. That’s the absurdity of the whole accusation, since we are all the sum of many parts.

The fact is I have nothing but the utmost respect for the instructors I’ve listed above.

No angry E-mails please.

Who Says Women Can’t Fight

When I started teaching fifteen years ago, my school was mainly comprised of teenage girls. In fact, six of my very first seven students were female, (see blog essay “A Brief School History Part 1 – The First Seven,” June 2006).

Since one of my main training partners when I was a student myself was a woman (my teacher’s daughter), I had no reservations about teaching these young ladies. I certainly did not have any concerns about whether women belonged in the martial arts or not. The fact is, I welcomed the opportunity to teach them, especially because I feel women have more of a need to learn life-protection skills than most men do.

Over the years, I’ve read numerous articles debating whether women belong in the martial arts, whether they can compete with men, and the pros and cons of men training with women. I assume that those that believe women have no place training in the martial arts don’t realize that there have been many notable women warriors throughout history. Even the creation of the art of Wing Chun is credited to a woman named Yim Wing Chun (Beautiful Springtime).

I, for one, have never understood these debates. So when I teach women, I teach them exactly like I teach the men. I give them no preferential treatment, and I expect them to perform techniques just like the men do. No “Dojo Bunnies” are allowed.

While the argument that men are physically stronger on average is true, my experience has shown me that women compensate by becoming more technically oriented. This doesn’t mean that any woman could go toe to toe with any man in a fight, but it doesn’t mean they don’t have a chance either. All factors being equal, I don’t see why a woman can't beat a man.

In fact, I know a few women martial artists I wouldn’t want to fight with, and that I would be extremely happy to see coming to my aid in a real a street fight. To be perfectly honest, I was once saved from being thrown off the top of a water tower by my female police partner: she grabbed the suspect’s testicles and pinned him to the ground without ever losing her grip. Now that is technique over brawn. I bet the bad guy is still singing soprano to this day.

Well, for anyone who thinks women can’t fight, or shouldn’t be martial artists, I'm posting this video clip featuring Mixed Martial Arts fighter Satoko Shinashi.

This is one tuff looking little powerhouse. That’s not a sexist statement either. Satoko Shinashi is 4-11 and about 105 pounds. That’s pretty tiny. However, though small in stature this Sambo/Jujutsu stylist has amassed quite a fighting record.

Bronze Medal – 2000 World Sambo Championships (-48kg)

Silver Medal – 2001 Asia Sambo Championship

Gold Medal – All Japan Brazilian Jujutsu Championships

MMA record – 13-1-1

Semi-professional MMA record – 11-0-0

What’s really impressive in this video happens during the last few second, when she makes a much larger male opponent tap out by using an arm bar. It’s clearly a David versus Goliath match, and while I haven’t been able to find out why the fight took place or what specific rules they fought under, it shows a woman can, at times, beat a man.

Now, I’m not saying that Satoko Shinashi is the best woman fighter out there. I’m certain there are plenty of others. What I liked about the video is her technical ability, and the power she demonstrates executing her techniques. Clearly, she is a martial artist.

Certainly, this video shows that women can fight, and I’m sure as female MMA matches gain more acceptance, it wont be long until we witness a number of cross-gender fights.

Count Dante – Dim Mak Ad

A lot of people give practitioners like Rick Clark, George Dilman, Rick Moneymaker, Erle Montaigue, Taika Oyata, and Dr. Pier Tsui-Po a lot of credit for bringing the art of Vital Point Striking to the public’s attention.

Which is true.

These men and others like them have been major proponents of the art of Vital Point Striking over the last decade, and have done a lot of research in order to revive techniques within old forms that to a large extent have been forgotten.

However, long before any of these men were traveling around the world teaching seminars, writing books, or making videos on Vital Point Striking, there was John Timothy Keehan (02/02/39 – 05/25/75), or as he is better known, “Count Juan Raphael Dante, The Deadliest Man Alive.”

Yes, long before many of the above martial art teachers had even earned their first black belt, Count Dante offered a book on the topic of Dim Mak “The Death Touch.”

(Circa late 60’s early 70’s)

I personally have never seen this book. However, based on what I’ve read elsewhere, it sounds as if Count Dante was quite an outlandish character. Yet in many ways a true pioneer in the American martial arts world.

According to most accounts, he was one of the first martial arts instructors to teach non-white students, helping to break racial barriers. He is also credited for helping organize and promote one of the first major full contact martial art tournaments in the US, (072863).

What’s even more interesting was Count Dante was also one of the first to openly reject traditionalism and formality, opting to focus on what he considered to be more “reality based” fighting methods. He even went so far as to state that training in Karate was for sissies. Arrogant no doubt, but this was still pretty progressive for his time--a time when few Americans even knew what Karate, let alone any other martial art styles, were.

For the most part, I’m really not interested in the history of Count Dante, be it fact or fiction. The comments I’m about to make are solely based on the absurdity of the above comic book ads offering instruction in the “the world’s deadliest fighting secrets.”

While these ads clearly speak for themselves one of my favorite paragraphs is:

“Yes, this is the DEADLIEST and most TERRIFYING fighting art known to man --- and WITHOUT EQUAL. It’s MAIMING, MUTILATING, DISFIFURING, PARALYZING and CRIPPLING techniques are known by only a few people in the world. An expert at DIM MAK could easily kill many Judo, Karate, Aikido, and Gung Fu experts at one time with only finger tip pressure using his murderous POISON HAND WEAPONS. Instructing you step by step thru each move in this manual is none other than COUNT DANTE – THE DEADLIEST MAN WHO EVER LIVED.”

Wow! And I can learn all that for just $5.50.
Now I realize these advertisements mostly appeared in comic books, and catered to a comic book reading audience. Keeping this in mind, I’m hoping that the comic, clearly over the top, nature of these ads were intentional. Though unfortunately I’m most likely wrong.

Based on what I’ve read I have a sneaky suspicion that Count Dante had the type of ego where he believed his own hype, and depending on which source you think is telling the truth, definitely had the fighting skills to back it up his claims. After all he was named “The Deadliest Man Alive” after winning “secret death matches.”

The unfortunate thing about these ads is the fact that they circulated during a time when the average American had little or no martial arts savvy, which makes me wonder how many people who read this stuff actually believed it. Or worst yet how many people bought it.

According to Count Dante’s Black Dragon Fighting Society, over one million copies were sold. In my opinion that’s a staggering assertion, since I doubt very many martial art books printed today even sell close to that total. Further more, I did a quick search of the Internet and couldn’t find a used copy for sale anywhere, (not even Ebay.com), which leads me to believe that one million is quite an exaggeration.

Of course if one million copies had actually been sold, I’m assuming that they weren’t all that instructional. After all, I don’t remember reading about a wave of mysterious Dim Mak related deaths in the 60’s and 70’s.

Like I said the absurdity of these ads speak for themselves but I would be remiss if I didn’t mention and comment on some of the more blatant claims.

Claim #1 – Dante’s Claims to Chinese Tongs

While I can’t find anything that associates Dante to actual Chinese Tongs (the Tongs that know the secret of Dim Mak and were members of his Black Dragon Fighting Society), many biographies of Count Dante say he did teach known Chicago gang members as well as various types of other criminals.
I also get the impression that Count Dante had a quite lengthy criminal record himself; depending which version of the story you believe, he was arrested for arson or bombing a rival martial arts school.

Claim #2 – Dante’s Claims of winning “Death Matches”

Clearly, many of the tournaments Count Dante organized were ho holds barred events akin to today’s UFC or Pride fights. Many of these fights were extremely violent bloody affairs. However, there is a big difference between a no holds barred fight, and a death match.
As expected, these so-called death matches were held in secret, and there are no records of them. If they did occur I would expect there would have been witnesses, who by this time would have said something to verify they took place.
I think it will be very interesting to see how much attention these “death matches” get, when the video documentary on Count Dante’s life is completed by film maker Floyd Webb (http://johnkeehan.blogspot.com/).

Claim #3 – Breaking the oath of secrecy.

Isn’t Count Dante contradicting himself here? I mean if one had to swear a secret oath, punishable by torturous death, not to share these ultimate secret-fighting techniques, wouldn’t the “Masters” that taught Count Dante seek vengeance? Maybe his death, caused by bleeding ulcers, was some sort of “delayed death touch.”
Do I hear the making of a conspiracy theory?

Claim #4 – The $10,000.00 guarantee.

You’ve got to love the disclaimer here; Basically it says that while this book can’t guarantee anyone will ever become a master or even expert fighter from reading it, it’s still the “deadliest” text ever printed to date. So dangerous, and “ferocious” that many other publishers wouldn’t print it in the past.
Please be serious.
First of all, it is next to impossible to learn to do martial arts from a book. That’s a no-brainer, and maybe one of the only true statements in the entire ad.
Secondly, having seen a lot of the martial art books released in the 60’s and 70’s any text covering techniques more closely related to street fighting would surely appear more brutal. In other words, it wouldn’t take much to appear more brutal and ferocious, “street lethal,” when most books of this period simply depicted kata (forms) and basic applications within these katas.
I just wonder how that $10,000.00 guarantee would hold up by today’s standards, with all the “reality based” martial art literature that is available.

Okay, once again I’ve had some fun with an old martial art advertisement. The truth of the matter is this stuff is just plain silly, and in most circumstance ads like these are best forgotten.

However, the truth is that practitioners such as Count Dante and ads such as these played a major part in how America looks at the martial arts in general, and why so many people have preconceived (usually wrong) ideas of what martial arts are all about.

For many Americans of the 60’s and 70’s ads like this one were there first introduction to the Asian fighting arts. Instead of educating the public, and extolling the benefits of martial arts training, ads like this embodied the entire negative stereotypes we as martial artists still face toddy.

Yes, martial arts were developed for fighting and killing, but the average martial artist isn’t looking to be a ferocious “chop-o-matic” killing machine. Certainly, most martial art practitioners aren’t training in order to "easily kill many Judo, Karate, Aikido, and Gung Fu experts at one time."

Unfortunately, Count Dante—as talented a martial artist as he might have been—didn’t exemplify a true master of the martial arts. By the sounds of it, he was an arrogant, boastful self-promoter and brawler. While there is nothing wrong with the desire to be a good fighter and focus one’s training on “reality based” fighting methods, Count Dante simply forgot that a true master of the martial arts only fights when forced to do so.

For more biographical information on Count Dante, read “The Life and Death of The Deadliest Man Alive” by Dan Kelly July 14, 2006.

For a more biased biography of Count Dante, go to: The Black Dragon Fighting Society Web Page http://www.countdante.com/page2.html

Experts

“Don't be buffaloed by experts and elites.
Experts often possess more data than judgment.
Elites can become so inbred that they produce hemophiliacs who bleed to death as soon as they are nicked by the real world.”

Collin Powell

“The difference between school and life?
In school, you're taught a lesson and then given a test.
In life, you're given a test that teaches you a lesson.”

Tom Bodett

In this day of the Internet, where so many claim to be an expert on any given topic discussed in many forums, I really wonder just what the word “expert” means. I questioned this even more during times when a self-professed “expert” states something as fact, when there is a clear preponderance of evidence to suggest the contrary.

You know what I mean, don’t you?

You know the guy, the expert who claims adamantly that his way is the only way, but offers no evidence to support his claims. Or the expert who spouts off statistics, but never mentions what study or organization gathered these statistics. Or wose yet someone who perpetuates a common belief/myth (such as that Karate is from Japan) as fact though evidence suggests a totally different conclusion (like Karate actually originated in Okinawa).

Another factor I question about expertise is what qualifications must one have in order to be a true expert in any field. Can a person be a real expert in raising children if they have never had any? Is an expert on Western Medicine qualified to give expert opinion regarding whether Traditional Chinese Medicine (acupuncture) works or not? Can someone truly be an expert on race relations if they’ve never felt racial oppression or prejudice?

I guess what I’m really asking is at what point does one go from expressing a personal belief to an informed opinion to that of the expert?

Unfortunately, the dictionary definition of the word “expert” isn’t enough to satisfy my curiosity. Basically all the dictionary explanation states is:

“1. A person with a high degree of skill in or knowledge of a certain subject. 2. Having or demonstrating great skill, dexterity, or knowledge as the result of experience or training.”

American Heritage Dictionary

Undoubtedly, there are real experts who willingly share their knowledge on the Internet. However, more often that not, I believe many individuals who profess to be experts really aren’t. I believe this because of several factors, the main one being how bent out of shape these self-professed experts get when you ask them for their qualifications, or present them with a fact that goes against their stated position.

In my opinion, I often doubt many of them have any actual professional experience in the topic they are discussing. I suspect that, like myself, they often speak mainly from what they’ve read, what they’ve learned from discussing the topic with others, and what’s been presented on TV.

Now, I’m not saying some of these individuals may not have some personal working experience on the topics they discuss. Take, for example, a person who has done Karate for ten years. He clearly has experience. However, though he may have experience, his knowledge may be only limited to what his instructor has exposed him to, or material related to his particular style. When that individual discuses Karate with others, his experience is limited to one facet of a larger collective, and I don’t believe that qualifies to talk about Karate in general, especially as an expert.

Of course, I also question if personal experience alone is enough to make someone an expert on any topic. I wonder this because I’ve met a lot of self-taught individuals who clearly exhibit expertise in their field. Instead of formal training/study they honed their craft by trail and error, and while they might not do things according to the book, their results are the same.

This of course leads to the question about how much formal education coupled with real world experience one needs to become an expert. That’s a little harder for me to determine, since there are numerous variables to consider. Such as:

1. Length of study
2. Real world application of studied material
3. Years of experience
4. Advanced study / Continued education
5. Length of time since experiences were last applied

Take myself for example. I like to consider myself as educated, well-read, semi articulate, with varied interests. I like reading and studying all sorts of topics, and my mind is often full of trivial/useless facts and statistics I’m just dying to find a use for. I also like debating issues, and finding facts to support my position.

When I write an essay, I don’t just write what ever comes out of my head at the moment I actually do a lot of serious research on the topic. I do that because I’ll be the first to admit I don’t know everything. The last thing I want to do is write something that others will read which is total nonsense, or utterly untrue. I also spend a lot of time researching my topics because in all honesty I often prefer the research phase to the actual work involved to put all my research together and write the essay.

In my professional life I’ve been a peace officer (15 years), an investigator for the county court (almost 7 years), building manager (over 10 years), and martial arts teacher (going on my 15th year). During these professions I have had to study a lot, pass many exams, and have done a lot of learning the hard way: trial and error.

I have also had to testify in court several times, for various reasons related to my jobs. PPer the Superior Court of San Francisco and San Mateo County it's on record that I’m an “expert” on determining if people are under the influence or a controlled substance, and how the body will react during a fight and to various strikes to specific targets. It has also been stipulated that I am knowledgeable enough to give “expert opinion” on the fighting arts in general, police procedure, nightclub security, and tenant right issues.

Now I’m not bragging, I about to make several points.


Point #1 -

I haven’t been a peace officer in almost 14 years so my “working” knowledge of police procedures is antiquated. Numerous changes have certainly occurred since I retired.

In addition, my knowledge was only related to local departments, and police procedures in New York may be very different than those of San Francisco, or agencies in San Mateo County, California.

Furthermore, even though I may read up on the topic and try to stay informed, is it fair to still consider myself an expert on police procedures now.

Clearly, I know more than the average person, but where does one draw the line between knowledgeable and expertise.


Point #2 -

The same is true for dealing with suspects that are under the influence of a controlled substance. I can’t even remember the last time I used that skill, or made an arrest based on my training. I believe I could still make an informed guess, but I wouldn’t lay my reputation as an expert on that assumption.

Once again while I may keep myself updated on new methods, the signs and symptoms of drug interactions within the body, and other facts related top the topic, with out putting this information into practical daily use what level of “expert” am I.


Point #3 -

As an investigator I spent a lot of time investigating homicides. I could certainly teach someone how to do the job, but I’m no expert on every facet of homicide investigation.

I may know how to collect evidence, but I’d be lost trying to process/test it. I may understand the motives that drove a particular suspect to commit murder, but I have no formal training in the psychology of killers.

Once again I may have more experience than the average person, but am I an expert on every facet of homicide investigations? Am I an expert on Homicide investigations? According to the dictionary definition I am.

My point with all of these examples is just because I’ve had experience in something and maybe even continued to keep myself abreast of new information, procedural changes, and other related information still doesn’t mean I’m an expert. Things change, old theories are replaced by new theories, and what once may have been considered science fiction (traveling to the moon) may be science fact today.

I mean how many five year old kids of my generation ever imagined there would be home computers, cell phones, or Nintendo Wii.

All that my experiences mean is that I may have a better understanding of the material compared to someone who has never been a police officer, done investigations, or been exposed to the things I’ve been exposed too.

The question shouldn’t be if I’m an expert on any topic, but if I am more credible when I discuss a point based on my life experience?

I, for one, place more weight and credibility on one’s experiences than those who just learn things from a book or TV. While some may disagree with that belief, the fact of the matter is there is a big difference between the way things are taught, and the way things actually get done in real life.

My older son is facing such a case scenario. Currently he is in Paramedic school, where they teach him things according to a certain set criteria. Everything has to be done in a specific progression from “A” to “Z.” In order to pass exams students are not allowed to deviant from strict structured protocols.

However, when my son takes ride-a-longs with the local paramedics they do things quite differently than what he is taught at paramedic school. Sure they have certain procedures to follow, but they don’t follow a set progression of questions and tasks. In other words they take short cuts, adjust to the situation, and do things in ways that if attempted by a paramedic student would cause them to be flunked.

Real world experience has taught these working paramedics that not everything case can be “handle by the book,” and at times in order to save someone one must think outside the box.

This of course leads me to another issue regarding expertise. Is someone who studies a subject, learns proper text book procedures, passes exams, and is able to spout facts and statistics more of an expert than someone with real world skills who applies this knowledge on a daily basis?

I mean who would you rather have working on you in an emergency, the A+ student paramedic graduate, or the guy who has been a paramedic for several years? Or to put it another way, the novice with no experience, or the veteran who knows what has to be done and can make adjustments as needed.

Further more, when does one become an expert? Is it a within 6 months of starting a job and applying that knowledge, after a year, or after 10 years?

The problem with the word, “expert,” is that it is subjective. Its one of those words that gets thrown around a lot, and few people who claim to be one are ever asked to put up or shut up.

Now don’t get me wrong. Like I said, there are real experts who offer their opinion on the Internet, and they have a lot of valuable information to share. The only problem is, one has to wade through a lot of misinformation/half-truths to find the factual stuff.

Basically, I try and live by the adage; don’t believe everything you hear or read. Learn to be selective, and learn to examine where the source of the information comes from.

I’ve also learned that just because someone claims to be an expert, maybe even is an legitimate expert on a topic, doesn’t always mean they are right. Human frailty being what it is, even real experts are often prejudicial and one sided. As Thomas Sowell stated, “For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert; but for every fact there is not necessarily an equal and opposite fact.”

Lastly, and maybe most importantly, I’ve also learned that when ever discussing something on the Internet, no matter how much I may feel I know on the subject, or how many actual facts I may possess to support my position, it is always safer to express myself as if were only an opinion. Let others take it as fact if they elect to do so.

No-Touch Knockouts – Why do I care?

For those that are regular readers, and for those that have stumbled onto this blog and have read a few of my previous posts regarding the no-touch knockout controversy, one may wonder why I care.

I ask myself that very question all the time. I mean why does it bug me so much? Why can’t I just overlook the nonsense, and just forget about it? WHY!?

Well the answer isn’t because I’m such a fine upstanding citizen or that I want to see truth and justice prevail. It’s not because I think my purpose in life is to expose fraud and corruption where and when I can. And its not because I receive accolades from my martial art contemporaries, martial art students, fellow workers, family, or friends because I’m willing to fight the good fight. To be honest most don’t care.

No, the reason is more personal; I simply take offense to the idea, and feel this affects the credibility of the martial arts in general. Clearly with the current state of martial arts, where schools exist that churn out black belts like McDonalds sells burgers, we in the industry don’t need this.

The last thing we martial artists need are people discrediting what we do, and giving the public further ammunition to ridicule what we do. Hollywood has done enough of that already, by highlighting the flash and the fluff, as well as the mystical more-than-real world fighting techniques that work.

I learned a long time ago that credibility is everything, and one’s reputation is all one will ever truly possess in this lifetime.

Now some will laugh at the above, once again questioning the legitimacy regarding the history of my school. However, I’m the first to admit that what little information I’ve pieced together has enough holes to leave room for lots of speculation and suspicion.

I for one would carefully scrutinize someone else with the same story as mine. However, I would never be flipped enough to call them an outright fraud in public forums as others have done to me. Without meeting the person, seeing their skills first hand I wouldn’t be comfortable or feel justified making any assertions.

Anyone who knows me will tell you I’m the first to stringently question the information my teacher gave me, but it’s all I’ve got to work with. I’m also the first to say there is absolutely no proof to verify anything. I’m not trying to deceive anyone by saying there is. I tell people what I do and do not know and let each individual believe what they want.

With that said, back to my point.

As any student of mine will tell you, I’m a big proponent of vital point striking. I believe understanding the various methods of applying vital point striking and other elements of Kyusho Jutsu is extremely important in maximizing the efficiency of ones martial art techniques.

My honest opinion is that you can’t call yourself a martial artist if you have no concept of them, or at the very least some basic tools to utilize them. All real authentic martial arts attack weak points of the body, and that is all the art of vital point striking is about.

I also realize that relying on vital points alone in a real fight is ludicrous. It’s borderline suicide. The art of vital point striking is nothing more than an enhancement system to viable techniques. The art of vital point striking is sort of like adding the whipped cream to the milkshake. You don’t need the whipped cream to make the milkshake taste good, but you want it anyway. It’s that little extra zing that makes the milkshake so much better.

So what is the connection between the art of vital pint striking and no-touch knockouts? The answer is simple; most proponents of no-touch knockouts are also proponents, even major figures—dare I say modern day pioneers—in the art and dissemination of vital point striking.

Given the fact that many people already questioned the validity of vital point striking as they presented it, and believe these proponents were frauds regarding that topic, imagine what they must think now.

Clearly, there is more proof to substantiate that vital points exit. Just spend a few minutes at a vital point class/seminar and your opinion regarding their existence will quickly change (note I didn’t say one’s opinion on their application in a real fight would; that requires a little more time).

My problem, the reason I’m so adamant regarding the topic of no-touch knockouts and extolling the insanity of this belief, is that those who perpetuate martial art myths such as this discredit all the real hard working martial artist who spend numerous years enduring physical hardship to hone their craft.

The martial arts are nothing mysterious or supernatural. They are all based on applied sciences. They were all tested and refined during a time when warriors actually utilized these skills.

To make martial arts something they are not, to take these skills and try to place them in a position akin to supernatural powers is just wrong. It’s a lie. It’s dishonest.

I can’t tolerate dishonesty, and I guess in the end that’s what really bothers me about this topic the most. Clearly, it’s the reason I can’t put this topic to rest.

Lastly, I dislike having to dispel preconceived notions potential students bring into my school. Explaining to someone that their belief, that what they’re searching for, does not, nor ever did exist is just not good for business.

No one likes or respects somebody who “bursts their bubble.”

Interesting Question – No Touch Knockouts Versus No-Touch Healing

"The problem here is a very practical one. Research costs money, and the skilled practitioners of these methods (Therapeutic Touch) are busy working as doctors, not as researchers to a high enough level of competency in these methods for the research to be effective. Yet if some enterprising body were to give sympathetic and careful attention to our claims, then I feel we would discover that we have an undreamed of tool available to us which I'm sure can be further extended and refined."

Anthony Scott-Morley, D.Sc., Ph.D., M.D. (alt. med), of Dorset, England

Recently there has been an interesting discussion on one of the martial arts forums asking why a person who believes that some people have the power to do no-touch healing would dismiss another's ability to do no-touch knockouts.

In other words, if one believes people can heal others by externalizing their energy (call it Chi, Ki, or whatever) from a distance, why can’t that same form of externalized energy be used in combat and to knock people out?

Good question.

Now, I never considered this debate before, and call me a hard-ass, but I think both issues are nonsense. However, though I may tout the hard-line, I can see why people would have more faith and belief in no-touch healing than no-touch knockouts. In fact, there may even be some validity to their argument—possibly, but only the argument.

Now before you think I’m going soft and that I’m flip-flopping on my position, I am not. I still hold, and well forever hold until proven wrong, the position that neither method has any actual validity, and that there is absolutely no scientific information to indicate either works.

With that said though, I’m also aware of the “healing properties” of human touch and positive human interaction.

Of course I want to make the distinction clear. I believe touch, actual physical contact, can be therapeutic. In fact, I believe that touch is essential to the health and welfare of all human beings.

I also believe positive interaction among two or more individuals can also have many healing qualities. I mean, group therapy and “Twelve Step” programs are based on this belief. Clearly, if peer pressure can be blamed for causing one to engage in negative behavior, why can’t positive compassionate interaction help someone feel better about themselves and aid in their recovery?

Arguably, I guess the proponents of no touch healing can argue they provided the same benefits as group therapy, but on a on-to-one basis. Clearly, no-touch healing provides a healthy constructive interaction between practitioner and patient. Furthermore, treatment is designed to instill faith that one will get better and will feel better. This connection between mind and body has definite merit, and a positive outlook can do wonders when it comes to healing oneself.

With that said however, I don’t believe touch has the power to cure all ills. As therapeutic as touch may be, I don’t believe it can cure diseases such as cancer, like some proponents would suggest. Touch certainly can aid a person during their recovery, even ease their suffering, but it can’t cure them.

(For more information on the healing benefits of touch and studies relating to touch and healing I suggest going to Healing Touch International, Inc)

Of course this blog entry isn’t about actual touching to heal a person, it’s about no-touch healing.

I’m sure based on my opinion regarding the benefits of hands-on healing no one will be surprised when I say no-touch healing is a load of baloney. At least,it is in the way it is packaged and sold to the public. Sorry if being blatant offends someone, but its true. Quote all the studies you want, none of them prove its existence or even the possibility that there is some scientific evidence to support the faith people have in it.

Now, I’m not denying some people have benefited from such a treatment, but all that proves is the amazing power of the mind.

I forget which war this took place in, but a group of injured soldiers were once given sugar pills to relieve their pain instead of regular pain killers. Of course these soldiers weren’t told the pills were made of sugar. They were informed that these pills were the strongest pain reliever ever made, stronger than even morphine. Even so the pills had absolutely no medicinal properties a majority of the soldiers felt a reduction in their pain.

Now, we all know sugar won't decrease pain, and those soldiers that felt relief shouldn’t have felt any changes. However, they did. It worked because they believed what the doctors were telling them and had faith in the pills they were ingesting. Clearly, it was a case of mind over matter.

The same placebo effect can be account for many of the wonderful results attributed to no-touch healing. As Albert Schweitzer stated, “The greatest discovery of any generation is that human beings can alter their lives by altering the attitudes of their minds."

Now to be perfectly honest, I’m not very knowledgeable when it comes to the various forms of no-touch/faith healing methodologies that are out there. Basically, many of them sound the same to me, and most deal with spirituality more than science. Of course this link to spirituality isn’t such a surprise.

Many individuals believe in the power of prayer, and that God can heal them. In many cases, even when faced with eminent death, their spirituality is unwavering. I knew such an individual once who instead of taking the antibiotics his doctors prescribed waited for God to cure him. He prayed and his fellow Jehovahs prayed with him. They held hands to share energy, and although he got worse and worse, his faith remained absolute. The end result was that he died from an illness that could have been easily been cured with proper medical treatment. Basically, one could assert that his “faith” killed him.

Of course, that example is most probably why I have such a bias against the healing quality of faith on its own. That is why I’m adamant that without proof one should not extol the virtues of “faith healing” as a true method of healing anyone.

Yes, it’s a hard-line, but it's based on personal experience, and every thing I’ve ever read, heard from others in the medical profession, or seen on TV.

But I digress.

While I was reading the various posts debating no-touch healing versus no-touch knockouts, one particular method of healing was constantly referred to. That method is called Reiki.

Since Reiki seemed to be a major component of their discussion, I will address only that particular method in this essay, though I’m almost certain what I’m about to say applies to most other methods (magneto therapy, pranic healing color therapy, aroma therapy, music therapy, gems and stone therapy, etc).

Now I’ve heard of Reiki before, but really didn’t know enough about Reiki at the time this discussion was “heated” to make any fully informed comments., Now after several days of Internet research I think I can make a better, definitely more informed, opinion. And yes, the information presented here is just my opinion.

Before I start though, let me quote a description of Reiki I found on the International Center for Reiki Training website, (www.Reiki.org). Per their website they describe Reiki as:

Reiki is a Japanese technique for stress reduction and relaxation that also promotes healing. It is administered by "laying on hands" and is based on the idea that an unseen "life force energy" flows through us and is what causes us to be alive. If one's "life force energy" is low, then we are more likely to get sick or feel stress, and if it is high, we are more capable of being happy and healthy.
The word Reiki is made of two Japanese words - Rei which means "God's Wisdom or the Higher Power" and Ki which is "life force energy". So Reiki is actually "spiritually guided life force energy."

A treatment feels like a wonderful glowing radiance that flows through and around you. Reiki treats the whole person including body, emotions, mind and spirit creating many beneficial effects that include relaxation and feelings of peace, security and wellbeing. Many have reported miraculous results.

Reiki is a simple, natural and safe method of spiritual healing and self-improvement that everyone can use. It has been effective in helping virtually every known illness and malady and always creates a beneficial effect. It also works in conjunction with all other medical or therapeutic techniques to relieve side effects and promote recovery.

An amazingly simple technique to learn, the ability to use Reiki is not taught in the usual sense, but is transferred to the student during a Reiki class. This ability is passed on during an "attunement" given by a Reiki master and allows the student to tap into an unlimited supply of "life force energy" to improve one's health and enhance the quality of life.

Its use is not dependent on one's intellectual capacity or spiritual development and therefore is available to everyone. It has been successfully taught to thousands of people of all ages and backgrounds.

While Reiki is spiritual in nature, it is not a religion. It has no dogma, and there is nothing you must believe in order to learn and use Reiki. In fact, Reiki is not dependent on belief at all and will work whether you believe in it or not. Because Reiki comes from God, many people find that using Reiki puts them more in touch with the experience of their religion rather than having only an intellectual concept of it.

While Reiki is not a religion, it is still important to live and act in a way that promotes harmony with others. Dr. Mikao Usui, the founder of the Reiki system of natural healing, recommended that one practice certain simple ethical ideals to promote peace and harmony, which are nearly universal across all cultures.

Based on this above description I can certainly see why some people would believe in the value of such a healing method. However, while they claim to have no “dogma,” it certainly sounds like they do. Clearly, they are stating their opinions and ideas, which are founded on faith, in an authoritative manner (that’s the definition of dogma).

This description also claims believing in Reiki isn’t necessary in order to benefit from it. However, they fail to offer any verifiable proof of that assertion. They simply refer to the spiritual nature of Reiki to explain why it works. What if I’m not spiritual by nature? What if I don’t believe Reiki comes from God?

Furthermore, they assert that Reiki has been beneficial in “helping virtually every known illness and malady.” If this statement is true, where are the statistics, the scientific data showing cause and effect. In addition, what is the definition of “helpful?” I need more than a few testimonials by individuals who believe Reiki helped them before I can believe this stuff actually has merit.

Lets face it, you can find and elicit testimonials regarding just about any product or idea out there. The diet industry is one such example of this. You know the ads: I used the cheesecake diet and lost ten pounds in one week, so can you!

Granted, most websites that discuss Reiki give the disclaimer that Reiki should not be used as a sole means to cure anything. In fact, many websites encourage individuals to seek professional medical advice in addition to Reiki treatment.

I respect this disclaimer a lot, but it goes a long way to proving my point. If one is seeking professional medical treatment at the same time they do Reiki, how could they possibly tell which method is actually more effective?

For example, I’ve suffered chronic neck pain for over ten years. I’ve tried everything short of surgery to ease the pain and get some relief. Nothing seemed to work, and trust me I wanted to believe something would.

Well, several months ago my doctor finally prescribed a painkiller that I have to take daily, but which takes several weeks before becoming fully effective. Let's assume I would have gone for Reiki treatments during those weeks; would I now believe the Reiki made me feel better, or it was the medicine? Or was it a combination of the two?

Using the same logic as those that propagate Reiki, maybe the real reason I feel better now isn’t due to the pills. Maybe it is actually due to my new pillow, the fact I cut my hair really short and lessened the weight of my head, or maybe it was just the Twinkies I ingested. Sorry if that sounds antagonistic or I come off sounding like a jerk, but what if?

That’s the problem with this debate; there is a lack of proof, a lack of hard evidence to confirm or at least legitimize their claims. Most testimonials they present as fact are only based on the belief this works, not scientific study or serious long-term investigation.

Like I said I’m no expert on Reiki, and have no first hand experience regarding how this method is employed. Based on what I’ve read this treatment is either hands-on (light touch), no-touch, or a combination of both.

In either case, I discovered that there appears to be a direct correlation between Reiki and acupuncture/acupressure. Or in other words, many of the points used in Reiki to “transfer energy” are the same used in acupuncture, Shiatsu, and various other forms of massage.

I’m sure this correlation is no accident or fluke either, though I could hardly find any evidence of such a link on most Reiki websites. The topic is debated on some forums discussing Reiki though.

Now, I’m aware that acupuncture as a healing method also has its detractors and that explaining why it works can also border the mystical realm. However, I have lot more faith in acupuncture/acupressure than anything involving no-touch methodologies. At least with acupuncture there have been some major scientific studies to investigate why it works.

The flaw with the theory of Reiki, and other similar methods, is the spiritual component, a component that can’t be proven. This component is based solely on FAITH.

Any healing method that claims to transfer/channel universal life force needs to be scrutinized. What is this “universal life force?” Is there any proof such a thing exists? Are they referring to my aura, the radiation I naturally emit, heat transfer, or something else.

This claim is very similar to those who claim to have the power to knock someone out with out touching them. No-touch knockout proponents clearly state that they transfer and use life force (Chi) to knock people out. That is their assertion at least.

Of course, there are major differences between proponents of no-touch knockouts and no-touch healing methods such as Reiki. These differences mainly have to due with how both methods are taught, and that no-knock practitioners don’t claim their abilities will work on everyone, especially skeptics.

Since I have already discussed the later in previous posts, I’ll focus my attention on the differences each system has when it comes to learning and acquiring these skills.

According to the International Center for Reiki Training website, they claim learning to do Reiki is extremely simple, and anyone regardless of their intellect can do it. Per their website:

An amazingly simple technique to learn, the ability to use Reiki is not taught in the usual sense, but is transferred to the student during a Reiki class. This ability is passed on during an "attunement" given by a Reiki master and allows the student to tap into an unlimited supply of "life force energy" to improve one's health and enhance the quality of life.

Its use is not dependent on one's intellectual capacity or spiritual development and therefore is available to everyone. It has been successfully taught to thousands of people of all ages and backgrounds.

Now I had no idea what could possibly be giving during “attunement” but according to Wikipedia:

The Reiki attunement process is an awareness of self-empowerment usually involving initiation, spiritual ceremony and /or meditation with a specific purpose and intent to connect to the Universal Energy Source. Following and coming to understand this process is how one becomes a Reiki Healer. Being attuned to Reiki is purported to give one the ability to easily access the Reiki energy (Universal Life Force) for the purpose of healing a person or situation by realigning that person or situation's energy. Many believe that only a Reiki Master can give Reiki Attunements.

When the attunement is given, depending on the type of attunement, Reiki Symbols are placed into your Crown, Heart, and/or Palm Chakras. During the attunement, Chakras are opened and cleared. Reiki symbols are used and there is transference of Reiki energy during the attunement. Central to this process is the establishment of a connection with the source of Reiki.

Now I’m not sure what all of the above means, sounds like mumbo-jumbo to me, but it is certainly pretty complicated. I would have to believe it would take more than a weekend class to obtain such skills, even if that skill was on a beginner’s level.

Of course, the assertion that obtaining Reiki skills is easy is directly contrary to what no-touch knockout proponents say. In fact, learning to do no-touch knockouts, learning to focus one’s internal power and externalizing it is suppose to take years of arduous painstaking practice, and well as personal insight.

While I have been unable to find any specific information stating how practitioners of no-touch knockouts transmit their knowledge, I would assume it has to be akin to techniques taught to develop and build up one's Chi (internal power).

Of course whether one system is easy to learn and the other isn’t really isn’t important to the topic. That topic is why one would believe one method is real and the other is not. However, it shows a definite contrast in the average person’s ability to master something such as learning to externalize and channel energy.

From everything I’ve seen and read regarding both methods my opinion is you either believe in both, or neither. You can’t have it both ways.

In other words, if it is the realm of possibility to externalize energy at all, why is this ability only limited to good not evil?

The answer of course is more of an issue of morality than science. It is mush easier to accept something as fact when it is for the greater good, than when it is evil in nature. Fighting is, after all, considered evil.

In addition, a lot more people have been exposed to and accepted alternative methods of healing than have practiced martial arts, or been exposed to practitioners that claim to be able to do no-touch knockouts.

Whether no-touch healing works or not, I can’t say for certain. My opinion is that is does not and I wouldn’t trust these methods if I were ill. However, if they work for others, that’s great.

That of course is also my opinion when I listen to people who adamantly say they have been knocked out by a no-touch knockout, or claim to have felt something unexplainable during an attempted no-touch knockout.

My final thought on this topic is simple; believe what you will, just don’t tell me there’s proof when there is none. Don’t try and convert me. Let me enjoy my skepticism, until I’m proven wrong. I’ll be the first to admit my mistake when I see the real proof.

Lastly, don’t try to tell me one exists and the other doesn’t. Either accept both or keep quiet. After all you’re talking about the same abilities, used for different purposes.



***** Please note: I am not clear if Reiki is a no-touch method of healing, or if some practitioners just elect to use Reiki in a no-touch manner. Photos on the Internet showing Reiki practitioners clearly depict some do make physical contact and others do not.

My opinion on the effectiveness, or I should say lack of effectiveness clearly lies on the practitioners who practice no-touch versions of this method.

Since I believe Reiki is akin to acupuncture/acupressure those that touch are employing a method that has more validity, since as I said numerous times touch is beneficial to one’s overall all physical and mental health.

Faith – The Power Of Belief

“What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires — desires of which he himself is often unconscious.

If a man is offered a fact, which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it.

If, on the other hand, he is offered something, which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way.”

Bertrand Russell (05/18/1872 – 02/02/1970)
British philosopher, logician, and advocate for social reform.

My last few essays regarding No-Touch Knockouts (here, here, and here) have clearly conveyed my opinion. I don’t believe in any shape way or form that no-touch knockouts exist.

Fortunately, my opinion is clearly in the majority, and most people immediately dismiss this claim when they hear about it.

However, for whatever reason, there are many others who do believe such mystical—what certainly can only be considered fictional—things can occur.

The real question shouldn’t be whether no-touch knockouts exist; the question should be why do some individuals have the need to believe in such mystical things? What motivates them to believe?

Furthermore, why do these believers so vehemently argue about the validity of no-touch knockouts when faced with such overwhelming facts to the contrary?

The answer is all about, “FAITH.”

It’s their faith, their desire to believe in something, such as a higher power, that inspires them.

The American Heritage Dictionary defines the word faith as:

faith (f³th) n. 1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, an idea, or a thing. 2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. 3. Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance. 4. Often Faith. Theology. The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will. 5. The body of dogma of a religion. 6. A set of principles or beliefs. --idiom. in faith. Indeed; truly.

Clearly those that believe in no-touch knockout are confident this phenomenon exists.

They also see the potential value of such a technique for life-protection, as do I—if it were a reality.

Lastly, they also trust and admire, in almost cult like devotion, those who claim to have such powers and skills.

However, anyone approaching this topic logically would see there is no merit it to it, since there is absolutely on material evidence to support its existence.

That however, is not what faith/belief is all about. In most case faith/belief is often based on intangibles, and people who have faith in something, believe in something strongly, proof is not necessary.

For example, religion is based on faith. There is absolutely no proof of any deity, heaven or hell, after life, or reincarnation, yet people strongly believe. People claim to have experiences where they have communicated with the divine, seen the light, were touched by an angel, or been tempted by demonic forces. Furthermore, most religions of the world were founded and propagated by charismatic individuals who sought out others searching for a greater meaning to their life, and would be willing to embrace their message. Even at times, die for their message.

While I have no desire to discuss theology there are parallels to those that truly believe in mystical martial arts myths.

For starters these individuals are searching for something. Something on a higher level than the average person can attain. They want to rise above normality, and obtain a higher power. While most people are content with becoming warriors they want to become a Jedi.

They seek out like-minded individuals who exchange these ideals, and talk about amazing techniques they’ve personally witnessed or that a friend of a friend has witnessed. How cool would it be to know how to do that!?

Lastly, they seek out someone who has allegedly achieved these abilities. Someone who is willing to teach these skills, especially if you afford him the proper, respect, loyalty, and devotion someone in his position deserves. Someone who has the personality, magnetism, and mastery to further instill that these beliefs are actually fact not fiction. In other words, someone who is a guru.

The funny think about the power of faith and belief is that even when such a “guru” says something that debunks the myth, his followers and others who believe the same thing seldom get the message. Or they refute what was said; normally blaming others for misinterpreting what was actually meant.

This is apparent if one watches the YouTube.com video clip titled “Dillman Explains Chi KO Nullification.”

In this interview Mr. Dillman explains why a no-touch knockout attempted by his associate Leon Jay didn’t work. In this interview he clearly states that the technique failed because the subject was a “skeptic,” and was a “total non-believer.”

I’m sorry, but if a technique is viable, skepticism shouldn’t be a negating factor. I mean who would go to a fight counting on something like that, especially if the counter is just disbelief.

My interpretation of what Mr. Dillman is saying clearly indicates that no-touch knockouts don’t work.

Another proponent of no-touch knockouts, Harry Thomas “The Human Stun Gun” Cameron states that no-touch knockouts only work on 40% of the population and that “natural athletes are the toughest.”

First of all, I wouldn’t bet on something if it only had a 40% chance of winning. I certainly wouldn’t waste years and years trying to master such a thing, when there are so many other viable options to choose from.

Secondly, aren’t most soldiers akin to “trained athletes?” Isn’t that why soldiers spend so much time enduring physical fitness exercises during basic training? Does this also imply that if one should happen to fight a professional soccer player, a definite example of an athlete, a no-touch knockout may not work?

These are nothing more than excuses that come out when frauds are exposed. I see it, the majority of people who see these clips see it, but the faithful some how miss it.

Of course all of the blame shouldn’t be directed towards George Dillman, Harry Cameron, Yanagi Ryuken, and others like them. Their followers—the “true believers,” the guys who fall down when attacked, and claim to have felt “something”—are just as guilty, if not more so, of conning the unsuspecting public.

These individuals are the salesmen for such fraudulent claims. These are the individuals who unwittingly (hopefully) fool others into believing that such things are real.

These are the individuals who stroke the egos of the con-man, until he reaches a point where he even deludes himself into believing he has the actual power, the gift. Just look at the case of Yanagi Ryuken (see previous post).

Of course, accusing the “believer” of fraud isn’t fair. After all, he truly believes that such things exist. His belief, his need to believe, has been preyed on and manipulated.

The problem with faith and belief is that you can’t fight it with logic or reason. Because of this, there will always be those who will perpetuate and try to achieve the power of the supernatural. There will always be those who will prey upon such believers.

Furthermore, there will always be those who will vigorously and even fiercely defend what they believe to be true.

This means that debates like this will continue on, and lines will be crossed in the sand. For the most part, it’s really not worth all the anger and energy, not to mention time, both sides spend debating the topic.

The only true solution to the debate is to agree to disagree. After all, the believers can have faith and feel confident that one day the truth will be known by all.

No-Touch Knockout Fraud Exposed

You know, sometimes I just feel so out of the loop. How was I suppose to know that there was a perfect video circulating around that shows just how fraudulent the no-touch knockout hype is all about? Where are all the guys who normally send me these links?

Now, I’m not talking about the George Dillman clip form the National Geographic special, or even the Youtube.com clip featuring Darren Brown.

No, this clip is from Japan and features Yanagi Ryuken (ryuken = dragon fist), a supposed 10th degree black belt in five traditional martial arts.

Problems with Bio Info of Yanagi Ryuken

First of all, according to the Internet, Yanagi Ryuken is a “Daitouryu Aikido” practitioner. What is “Daitouryu Aikido?” Do they mean Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu? If so I feel very sorry for legitimate Daito Ryu practitioners. I wouldn’t want this guy claiming to represent my art.

However, according to Yanagi Ryuken, his system is based on koryu jujutsu arts (unnamed), with Aiki, Qigong, and other mysterious elements mixed together.
In addition, Yanagi Ryuken is also supposed to have won over 200 Val Tude (anything goes) fights. You think with that many victories there would be more written about the man. I couldn’t find anything.

Video Clip #1

Watch this clip and make up your own mind.

If you believe what you’re seeing, please send a check to Yachigusa Ryu Aiki Bugei Dojo for $1,000.00 and I’ll send you the “secrets” so you too can learn to do these techniques. Money back guarantee not valid in any of the 50 states of America, or any other continents where some form of terrestrial life exists.

For those who don’t believe... well we now know nothing is wrong with your sanity.

Video Clip #2

Yanagi Ryuken Versus Iwakura Goh (Team Barbosa Jiujitsu Japan)

My Personal Comments

"Evil Gary" wants to say that Yanagi Ryuken got just what he deserved. He got the crap beat out of him, because what he claimed to do doesn’t exist. He met a skeptic, and the skeptic beat him. Beat him bad.

Furthermore, "Evil Gary" has to wonder why such a great fighter, a winner in 200 Vale Tudo matches, didn’t look like he could whip cream. The guy he fought was clearly a lot younger, and less experienced. I mean he isn’t a 10th degree black belt in even one system, let alone five.

"Compassionate Gary" sort of feels sorry for this old guy. Obviously, there is something mentally wrong with the man, since he seems to really believe he has mystical powers. Clearly he is delusional.

I mean, he must be delusional, since in one post I read he actually claims to fight ghosts.

To bad Iwakura Goh wasn’t a ghost. Maybe then Yanagi Ryuken wouldn’t have suffered several broken teeth, and numerous cuts to his nose and lips. Maybe then he wouldn’t have looked like a buffoon. Sorry, I'm being evil again.

"Gracious Gary" appreciates that Yanagi Ryuken publicly admitted he had the lost the match, even though he blamed heart trouble for his loss. At least he didn’t mention anything about the old "tongue and toe defense."

Further more, "Gracious Gary" wants to thank Mr. Ryuken for showing what happens to, and will happen to, anyone who dares to fight using such fictional skills. Mr. Ryuken did more in 2 minutes of getting his butt kicked to dispel this myth than months and months, maybe even centuries of debate ever has.

Closing Comments

Okay, I’ve had my fun discussing these two video clips.

On a more serious note I think video clip #2 clearly illustrates what every skeptic already knew. There is no such thing as no-touch knockouts. They just don’t exist.

You can argue the issue as much as you want to, but fact is fact. Sorry to burst your little bubble.

Like I said, I’m not sure if I feel sorry for, or respect Yanagi Ryuken for at least meeting the challenge. Sure a great deal of money was involved, and I’m sure he saw dollar signs, but at least he was willing to back up his claims. That’s more than the likes of George Dillman, or his army of generals ever has done.

The good thing in this case is that Yanagi Ryuken has now decided to retire, and will no longer accept challenges.

The bad thing is that I’m sure some of Yanagi Ryuken’s students, and other gullible individuals like them, will still believe. They’ll find some excuse for what happened that day, dismiss reality, and go on arguing that no-touch knockouts do exist.

Worst yet, these individuals will find others gullible people to believe them. I guess what David Hannum said was true, there is a sucker born every minute.”1

1 Quote is attributed to P.T. Barnum, but was actually said by David Hannum. Source “P. T. Barnum Never Did Say "There's a Sucker Born Every Minute" By R. J. Brown Historybuff.com

My No-Touch Knockout Experience

My last essay reminded me of the below story, and made start to think that maybe I should reevaluate the possibility of that no-touch knockouts do exist. Or at least what the definition of one would be.

Many years ago during a reported burglary in progress, I came face to face with the suspect as he tried to exit through the window.

Burglary is a felony, and since I couldn’t see the guy’s hands I drew my gun and told the guy to “Freeze.”

As I lifted my gun from the holster and pointed the barrel in his direction the guy fainted. Yes he drop to the ground and was completely unconscious.

By definition wasn't that a "no touch" knockout? I didn’t touch him, and he was “knocked out.”

After all, my "chi" must have passed from my hand through the gun and hit him.

HA HA HA

The No-Touch Knockout

I know this topic has been discussed to death on the Internet already, but believe it or not there are still groups discussing if such a thing exits or not.

I’m going to keep this short…. at least for me, and sum things up in one sentence.

There is absolutely no validity, or scientific evidence to prove, that anyone, living or dead, can or ever could knock someone out without touching them, without the aid of a some type of projectile.

Fact is fact!

Okay, so much for one sentence.

I know there are those that will vehemently argue that no-touch knockouts do exists, and that they have witnessed someone get knocked-out in such a manner, or know of someone who witnessed such an event.

Okay, I also have a bridge I like to sell you here in San Francisco. It’s really pretty and attracts a lot of tourists. I’ll sell it to you for a steal.

I realize many people have a need to believe in something. I understand that some people want to believe in mystical or super human abilities. Furthermore, I know people can at times be pretty gullible, and someone with a forceful charismatic personality can sway people into believing the unbelievable.

I’ll be the first to admit that if such a technique existed I would want to learn it. I mean, who doesn’t want to have that skill. It’s the ultimate self-defense.

However, if such a skill did exist don’t you think a lot more people would know how to do it? Don’t you think there would be reports in the news, because such a skill is being abused?

I mean why use drugs to commit date rape, just knock her out from across the room. Why point a gun at a clerk, when you can just knock him out from a distance.

Now the argument of course is that in order to develop such a skill requires a lot of training, and dedication. Training and dedication most people wouldn’t endure.

Maybe that’s true, but there are millions of people in the world, and a few bad ones would. Just like a few bad people take the time to learn to make bombs, plan terrorist plots, and even cultivate bacterial weapons like anthrax.

Strike One

Then of course, there is the argument that this knowledge was lost and only recently re-discovered. Crap! That’s just too easy of an explanation. Plus, except for legends, no reliable sources state that such a techniques was ever used in actual combat.

There is also no viable information that an actual living person in the past ever had such a skill.

I think anyone in the past that had such ability, and demonstrated it effectively-especially in a combative situation-would have instantly become a martial arts icon. He would have had tons and tons of disciples. Nnumerous stories about him would exist.

There are no such stories, and such a person never existed.

Strike Two

The last argument is my favorite, and usually used to attack skeptics like me. I call it the blame game.

In this case, when the no-touch knockout fails it’s the skeptics fault. They countered the techniques by lifting their toe or twisting their tongue.

Or how about this excuse: I can’t do the technique on you because your chi isn’t developed enough and it would seriously injure you. Don’t laugh; that excuse was used on me.

Many years ago there used to be a female martial arts instructor in San Francisco, whose students swore could knock people out without touching them. I forgot her name, and I’m not even sure if she is still alive. That’s not important anyway.

As a skeptic that would be willing to accept being proven wrong, I went to her school to see things for myself. I politely introduced myself to this teacher, and told her I had heard great things about her skills. I told her I was extremely interested in her ability to knock people out without touching them.

For the next half hour or so I got a lecture on chi, and the training it would take to develop my internal force. This lecture was followed up with her giving a demo, where she continuously knocked her students to the floor or into unconsciousness without ever touching them. She even knocked one guy out as he stood on the other side of a wall. Pretty impressive stuff to be sure.

I then asked her if she do it on me. She looked at me for a moment and said “No.” I asked her again, and she said she couldn’t. Not because she lacked the ability, but because my chi wasn’t strong enough and I would get seriously hurt.

Sure!

I then told her I would be willing to sign any release and wavier she wanted me to, and that any injury suffered would be totally my fault. She still declined.

Of course at this point she offered to accept me as a student and help me develop my chi. All it would cost was $85.00 a month.

“How long do you think it will take?” I asked.

“Years,” she said, “maybe longer.”

Once again I asked her to just please try and knock me out, I needed to feel her power before I could commit to training with her.

With a huff she agreed to try. I stood there waiting to feel something, anything. All I felt was bored...okay maybe a bit amused. I certainly was never knocked-out. If she was projecting any “force” my way, I never sensed it.

After a few moments she stopped. There was never any explanation why nothing had happened. She just left the room.

Of course some of her senior students asked me if I was feeling okay, and if I needed to sit down. I guess they were worried about my welfare. Nice of them, but unnecessary.

I left her school as I had entered it, still a skeptic. Maybe even more so.

This story clearly illustrates the main fact that disproves the notion of no-touch knockouts. If such a technique existed and one had the ability to do it they should be able to do it on anyone at any time.

If you placed 100 people in a room, 50 of them skeptics, 50 of them believers, your abilities should work on everyone. Maybe not to the same degree, not every martial arts technique works on everybody equally, but enough to show a verifiable statistic to prove its existence.

To date, I’m unaware of any such study, and I doubt any such study is forthcoming.

Furthermore, I find it interesting that those individuals who claim to be able to do no-touch knockouts, usually accuse the other person of countering their attack when things don’t work. What a load of crap! How can I counter something when I don’t even understand how it works?

More importantly if it’s that easy to counter, why bother learning it anyway?

Strike Three

The truth is that no-touch knockouts don’t exist. The body does not externalize energy like a ray-gun, any more than a goose can lay a golden egg.

No-touch knockouts are a con, a scam, and those that claim to have the ability should trade their black belts for a priest’s alb, since they are more akin to wanting to be a guru or a cult leader than a martial arts teacher.

Please give us legitimate martial arts teachers a break. Give the unsuspecting a public a break.

Challenges – "You wanna fight me?"

Shelter from the Rain

This weekend, the rain poured. As a result I’ve had to deal with a lot of trespassers who feel that the community garage of my building is a haven for them to do their illicit affairs, or a dry place to take a nap.

Unfortunately for me, who has to manage the building, trespassing into the garage area is nothing new; after several years, word has got on the street that it is a semi-safe place to do one's drugs, use as a bathroom, or for prostitutes to service their clients.

Judging by the current activity, one would think I live in a crappy neighborhood. But, while the neighborhood can be colorful at times, that really isn’t the case. There are just a few bad characters on the street, and a bunch of lazy tenants who can’t get off their fat ass to secure the garage doors that create this problem.

However, for some reason this weekend has been extra bad. As I’m writing this, I’ve already had to remove almost 25 individuals from the garage. That total, of course, does not cover the repeat offenders, who always seem to bring new people with them.

Now I know this problem is one I should leave to the police, but law enforcement in San Francisco, can at times be very strange. The patrol guys say call when there is a problem, but their response time to such a trivial thing (in their opinion) can be more than half an hour.

Furthermore, if I should dare restrain these trespassers and keep them from leaving until the police arrive, I could be deemed the bad guy. This is true even though I’m a retired police officer, know the law, and know what force can and cannot be used.

Then there is the problem that even when the police do show up, they won't arrest these people. It doesn’t seem to matter that there are no trespassing signs posted, and I’m ready, willing and eager to sign a citizen’s arrest form. For some reason unknown to me, the police feel they need to warn these people and wait for them to do the crime again. It kind of defeats the purpose of having such laws in my opinion.

Now don’t get me wrong, I don’t want to send everyone to jail. But there are a few who continuously trespass, and think my warning is a joke. I think if I could send just one or two to jail the message would get out that I’m serious about keeping trespassers out of the garage. Maybe!?

Fortunately most of these trespassers leave without an argument, and some even clean up their mess before they depart. How nice.

Unfortunately, every now and then I get ones who want to argue and worst yet, fight. They actually want to challenge my authority, though they are clearly in the wrong, and fight me. Yes, believe it or not, they get into my face, and try very hard to get me to strike them.

It really doesn’t matter what time day or night these encounters take place, or the fact that I often have my 85lb German Shepherd dog with me, who semi-convincingly looks like he would come to my aid.

Of course, the breaking point came today when one of these trespassers started to get in my face. Like I said, it’s not unusual for that to happen, but this time I was with my wife. Now I have nothing to prove to her, but if things had deteriorated like they appeared they would I most likely would have gone into overkill mood. Attacking me and hurting me is one thing, but my wife was there and most likely would have had to get physically involved holding back his female companion. The fact that my wife could have been in danger escalated the whole situation. Especially since this guy was really looking for a fight, and didn’t appear to have the common sense to shut up and just walk away.

He was in the wrong, he knew it, but I guess he had to impress the lady he was with—with his masculinity. She was more pissed than impressed. I guess she was the one with the brain.

Putting the whole thing into perspective, though I never lost my temper, the whole ordeal was loud enough that neighbors were watching. I like having witnesses.

Back to my point...

There's no Winning

Now I’ve lived in this neighborhood all my life. I did homicide and gang related investigations in this area for many years. More importantly, my martial art school is located within the building I’m talking about, and has been there since 1993.

In other words people in this area know who I am. I get stopped on the street all the time by people I’ve never met, who comment about the school, or tell me how I helped someone they knew during one of my investigations. I’m no celebrity, but people recognize me enough—too much sometimes for my liking.

This means that a lot of these trespassers also know who I am, and several have jokingly asked me not to do my "karate shit" on them. Many leave when they see me coming, because they are afraid I will hurt them, because of what I teach, even though I’ve never made a threat.

These "street people" also know I will fight if forced to, since I have a reputation for fighting those that left me no choice. The fact is, I almost shot a hooker in my garage area that came at me with a syringe full of heroin many years ago. I was in uniform, and she was extremely stupid. She can thank her boyfriend that she is still alive, since he took the stab instead of me.

I’ve also had to forcefully escort a few idiots out of the building, and there are marks and indentations on the wall to prove it. I’m not proud things deteriorated to that point, but it sent the right message and couldn’t be avoided.

Now don’t get me wrong, I hate fighting. But as the manager of the building I have an obligation to keep things safe and clean for the 130 people who live here, including my family. That means I have to stop and confront these trespassers and get them out of here. I have no choice. No one else will do it.

This of course leads me to the point of my essay, that point being the idiots who issue challenges to fight them. Especially those individuals that are aware of who I am and what I do.

See, I’m in a situation where I’m damned if I do, and damned if I don’t. As a martial arts instructor, if I resort to physical violence I can quickly be seen as the aggressor, the bad guy. If I win the fight and cause an injury I can look like a bully, and possibly be sued even though I was 100% in the right.

If I lose, well I lose, but that fact will get around like a wild fire burning out of control, and would just lead to a lot more physical challenges in the future. I certainly don’t need that.

In other words its basically a lose-lose situation for me.

Now I’m no stranger to being challenged to fight. As a police officer I got that a lot. I mean, how many people want to get arrested and go to jail. However those challenges weren’t personal. All these people only saw was the uniform, the badge.

In addition, as a police officer there was always back-up just a radio call away.

No the situation in the garage is more like the ones I faced owning a "commercial" martial arts school. These challenges were one-on-one encounters with people who thought they had something to prove—people who wanted to kick my ass, just because I’m martial arts teacher.

This especially true in two situations that had the potential to be as life threatening as any fighting that would occur in the garage.

Challenge #1

The first situation occurred many years ago as I was teaching a kinder-karate class (4 –7 year olds). A man walked in off the street, watched me teach for a few moments and then questioned what qualified me to teach.

I answered his question politely, who knows he might have kids and was interested in enrolling them. However, he wasn’t satisfied with my answer, which mainly consisted of the number of years I’d been training, and which associations I belonged to at the time.

No, he wanted to know if I could "fight," and if my fighting skills were good enough that I really had something to teach these kids.

Once again I was very polite, and told him I wasn’t a fighter, and that the kinder-karate class was all about teaching the kids not to fight. Once again he didn’t like the answer.

A few questions later, and after a few more polite answers, he finally asked me what was really on his mind, "WILL YOU FIGHT ME?"

What!? Was this guy actually challenging me to a fight? Here, in front of all these kids and their parents. Is this guy crazy?

Of course I declined to fight the guy, but he kept insisting. I clearly had to think of something else. I mean this guy was already taking his shirt and shoes off, and by now I’m pretty positive our discussion was over.

Certainly everyone watching had the expectation that if we fought I’d win. After all, I’m the "martial arts teacher." However, that’s the problem, or at least part of it.

If I won, so what, I didn’t prove anything. That’s what people expected. I mean a martial arts teacher should be able to beat a "guy off the street."

If I should lose however, well who wants to study with a martial arts teacher that can’t defend himself?

No, I had to think of another way, I had to use the greatest weapon I had, my brain.

So keeping my composure, I went up to the guy and told him I couldn’t fight him. I explained that if I won I would be considered a bully, and if I lost it would be bad for business. I then explained the real reason I couldn’t fight him, that reason being that it would set a bad example for the kids. Year after year I’ve told these kids fighting was bad, and should be avoided. If I should fight now, for no apparent reason, then what example would I be setting?

Now I’m not sure what part of what I said clicked in this guy’s brain, but he stood up, put his clothes back on, and started to walk out the door. As he left, he shouted that I was one of the best martial art teachers he had ever met, and that in his opinion I was qualified to teach these kids.

Of course I had to ask why. His answer was simple; I practice what I preach. Only someone confident in his or her abilities would have given him such an honest and straightforward answer to his challenge.

Well after this initial meeting, this man would stop at the school at least once a week. Not to challenge me again, but just to visit. Turns out he had studied martial arts for years while overseas, and was just interested in observing what I taught from time to time. He wanted to see where I was coming from, what I thought the martial arts were all about.

In a way, he was rather philosophical about life and the martial arts, and clearly had a lot of information to share. On the other hand, it was clear he wasn’t completely there mentally. And looking at the knife he always carried and that far away look in his eye wasn’t someone you wanted to have on your bad side.

I won't ever call the guy a friend, but he did support the school. And it was better to have someone like that on my side, keeping out other potential threats, than having to worry about what he would do next.

Isn’t there a saying that says, "Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer?" I’m sure it applies to even potential enemies.

Challenge #2

The second challenge was a little more serious. It occurred one afternoon between classes. A man, about 5'2", 110 lbs, with a crazed look in his eyes, entered the school and asked me if he could "spar" me.

At first I looked at him in disbelief, assuming I had misunderstood what he was asking. I mean people entered the school all the time asking me if I could teach them to fight.

Of course I had heard correctly, and he asked me once again to spar him. It wasn’t like he asked me in a manner I could say no either.

My first response was to ask him if he had a habit of entering martial art schools and asking the instructor to spar. To my surprise, he said yes. Strike one for me.

"Why," I questioned.

"Training," he responded.

"Training!?" as I looked at him with a puzzled expression.

"Yes, as I travel around I ask anyone I think may have something to teach me, to fight with me, so I can test my skills." As a demonic look gleamed from his eyes, he continued to tell me of his past fighting experiences, how he has been stabbed numerous times, and how he kicks trees in the park to strengthen and desensitize his legs.

I looked at him dumbfounded, I mean it’s the 20th century; do people really do those kinds of thing anymore? Do they? I had to know more.

Turns out, that this guy was a "self-taught" fighter, who honed his skills on the street. In fact, he said he would often offer some of the less than savory characters he met money to try and beat him up. If they kicked his ass they would get the money, if not they wouldn’t be in any shape to take it.

He then regaled me with some of his experience in barrooms, alleyways, and even in jail. Clearly this was a tough guy, if not someone who was a little psycho.

In a way it sure sounded like something out of a movie to me, but he was dead serious.

He continued by explaining that he didn’t have money for classes, and the only way he could train with a martial arts teacher was by challenging them to spar and seeing how they fought. Win, lose, or draw, he would learn something.

I then tried to convince him that he most likely had more "real" fighting experience than me, and I wasn’t sure what I could offer. He said it didn’t matter. Strike two.

Now, like I’ve said numerous times before I don’t like fighting or sparring. Then again something told me that "sparring" with this guy would actually lead to a no holds barred fight where one or both of us would get hurt, seriously hurt. He had that look, and based on our conversation I doubted he would care if he hurt himself in the process of beating me. In fact, I think he would have reveled with delight if lots of pain were involved, no matter who suffered it.

Like I said he had a strange demonic look to him. A look I know I’ve seen on violent criminals who just committed heinous acts, or those under the influence of serious mind altering drugs. Its a look like one would see when a when a tiger stalks its prey. A look that’s cold, uncaring. A look where it feels as if the person is looking through you, measuring you, formulating a game plan on which method to hurt you would work best.

Based on what I heard, and what my instincts were telling me I politely declined his request, stating that I no longer sparred due to injuries, and couldn’t afford to hurt myself further. He scanned my body, most likely evaluating what I said, and after a few moments insisted that we were just sparring and no one would get hurt. Strike three.

I thanked him for the offer to take it easy on me and once again declined. Of course by now I was edging my way to the phone so I could call 911.

For a few moments there was silence, then he postured as if he was going to attack. His whole body changed, and what once looked like a man of 5 foot 2, now looked like a demon, a demon ready to go for the kill.

There was no more smile on his face, and he clearly wasn’t the person I had been talking to for the last several minutes.

For the first time in my life, all those stories of Samurai sensing danger made sense. I sensed the threat, I could feel his intention, and my body automatically prepared for the attack. Things were happening like my instructor said they would if I ever felt my life was really being threatened. Further more, like the movies everything seemed to move in slow motion.

Unconsciously, my body prepared for his attacked, yet I felt calm. In a way it felt like I was watching the situation from the perspective of a third person. I realize my description sounds sort of cinematic in many ways, but I can’t think of any way better to explain it.

Fortunately, for both of us, the attack never came. In an instant it was all over, and we started talking again like nothing had happened. However, we both knew in the back of our minds a battle had been fought. I’m just not sure if either of could have figured out who the winner was.

After a few more moments I asked him to leave, saying I would never fight, because when and if I fight it is only to defend my family or myself and it is to the death. Dramatic yes, but it makes an unarguable point.

While he wasn’t happy with my comment, and started to provoke me again he realized I was serious. Our conversation, all the pleasantry, was over, and I’m sure my attitude and posture conveyed the fact this topic was no longer open for discussion.

As he left he thanked me, but he then asked if I had any students who would be willing to "spar" him? I said that would be up to my students, but I didn’t think so. We weren’t that type of school.

He left saying he would be back later. Sure, I thought.

A few hours later, during the adult class he returned. Bloody and busied he approached the class and asked if anyone would like to spar him. I stopped him, and asked him "what the hell happened to you?"

"I’ve been training," he said.

"Training?" I asked, as I looked at the cuts and bruises on his face and hands, his ripped shirt, and broken shoe.

"Yes, I was just training in the alley behind your school a few minutes ago," he responded. "There were two of them, one is still lying there," he said with a sickening grin which showed his pride.

Looking at him, all I could do is wonder what the other two guys looked like. I had to check the alleyway.

Sure enough there in the alley was a guy who looked like he had been hit by a bus. There was also his friend who looked like he had been caught in a blender. They were pretty messed up, and I’m sure at least one of them required medical attention.

To make the situation even worst were the ten other people that were trying to figure out just what happened to their pal. The level of anger, and talk about revenge was amazing. Fortunately, no one saw the guy, and no further violence occurred.

As we returned to the classroom, the guy once again asked if there was anyone there who wanted to spar with him. I tried to intercede by asking the guy if he hadn’t had enough for the day, but before I could finish one of my students I’ll call Bill started to accept. I say started because I stopped Bill before he could finish his sentence.

Now Bill was a wannabe kick-boxer, who has some real skills—real skills in a controlled environment such as kick-boxing ring. He wasn’t what I would call a well-rounded fighter, nor was he someone who could actually absorb and overcome a lot of punishment. More importantly, he definitely didn’t have a killer instinct.

The truth is, this street guy would have slaughtered Bill without breaking a sweat.

It would have been no contest, since the street guy had nothing to lose. Meanwhile, Bill had a family, work obligations, and let's just say a life that could be adversely affected if he should get hurt, especially in such a needless manner.

Furthermore, I knew Bill’s defeat would eventually lead to an escalation of this guys desire to fight me, something I really didn’t want to have to deal with. Based on what I knew, what I had seen in the alley, our "friendly sparring," would clearly end up as serious fight. In fact, this guy gave me the impression he would rather die than lose.

A new strategy was in order, and I had to think quickly. I offered to help clean the guy up, prior to any more challenges, and as I took care of his wounds started to talk to him about the "true meaning," of the martial arts. I told him that he had missed the point about what martial arts training was all about. Martial arts aren’t about only fighting, they are about building one’s skill to the point where fighting is no longer necessary. To avoid confrontation was the highest level one could achieve in training, and what he should really strive for.

I doubt what I said meant much to him, but he agreed to leave for the day. Unfortunately, while he left he also made it clear that he would be back.

I never thought I’d see this guy again, but the next day I asked a few people I knew on the street if they knew anything about this guy. I wanted to know what I was dealing with.

Turns out his name, nickname, was Crazy Charley (go figure), and people knew him as a brawler. Based on what I was told, everything he said about himself, including the fighting people on the street, was true. Furthermore, some of these fights involved weaponry, and he had done time for seriously stabbing someone in the past. He clearly was someone that shouldn’t be trusted. He was clearly someone who wouldn’t hesitate to hurt you.

Lucky me, I was now on Crazy Charley’s radar. I knew I couldn’t fight with him, and there wasn’t enough to get the police involved. At least, there wasn't yet, and I wanted to keep it that way.

True to his word, Crazy Charley showed up the next day, and the next, and the next. Each day he politely asked if I or anyone else would spar him, and each day after being rejected he would quietly leave.

Each time we would go and do our almost dance-like routine of posturing and feeling out each other’s intentions. Nothing was said, but we each knew what the other was thinking, and more importantly ready and capable of doing. Each time there would be that moment things felt like they would go to hell, and then nothing.

Slowly but surely, Crazy Charley visits occurred less often, but from time to time he would stop in showing me his new cuts and bruises from recent "training" matches. He displayed them as others display trophies.

After five months of continuous challenges, Crazy Charley disappeared. Some say he was stabbed, some say he went to jail, and others say he left the area. I didn’t really care. He was gone and that was fine. The potential for danger and violence was gone, without incident.

Of course, crazy people seldom disappear forever, and a year later I received a package in the mail. It was from good old Charley.

Basically, he wrote that he had liked our discussions on the philosophy of the martial arts. He had liked our "mental" duels. He appreciated the time I took cleaning up his wounds, and my advice to him to stay out of trouble. More importantly, he valued my opinion and wanted me to review the enclosed manuscript about his life and training. He considered me as his teacher.

Lucky me. Hopefully, this guy isn’t teaching others and claiming to be my student.

The enclosed manuscript was about 200 hand-written pages, which were basically illegible. It didn’t really matter though, since there was no return address and I’ve never seen Charley again.

Good Old Memories!

Why Would I Want To?

Of course these two stories directly relate to how I started this essay. No matter where I’m challenged, how I’m challenged, I have more to lose than gain. I will always be wrong, no matter what the circumstance, no matter how right and justified I am.

The truth is, if I’m attacked I will defend myself. If my family or loved ones are attacked, I’ll most likely go after you with the intention to kill. I’ll face the consequences of my actions later. However, to get me to that point where I’ll fight, will require a lot of work, as well as extremely bad intentions on the part of the aggressor.

But to fight in response to a challenge, when the other person is aware of what I do for a living is another matter. I don’t have the time, more importantly the need to stroke my ego, or to deal with that kind of thinking. It’s not worth it.

If I liked fighting, and needed that form of competition to stroke my ego, I’d enter the UFC. At least then there would be a potential to get paid.

Unlike the situations that occurred in the schools though, it’s very hard to reason with some of these garage trespassers. Some are just hostile violent people who don’t even care about their own health and welfare. In addition, I truly believe they want to get into a fight, and may even see dollar signs thinking about suing me in the future.

Worst yet is the realization that a few of these guys feel they have something to prove. Kicking my ass, would give them "street cred." If nothing else kicking my ass would open the door for even more trespassers, since they would get the sense they controlled the garage.

Besides nailing the garage door shut, (which I’ve considered but know I can’t do), I’m not sure what the solution is. I yell at the people who park there all the time, and have even threatened to take their parking space away.

Can the only answer be violence? Do I have to hurt someone, or get hurt to stop the challenges? Furthermore, if I fight barehanded today, what will stop the threats from escalating? I mean, I’m dealing with people on or taking drugs, who clearly aren’t in control of themselves. People who don’t care, and aren’t afraid to go to jail for what they do.

Clearly, the challenges I’ve had in my martial art schools, though potentially dangerous, are nothing compared to the ones in the garage.

Of course the true challenge for me is to hold my ground, remain true to my beliefs, and use my brain. Resorting to violence, to deal with the problem on their level, would make all the years I’ve preached about not fighting all meaningless.

Reality, Discovery, Aliveness, & MMA

One of the things I like most about teaching is the interaction between my students and I. Especially those interactions were my students ask insightful questions, or question the validity of something I said. Needless to say I’m often taught a lot, or at least giving information that might help me consider an alternative point of view.

I recently wrote two entries on Combat versus Combat Sports (here and here), and sure enough Spencer wrote an essay (here) quoting sources that had a slightly different opinion. Now Spencer’s essay wasn’t contradicting anything I said, or what he knows I feel regarding the topic, his essay was just a different way of looking at things.

In fact I found both the sources he listed very interesting, insightful, and to some degree I agree with both.

Not that either essay changed my opinion, but I would like to clarify a few things.

Reality Based Martial Arts

I’m not sure just what this “catch phrase” means, but it is definitely very popular to today. I mean, just pick up any issue of Black Belt Magazine and there is going to be at least one or two articles claiming to be about “reality based martial arts.”

Now, I understand the business of martial arts is all about what’s hot today. Just think about how many Ninja instructors appeared in the early 80’s when there was a ninja craze, and wasn’t it amazing how of all of a sudden there were so many jujutsu instructors when the UFC became popular. In my city alone it was amazing to see numerous Tae Kwon Do schools add the word jujutsu to their window displays. I didn’t even know jujutsu was Korean!?

My opinion on martial arts is that they are all “reality based;” it's just that a few have forgotten their roots. Some have forgotten the reality behind what they are now passing off as traditional martial art techniques.

After all, didn’t a Samurai have the need to learn reality based fighting skills? How about all the other warriors of different nations? Weren’t martial arts developed, tested, and refined during periods of time when hand-to-hand fighting was the norm not the exception?

The answer is of course they were.

Obviously, when discussing the sword fighting skills of the Samurai one can argue that people no longer fight with swords, and sword duels are a thing of the past. True, but that does not mean the techniques taught are not viable, or based on reality. It's just that in modern times it’s impossible to test these skills and we have to rely on the information being transmitted correctly.

If one really wants to know my opinion, the only people practicing “reality based” fighting skills are those that are in the military, and to some extent those involved in law enforcement.

While the argument can be made that the average soldier and police officer learn very little unarmed combat, one would be missing the point of what "reality based" means. Or more importantly, what the definition of “MARTIAL” is. The reality is that the martial arts of the 21st century involve guns, explosives, and dropping bombs from airplanes.

Soldiers no longer fight hand-to-hand on a regular basis, if at all. They shoot the enemy form long distances, normally while seeking cover.

The same line of thinking applies to unarmed fighting skills for any countless number of armies of the past. No one went to battle unarmed. Just imagine an army of Okinawans preparing to face an army of invading Japanese with just unarmed karate skills. Wouldn’t be much of a battle.

The truth is that all authentic traditional martial arts start their practitioners off with weaponry and then eventually train them in unarmed fighting skills. Weapons first, since that is what one will use in a real fight, and then unarmed skills in case one happens to lose or break their weapon during a battle.

The problem today is that to many schools specialize in only one facet of what once were complete fighting systems. That is especially true in many Japanese Budo forms. Because of specialization, few martial artists are well rounded enough to be prepared for any eventuality that may occur in the real world.

Add this element to the fact that many arts have become extremely stylized in their movements, and you have the making for a disaster. In fact, “stylized” movements are one element of martial arts that has led to its detriment, and if the process continues they will lead to the eventual uselessness of training altogether.

Worst yet are styles that practice one way, which is suppose to represet “real world fighting,” yet spar in a totally different manner. Now, does that make any sense at all? After all, if one’s forms are so lethal, and sparring is suppose to help one learn to apply those techniques then shouldn’t both methods resemble each other? Maybe that question alone can answer why I have such a problem with sparring, and why I said I didn’t care for it in my previous essay.

Now don’t get me wrong, I understand what proponents of “reality based” fighting system are trying to say, and the message is a good one. However, claiming that this is something new or innovative is a joke. People have been seeking out and developing reality based fighting methods since the dawn of our species.

The real reality is that what may work for one person may not work for another. Furthermore, what may work on one opponent may not work on another. There are just too many variables to say any one method is better or “more real world” than another.

Discovery

How often have I read about a new martial arts discovery? Something new and innovative, that’s never been seen before. Something revolutionary, which will change everything, and make everyone a better more effective fighter.

Really!!!!?

Unless the human body has changed recently, whom are these practitioners trying to fool. What have they discovered that wasn’t discovered centuries ago?

The truth is that the only things these people have discovered are concepts and techniques that someone senior to them either failed to teach or didn’t know.

To come out and claim in a public forum that you’ve discovered something new is the worst case of ego gratification I’ve ever witnessed, and those that applaud these individuals should be ashamed of themselves.

The fact of the matter is there is nothing new to discover, or should I say to claim to invent. How to attack another person, where to strike them, anatomical weak points, and the most efficient way to kill’s one opponent were already known in ancient times.

Let’s be honest, our ancestors actually used these skills; knowing how to fight hand-to-hand was a necessity for them, not a hobby like it is for so many of us.

They learned this stuff the hard way, by trail and error, and those who lost, or should I say died, didn’t have a chance to pass on their knowledge. In other words, what worked was passed on to future generations. What didn’t work, or was deemed less effective wasn’t propagated.

Whenever, I hear someone claims to have discovered something new or developed a new innovative method of fighting I just have to chuckle.

I mean Ed Parker, father of American Kenpo, and Morihei Ueshiba (1883-1969), founder of Aikido never claimed to have invented new methods of fighting. If anyone could make such an assertion it would definitely be people like them. However, they never claimed to have invented anything. They simply took elements of other systems and restructured things to suit their needs, and how they perceived martial arts should be taught.

Did these pioneers, and others like them discover or gain insights to new things over time? Sure, and changes within their systems are evident. However, they didn’t announce to the world that they discovered something new, something that had never been seen before.

That’s because they knew it wasn’t. They knew that if they could figure this out, if they could gain some insights to the techniques they’ve been doing for years, than someone before them could have also done the same.

Just because they had been show something, or had never seen it before, didn’t mean it didn’t already exist and that hundreds of other practitioners in the world weren’t doing this on a regular basis.

The simple fact is—and it is fact—there are only so many ways the human body can move, only so many ways the body can be used as a weapon, only so many ways the body can be attacked.

As a species, we may not have been on this planet for that long, but it has been long enough to discover just about everything that we can do when it comes to fighting each other.

Aliveness

This is a term I had never heard before, and one that I think has some real merit to it. The article "Why Aliveness?...." as posted in Spencer’s previous post is definitely worth reading.

For the most part I agree with the author’s assertions, and I really have nothing to disagree with in his overall argument that in order to see if one’s techniques are viable they have to be done in such a manner where there is a degree of realism.

It is the “realism” part I have issues with, or at least his thoughts on how far should this realism be applied.

For example, there is a video on “YouTube” where a practitioner of Systema, (a Russian Martial Arts System) does a gun take away with a firearm that is actually loaded with live ammunition and ready to fire. I mean how much realer can things get?

Another question about realism is how much do I need to see if something is really effective. In other words, do I need to test everything out to see if it actually works for me? Do I need to shoot someone with my gun to see if that will kill him? Do I need to stab a person to see if a knife will really penetrate flesh? Do I need to hit someone in the windpipe to see if they will actually stop breathing?

Sure these are extreme examples, but hopefully they make my point. My point being that sometimes certain things can’t be practiced realistically because they would cause great bodily injury.

In addition, there is a big difference between applying a technique to someone who is aware of what you are trying to do, and the poor sucker one catches by surprise in the alleyway when attacked.

A lot of martial arts skills, especially for the hobbyist, rely on the element of surprise. That’s how a lot of “real world” life protection techniques go for the kill, and are designed to inflict serious damage. You may only get one chance.

Sparring, no matter how realistic or alive will always have a degree of unrealism about it. It has to, because the intention is different. I’m not trying to hurt my sparring partner. I don’t want him to hurt me. I’m going to hold back to some degree.

In addition two trained fighters approach things differently than two strangers on the street. Fighters entering a match have some anticipation, some foresight that their opponent has the skill and ability to cause damage. They approach each other cautiously, “feel each other out,” I believe is the expression. They only go for the kill, the knockout, when they feel they have the upper hand.

Two strangers on the street have no expectations, nor are they aware that either person has any fighting skills. There is no time to “feel each other out.” The fight is on and it is life or death. That’s realism.

Is there a place for "aliveness" in training? Yes, there definitely is. Further more, there has to be. But there still has to be a distinction made between aliveness, and sparring. They are not the same.

While I won’t claim every technique I teach involves "aliveness," some techniques are done in a manner that is as close as it is possibly safe to do. They all require that the attacker attacks with intent, and that the defender defends themselves fluidly and with precision. These techniques also require immediate corrections as one’s opponent moves, balance shifts, and all the other countless things that can go wrong do go wrong.

In other words, our techniques cannot be done robotically, and no one technique is ever done exactly the same way twice. Each attack is different and changes one’s ability to instantly react, adapt, and modify things as they are happening. That real-time adaptation is the difference between success and failure.

In other words, the techniques become "Alive." They are constantly changing based on what is happening at the moment. The "aliveness" comes from not being restricted by overly stylized form, and the practitioner having the freedom to make adjustments as needed.

MMA

Unfortunately I have mixed emotions regarding the current trend in MMA (mixed martial arts). On one hand, I feel that that the MMA practitioners have clearly pointed out some major weaknesses within the state of martial arts today. On the other hand, I have a hard time with many of the claims they make, and frankly with the attitudes many have regarding other martial art systems.

First of all, MMA is not the end-all system of fighting so many claim it to be. Now, before the local MMA guys come looking to kick my butt, hear me out.

MMA is great for the ring, and there are a lot of MMA guys I’d like to have backing me up in a street fight. Some of these guys are very good fighters, and more importantly, they like fighting—which is diametrically opposed to me who hates fighting.

However, the way some MMA guys claim their system is the only viable fighting method is ludicrous, if not all out arrogant. I won't go into all the reasons I believe this, but if you read "Assumptions" by Toby Threadgill (also on Spencer’s post), you’ll get some idea.

Furthermore, let's not forget that MMA is a sport. There are rules. They do things that if done in a real life or death situation on the street would get them severely injured even killed. Go to the ground in a fight in my neighborhood, and see what happens.

They don’t train in weaponry or prepare for an opponent who is armed. That is a serious oversight in today’s world.

However, MMA practitioners do train hard. They constantly test their skills, honing them to a degree where they actually can use the skills they learn. Akin to warriors of the past, they constantly work to improve their abilities, and become the best fighter possible.

More importantly, the MMA fighter shows what type of physical condition one must achieve and maintain in order to be a “professional fighter.” Most of us don’t have the desire or determination to train in such a manner. Once again, this shows a major difference between the warrior and the hobbyist.

The most important thing the MMA has done is making people reevaluate the martial arts and their effectiveness. People are starting to understand that there are differences, and that there are martial arts that are less effective than others.

Let’s face it there are numerous schools that can be labeled Mc Dojos, Fu Fu Jujtsu, and belt mills. Many are nothing more than martial aerobics, or watered down shells of what once a real martial system. Many schools are nothing more than gloried day care, with a few adult classes.

The MMA has opened the door for people to question the arts that they do, and more importantly cross-train. Yes, cross-train.

Cross-training, seeking out techniques that cover the deficiencies in one’s system is nothing new. It’s been done since antiquity. No one person can know, or possibly transmit everything.

Unfortunately, for many years there has been a belief that is disrespectful to cross-train. Some teachers even forbid it. Because of this, many practitioners have been brought up to believe their style is the only method of fighting, the best of the best. These practitioners will vehemently defend their art, even when faced with overwhelming facts contradicting what their teacher told them.

In the end, the funny thing is that there is really no major difference between reality, aliveness, and MMA. They are all seeking pretty much the same goal, which I’ll sum up in one word: EFEECTIVENESS.

They want to go back in time to when martial arts were martial arts, and all the fluff, all the Hollywood, and all the BS weren’t so prevalent.

I may have issues with the arrogance of many of the proponents of these systems, but I have absolutely no issue with what they are searching for. I’m also searching for effectiveness. I to have problems with martial art techniques that have no basis in the real world, or would get a person killed if they ever attempted them in the real world.

Other Views on Martial Art Versus Combat Sports

I think it is worth adding a little outside context to Gary's post about distinction between "Martial Art" and "Combat Sport". There is a strong intellectual current in the martial arts that preaches a view somewhat the opposed to what Gary wrote, espousing the value of full intention sparring over traditional training. This view is growing in popularity along with the rise of Mixed-Martial Arts (MMA). I think that it is best articulated by the "Aliveness" doctrine. The essay Why Aliveness?.... by Brazillian Jiu-Jitsu exponent Matt Thornton is a very thorough treatment.

To my understanding, there are two basic points in the theory of aliveness and importance of sport. First, alive sparring is the only way to learn to fight with full commitment against total resistance in a world where most of us do not regularly engage in combat. Second, testing your skill against a non-compliant opponent is the only way to really know if your martial arts are any good (this point is especially made by MMA folks who previously learned a poor quality or fraudulent "traditional" martial art). These are important ideas and deserve to be taken seriously.

Another interesting point of view was given to me by a Zen teacher who practiced kendo. He felt that the full commitment of sparring, where you can let go of all inhibitions and attack with the full force of will, is vital for the awareness and spiritual training of martial arts—which he felt were more important than learning how to fight with swords.

I think there is a lot of depth in this debate as far as the history of martial arts goes. The example of the Greeks that Gary wrote about is just one of many times the same sequence has repeated:

1. Warriors develop martial skills and master them in order to survive.
2. In peacetime these skills are passed on as they were before, but without a life-or-death imperative, they tend to degenerate into empty form.
3. A sporting version the arts are developed to bring vitality back into training.
4. The sports become an art on their own and the original fighting skills atrophy.

It's worth thinking about where various arts fall in this spectrum, how to prevent the slides in to decadence of either pure sport (like Western fencing or Modern Wushu) or empty traditional form (like Tai Chi in a senior center). See this post for some of my previous blather on how Japanese martial arts developed.

For another viewpoint on the differing approach and value of traditional jujutsu compared to MMA, see the excellent article Assumptions by Toby Threadgill. The 3d paragraph about Takamura Sensei "sparring" a brash young challenger is priceless.

Martial Art Versus Combat Sport

Sparring

Several years ago during a martial arts tournament, the host of the event asked me if I would be interested in doing a sparring demo. Now, I hate sparring, but because he was the host I actually considered his offer. However, before I could agree I had to ask him what the rules would be.

Now this instructor happened to be a Tae Kwon Do practitioner, so he made it clear the rules would be those related to the sport of Tae Kwon Do. That meant I couldn’t punch to the face, do joint locks, strike vital points, take the fight to the ground, throw elbows, use my knees, or kick below the waist—all tactics I employ in the art I practice and teach.

In other words he wanted to fight his way, which clearly gave him the advantage.

I countered his proposal by saying that the first round should be fought his way and the second round my way—my way being that the only rules should be no eye gouges, no strikes to the groin, and no pulling hair. I also proposed we shouldn’t wear all the pads normally worn when competing in Tae Kwon Do.

After a few moments of silence, and a look I can’t even begin to describe, he walked away. Needless to say, the demo never happened.

Now, I’ve never claimed to be a fighter and I’m very happy to state I’ve talked my way out of numerous street fights instead of resorting to fisticuffs. With that said however, I know the difference between Martial Arts and Martial (Combat) Sports. I know the difference it takes when training, and to develop one's mind and body for competition and/or life and death encounters.

Of course, this was before the advent of MMA or the “Reality Based” martial arts that are so popular today.

The problem is, just like in the case of this instructor, most people don’t understand that there is a difference between learning to fight in a contest and fighting in the real world. Just because you’re good, even great, in the ring doesn’t mean you can survive a life or death altercation. There are no rules on the street, and everything goes. There are no points and no referees. Even winners in a street fight can suffer serious, even life-threatening injuries.

Train As You Would Fight

The truth of the matter is that how one trains has a direct relationship to one’s ability to really defend oneself. It also plays a factor in how one will spar.

I’m not implying that this means someone who trains in a combat sport won’t have an advantage over someone untrained, or can’t defeat a "reality" based practitioner. All I mean is that there are major differences between training for a "contest of skill," and real no holds barred/life and death fighting.

In the example above, if I had sparred according to this instructor's rules, it would have really limited the tools I have to defend myself. After all, I’ve honed my skills to use my entire body as a weapon and attack any perceived opening weakness. Call it "going for the kill," if you like, but if I have to fight it's going to be in a life or death situation and I don’t want to lose.

In addition, notice I didn’t claim to be any more dangerous or skillful a fighter than this instructor. Clearly he had the ability and technical skill to hurt me. However, my point with this example was that we had two completely different concepts of what the martial arts are all about, what self-defense/life protection skills are all about.

Like I said, I hate sparring and I’ll admit I’ve never excelled at it. However, it’s not my lack of skill that makes me dislike sparring; it’s the mind-set most sparring often cultivates. Sure, sparring has its merits: timing, distancing, speed, etc. However all these elements don’t make up for its primary shortcoming; sparring more often than not deteriorates into a game of tag.

Worse yet, sparring instills a mind-set of "give and take." I hit you; you hit me, and so on and so on. I mean, how many Kendo matches have I witnessed where competitors flail at each other for several minutes, when the first strike with a real sword would have ended the confrontation.

Although I’m no expert when it comes to fighting or combat, it's clear that in the real world I don’t want to be on the receiving end of an attack. In fact, I practice awful hard to avoid attacks and counter them in a way in which my opponent can’t hurt me. In fact, the joke in my school is that when it comes to a fight I want to be a generous guy and give and give until it hurts.

I don’t want to make a "game" of my fighting skills. If and when I’m forced to fight, it’s going to be to protect my life not to win some trophy. I have no desire to have my hand raised in victory, I just want to make sure I survive with as few injuries as possible, and that my actions are justified according to the laws of my state.

Having said all that, I’m also aware it’s almost impossible for me to practice in a manner where I can test my skills and execute techniques at full force. I would definitely hurt my training partners and quickly run out of people to practice with. I could even end up in jail or face several serious lawsuits.

However, I have to train realistically as possible, and try not to pick up bad habits. I don't want to be like the police officer who after successfully disarming a suspect immediately handed the bad guy his weapon back, because that what he always had done during training. I don't want habits such as making overly exaggerate movements/feints, or kicking so high my balance is jeopardized or I’m exposed to a counter-attack.

This means I have to train in a way such that I teach myself to do whatever works at the moment, to go for the "kill," and do unto others before they have a chance to do unto me. If this mean bringing a knife to a fistfight, or a gun to a knife fight so be it. That’s the true difference between martial art and combat sport.

Definitions

The debate between martial art and combat sport is a complex one that even the ancient Greeks discussed (see previous essay). This is a debate that the ancient Greeks clearly understood better than we can in our modern world; after all, their need to know hand-to-hand combat was clearly greater than ours.

Of course in order to discuss this debate one first must understand the definition of what a martial art and combat sport are.

A "martial art" is basically the method in which warriors/soldiers are trained in order to carry out their duties in time of war. The sole purpose of these techniques is to kill and/or subjugate the enemy. In order to do this efficiently, these techniques must be lethal in design and flexible enough to be used in any given situation that might occur on the battlefield. This also means that these techniques must be designed in a manner that not only allows a warrior to fight and dispatch another unarmed adversary, but are equally designed to be used against an adversary armed with a myriad of weaponry.

A "martial art" focuses primarily on weaponry, since any soldier going to battle will be armed, only resorting to empty-hand fighting as a last resort. This is one reason many authentic systems of martial arts teach practitioners weaponry prior to or in addition to unarmed skills.

A "combat sport" on the other hand, is a sport and/or contest that utilizes elements of, or mimics those found within martial arts. It is designed to either test one’s ability, strength, or prowess against another, or to be used as a form of entertainment. It is normally practiced as a leisure activity, and as a result the intention of the practitioner is not to kill, injure, or maim their opponent. Because of this, techniques are often unrealistic and "flashy," often times playing to the zeal of the spectators to the detriment of actual martial form.

Though techniques within combat sports can be lethal, many are taught in a manner that makes them unfit for practical self-defense applications, and would result in the death of the practitioner in a battlefield situation. As the famous Japanese swordsman Miyamoto Musashi stated:

"The Way of the warrior is a Way of life and can never be considered as a hobby unless you are seeking only to impress others with your techniques."

(Book of Five Rings)

In The World

Let's face it: few people really have the desire to learn true martial skills, or the perseverance to endure the training that is required to be a real warrior. Even fewer have the necessity to learn actual combat skills, since we have professional armies to fight our battles using guns.

Yes, many people want to learn how to defend themselves if attacked, but even learning self-defense techniques is not fully akin to learning life-protection/warrior skills. Many times these defensive skills are just bits and pieces of what once was a greater puzzle. A puzzle that when completed was a complete martial system that addressed everything the warrior needed to fulfill his professional military obligations.

Returning to the original story I used to open this essay, I could have sparred with the Tae Kwon Do instructor, but in order to do so I would have had to hold back, and fight instincts I’ve worked very hard to develop. This would have put me at a clear disadvantage, a disadvantage that would lead to my ultimate defeat.

Of course that was the same thing I sure he thought we he considered my proposal. He wasn’t prepared to fight. He wanted to "spar."

He wanted to keep things friendly and polite. He didn’t want to risk unnecessary injury. In other words, he wanted to show he had fighting skills, without showing the inherent lethality of what martial arts are really about. He wanted to throw flashy kicks to impress an audience—kicks that no one in their right mind would or should attempt in a real street fight.

For those that still don’t get it, let me make it simple:

The difference between a martial art and a combat sport is intent and focus. Martial arts were developed for one primary purpose: to kill or cause serious bodily injury. These martial skills weren’t designed or developed as a hobby. They were created, tested, and re-tested with one goal in mind and that was to win during an aggressive confrontation.

Call your martial system what you will, but be honest. If you do a combat sport, be proud of what you do, but don’t delude yourself or others that you are doing more. Know the difference.

Martial Art Versus Combat Sport in Ancient Greece

While this distinction between martial art and combat sport is very clear today (see following essay), historically the two approaches have been very closely associated with each other. In fact, this association makes it very hard to determine what fighting systems were solely utilized for war, and which were used solely as contests of skill. This is especially true in societies that had several variations/styles of unarmed fighting, such as the Greeks who had boxing, wrestling, and Pankration (basically Greek MMA).

Obviously, all three Greek fighting systems had lethal potential. Clearly, athletes and warriors practiced these methods to some degree, either for physical fitness or self-protection.

Historically, according to writers of the period, these fighting skills were all used on the battlefield and in life and death struggles. In addition, Greek literature is full of examples of heroes and warriors who were masters of one or more of these unarmed fighting methods and being skilled in the fighting arts appears to have been a true indication of one’s manhood; it could even confer “godlike” stature.

Since all three fighting methods are viable one must look at the "intent" of the individual and underlying circumstances in any given example to determine whether or not the techniques used are martial or sport related. Even then, making any absolute conclusion is still conjecture.

Arguably, martial arts and combat sports paralleled each other to some degree in antiquity, and ancient artists and writers did not see the need to make any discernable notations to differentiate them for their intended audiences. Clearly, their audiences would have understood their references, and applied them to prevailing knowledge and social practices of their time. Unfortunately, looking at these works in hindsight, and not being fully immersed in the cultures that produced them or the everyday idioms of those periods, both systems seem indistinguishable to us.

The question is, however, whether combat sports prepared a warrior for battle or were detrimental to his ability to really fight in war.

The sophist Philostratos, (circa 170 C.E.), definitely appeared to be of the opinion that there was an affinity between sports and warfare, and he stated that great athletes of the past "made war training for sport and sport training for war." He professed that the Spartans had developed boxing to learn how to avoid blows to the head during battle, and that the Athenians had found wrestling/Pankration skills very useful in their battle at Marathon after their weapons were rendered useless.

Of course, which method of fighting Philostratos favored most is debated. Some historians believe Philostraos felt Pankration was the "worthiest contest of the Olympiads and the most important preparation for warriors." After all, Pankration had fewer rules, and resembles real combat more than boxing and wrestling.

Other historians believe Philostraos felt wrestling was the most useful sport since soldiers wearing armor could use wrestling techniques on the battlefield. According to these researchers Philostratos felt that Pankration was little more than a combination of bad boxing and worse wrestling.

In either case, it is important to note that Philostartos’ opinions were based on athletes of the past, and not on the current state of athletics as he witnessed them. In fact, he felt that the athletes of his day were inferior to the athletes of the past. According to Philostartos, athletes of his day spent too much time eating, drinking and fornicating instead of actually training. In other words combat sports were more of a hobby than a way of life.

The famous philosopher Plato also believed Greek sports were an augmentation of survival skills, and that it was important for men to practice them in order to maintain proper physical fitness in case they should be called for military service. In his book, entitled “Laws” he specifically mentions how the practice of some athletics improved military skills. Plato writes:

"Education has two branches-one of gymnastic, which is concerned with the body, and the other of music, which is designed for the improvement of the soul. And gymnastic has also two branches-dancing and wrestling; and one sort of dancing imitates musical recitation, and aims at preserving dignity and freedom, the other aims at producing health, agility, and beauty in the limbs and parts of the body, giving the proper flexion and extension to each of them, a harmonious motion being diffused everywhere, and forming a suitable accompaniment to the dance. As regards wrestling, the tricks which Antaeus and Cercyon devised in their systems out of a vain spirit of competition, or the tricks of boxing which Epeius or Amycus invented, are useless and unsuitable for war, and do not deserve to have much said about them; but the art of wrestling erect and keeping free the neck and hands and sides, working with energy and constancy, with a composed strength, and for the sake of health-these are always useful, and are not to be neglected, but to be enjoined alike on masters and scholars, when we reach that part of legislation; and we will desire the one to give their instructions freely, and the others to receive them thankfully. Nor, again, must we omit suitable imitations of war in our choruses; here in Crete you have the armed dances if the Curetes, and the Lacedaemonians have those of the Dioscuri. And our virgin lady, delighting in the amusement of the dance, thought it not fit to amuse herself with empty hands; she must be clothed in a complete suit of armour, and in this attire go through the dance; and youths and maidens should in every respect imitate her, esteeming highly the favour of the Goddess, both with a view to the necessities of war, and to festive occasions: it will be right also for the boys, until such time as they go out to war, to make processions and supplications to all the Gods in goodly array, armed and on horseback, in dances, and marches, fast or slow, offering up prayers to the Gods and to the sons of Gods; and also engaging in contests and preludes of contests, if at all, with these objects: For these sorts of exercises, and no others, are useful both in peace and war, and are beneficial alike to states and to private houses. But other labours and sports and exercises of the body are unworthy of freemen, O Megillus and Cleinias."

Book 7 (Translated by Benjamen Jowett)

Clearly Plato believed wrestling was more closely related to the arts of war than then other forms of athletics. Plato even states, "… of all movements wrestling is most akin to the military art, and is to be pursued for the sake of this, and not this for the sake of wrestling." He also asserted that because wrestling helps prepare men for war, all Greek youths should work out in wrestling-schools (palaestra) whether they were serious about becoming Olympic contenders or not.

Though Plato believed in the value of wrestling, he also believed that the principal purpose of education should be the life-long training and preparation of citizens for the "greatest of contests," the struggle for the defense of their country, and not the breeding of professional athletes. Basically, Plato rejected the notion of specialized, intensive and exclusive athletic training since he considered it detrimental to the health and well being of the practitioner.

Of course, for every proponent of combat sports there were also those that refuted their assertions.

The Spartan general Tyrtaeus (late 7th century BC) claimed he did not believe that training in athletics could fully prepare a man for battle. He stated:

"I would not say anything for a man nor take account of him
For any speed of his feet or wrestling skill he might have
not if he had the size of a Cyclops and strength to go with it
Not if he could outrun Boreas, the North Wind of Thrace
not if he were more handsome and gracefully formed than Tithonos,
or had more riches than Midas had, or Kinyras too,
not if he were more a king than Tantalid Pelops,
Or had the power of speech and persuasion Adrastos had,
not if he had all splendors except for a fighting spirit.
For no man ever proves himself a good man in war
unless he can endure to face the blood and the slaughter,
go close against the enemy and fight with his hands."

(Tranlated by R. Lattimore)

Euripides, (480 – 406BC?), one of the three greatest Greek writers also questioned the practice of using athletics to prepare soldiers for war. During the Peloponnesian Wars (a twenty-seven year war between Sparta and Athens that started in 431BC) Euripides wrote a play titled, "Autolykos." In this text Euripides states

"What man has ever defended the city of his fathers by winning a crown for wrestling well or running fast or throwing a discus far or planting an uppercut on the jaw of an opponent? Do men drive the enemy out of their fatherland by waging war with discus in their hands or by throwing punches through the line of shields? No one is so silly as to do this when he is standing before the steel of the enemy."

(Translated by Stephen Miller)

It should be noted that while Euripides is famous for his writing, during his youth he was trained to be an athlete, and it is alleged that he was a skilled Pankrationist and boxer. Because of his background, Euripides definitely understood the merits of training in athletics. However, Euripides’ comments regarding the worthiness of athletes as soldiers, was a direct result of the increasing professionalism and specialization he saw within athletics. Euripides felt that this professionalism glorified physical strength to the detriment of spiritual and mental growth resulting in a poor soldier.

In the biographical story of Philopoemen, (a Greek statesman and general 252 –183BC) the Greek biographer Plutarch, (46? –120AD), writes that the athletic body and lifestyle were different in every way from those of a soldier.

According to Plutarch, soldiers and athletes had different types of diet, as well as different forms of exercise. Athletes slept and ate regularly, while the soldiers trained to endure wandering, irregularity, and lack of sleep. According to Plutarch, athletics was something that distracted a man from more important things, such as waging war or earning fame.

What’s even more important in the story of “Philopoemen,” is the evidence that asserts certain Greek generals disapproved of using combat sports and athletics for training soldiers. Not only does Philopoemen not practice wrestling he develops a "contempt" for it.

“He (Philopoemen) was strongly inclined to the life of a soldier even from his childhood, and he studied and practiced all that belonged to it, taking great delight in managing of horses and handling of weapons. Because he was naturally fitted to excel in wrestling, some of his friends and tutors recommended his attention to athletic exercises. But he would first be satisfied whether it would not interfere with his becoming a good soldier. They told him, as was the truth, that the one life was directly opposite to the other; the requisite state of body, the ways of living, and the exercises all different: the professed athlete sleeping much and feeding plentifully, punctually regular in his set times of exercise and rest, and apt to spoil all by every little excess or breach of his usual method; whereas the soldier ought to train himself in every variety of change and irregularity, and, above all, to bring himself to endure hunger and loss of sleep without difficulty. Philopoemen, hearing this, not only laid by all thoughts of wrestling and contemned it then, but when he came to be general, discouraged it by all marks of reproach and dishonor he could imagine, as a thing which made men, otherwise excellently fit for war, to be utterly useless and unable to fight on necessary occasions.”

(Translated by John Dryden)

Clearly, Philopomen despised athletics, and when he became a general was noted for saying, "men who are otherwise fit for war became, through athletics, too delicate for battle."

Furthermore, Philopomen is not the only Greek military commander asserted to dislike "sport" related athletics. Both Alexander the Great and Epaminondas (418 – 362BC) show ambivalence and/or disapproval of combat sports.

In Plutarch’s biography of Alexander the Great he writes:

"Indeed, he seems in general to have looked with indifference, if not with dislike, upon the professed athletes. He often appointed prizes, for which not only tragedians and musicians, pipers and harpers, but rhapsodists also, strove to out vie one another; and delighted in all manner of hunting and cudgel-playing, but never gave any encouragement to contests either of boxing or of the pancratium."

(Translated by John Dryden)

In the tale, “Life of Epaminondas,” written by the historian Cornelius Nepos, (100 – 24 BC), Nepos asserts that while Epaminondas practices wrestling, and realizes its benefits, he still spends most of his time doing military exercises. Nepos writes:

"After he grew up and began to apply himself to gymnastic exercises, he studied not so much to increase the strength as the agility of his body; for he thought that strength suited the purposes of wrestlers, but that agility conduced to excellence in war. He used to exercise himself very much, therefore, in running and wrestling, as long as he could grapple, and contend standing with his adversary. But he spent most of his labor upon martial exercises."

Another example providing evidence that someone skilled at combat sports wasn’t always seen as effective on the battlefield can be found in Homer’s "Iliad." In Book twenty-three, Epeius admits that while he is the best boxer among the Achaeons, compared to the rest of the Greek warriors he is an ineffective warrior.

“Son of Atreus --- all you Achaean men-at-arms!
We invite two men --- our best --- to compete for these.
Put up your fists, fight for what you’re worth
The man that Apollo helps outlast the other ---
clearly witnessed here by Achaea’s armies ---
he takes the beast of burden back to his tents
but the one he bets can have the two-eared cup. Line 740
And a powerful, huge man loomed up at once,
Penopeus’ son Epeus, the famous boxing champion.
He clamped a hand on the draft mule and shouted,
“Step right up and get it --- whoever wants that cup!
This mule is mine, I tell you. No Achaean in sight
Will knock me out and take her --- I am the greatest!
So what if I’m not a world-class man of war?
How can a man be first in all events?
I warn you, soldiers --- so help me it’s the truth ---
I’ll crush you with body blows, I’ll crack your ribs to splinters! Line 750
You keep your family mourners near to cart you off ---
Once my fists have worked you down to pulp!””

Book 23 (Translated by Robert Fagless)

Lastly, there is evidence that the gap between athleticism and military training was also considered one of the reasons the Greek empire fell. According to Plutarch, he felt the Greeks should have spent more time practicing military arts instead of sports, even if those sports did involve personal combat.

Plutarch definitely makes his opinion clear that the Romans, "who live for war," beat the Greeks who "engaged to extensively in athletic contests."

Plutarch further asserts:

“The Romans considered nothing to be the cause of the Greek’s enslavement and degeneracy as much as the gymnasia and palaestras, which gave rise to much time wasting and laziness in the cities, and also profligacy, pederasty, and the ruination of the youths’ bodies through sleep, strolls, eurhythmic exercises, and precise diets, because of which they stopped practicing with weaponry and were happy to be called nimble and wrestlers and handsome instead of hoplites (Greek infantry men) and good horsemen.”

“Moralia” (Greek and Roman Questions)

* * *

So in the end what does this all mean? Clearly, training in combat athletics had/has merit, but as these athletic events became more specialized, as athletes became more focused on winning contests a natural deterioration of actual fighting (battle/warfare) skills has to occur.

It’s the same scenario we face today. As more and more martial art systems become sport-oriented, or are practiced solely as a hobby/diversion, the martial aspect of them becomes less and less viable. Studying the Ancient Greeks gives us a good analogy to understand what is happening to martial arts/sports in the modern world.

No Bullshido, the Trademark Violation

A few months ago I posted about a short film named "No Bullshido" that used our dojo as the set for a scene. It was an amusing little piece thrown together in just a weekend for the "48 Hour Film Project."

I had always wondered what reaction the folks at the message board Bullshido.net (famed for calling traditional martial artists LARPers) would have to the film, given its name and the theme of making fun of ego-inflated martial arts. I was expecting them to slag on it, but I didn't expect them to be quite so upset about the name as they are in this thread. The owner of Bullshido.net stated that the film committed "[t]rademark infringement, and we're pursuing options."

This is quite staggering to me… a few non-martial artists make a short film for a competition that coincidentally has the same name through the obvious combination of bullshit and bushido (together at last) and they are talking about legal actions?

I often tell people that as passionate as I am about the martial arts, I really can't stand most martial artists. This is a prime example of why. You collect a bunch of people who love to fight together and they attack everybody else. After all, you cannot win unless others lose.

Given that most folks practice the martial arts for love not money, why would anybody possibly take this issue so seriously?

Injury Rates from Street Fights in the UK

Research from hospital patients in Britain show that in fights "people who had been kicked were most likely to suffer serious injury - even more so than those who had been attacked with a blunt or sharp weapon."

BBC News Report
Journal Article

At first glance, this would seem to validate the tried and true martial arts strategy of training in kicking techniques over the currently popular emphasis on ground-fighting based on the dogma "that all fights go to the ground." Kicking was 44% more likely to cause a serious injury than punching.

But as you read the news story, it turned out that people were often kicked after they had "gone to the ground" the wrong way.

[A]lcohol was a large contributing factor in the use of kicking in fights as drunk people were more likely to fall over.

So indeed, fights do go to the ground rather than being stand up kickboxing fights (no surprise). But on the other hand, this is a good reminder that the ground is a very bad place to be if your opponent's friends are still standing.

Once you are on the floor, you're at great risk.

Just because the fight is going to the ground doesn't mean that you want to go there with it.

There are also lessons to point out from the other side. This does succinctly and brutally reinforce the Yachigusa-Ryu philosophy of kicking:

1. Never kick above your waist.
2. Always kick to the head.

Some other points from the study worth mentioning:

• There was a significant increase in severe injuries when there were three or more assailants.
  
• The greater rate of injuries from feet over blunt objects does not look to be statistically significant.
  
• Blunt objects (and of course feet) caused more significant injuries than sharp objects. This could be because attackers pull back sooner after cutting somebody or it could be due to the fact that may of the cuts were only due to broken glass.
  
• Patterns of violence are likely to be different in other countries, both due to cultural reasons and the differing availability of firearms.
  
• Kicking was the mechanism of assault in only 7% of injuries surveyed in the hospital. Blunt and sharp objects each represented 11% while punching represented 55% of cases. In other words, kicking might be dangerous but it is rarer than other attacks.
  
• Victims were more likely to sustain serious injuries in middle age, with 47 being the peak age.
  
• More than a quarter of treated victims were women, which is a higher percentage than in previous studies. Women were less likely to be severely injured than men, unless they were the victims of multiple attackers.

Powerstrike Forza, Go!

A few years ago, at about this time in the holiday season, I was wandering around Midtown in New York. At Rockefeller Center, among all the joyous Christmas schmaltz, a little TV in a window caught the corner of my eye. I could have sworn I saw a legion of leotarded women swinging bokken around (nah, couldn't be). When I turned around to look back at the TV, it was just quick cuts to views of perfectly normal aerobics classes; but I kept watching and sure enough the sword-aerobics clip came back on.

I had discovered Powerstrike Forza. "Also known as Samurai Sword Training, the one hour class is a supercharged workout that blends elements of two Japanese sword fighting techniques - Kendo and Aikijujitsu."

Just imagine if you traveled to Tokyo and saw a roomful of people with baseball bats doing synchronized batting practice to music.

Actually, as much as I'm amused (bemused?) by visions of Samurai Jazzercize, I'm all for the idea behind this. Kendoka extol the virtues of suburi, exercises with a heavy bokken, for training strength and technique after all; this is what you get if you remove the kendo from suburi—and replace it with house music. From a Western perspective, it sounds like a fresh and fun take on the hoary old idea of training with Indian Clubs. Given what a hard time people often have getting a good upper-body work out with aerobics, it's a great idea. In fact, pretty much anything that can get folks excited about exercise is a good idea.

But still, the silliness can be a bit much. It seems hard for the marketing/press folks to avoid describing these classes as "learning sword fighting" and they always seem to pull out the word "empower." Plus, some of the pictures really do look goofy (this from a guy who wears a pleated "skirt" while he swings his sword around).

The snob in me desperately wants to know what sort of "aikijujutsu" sword fighting the creator has trained in (a bio says she got a "black belt in Shorinjiru Karate and a brown belt in Aikijujitsu, and has trained in kick-boxing for four years").

Somewhere on a news clip, I heard an instructor say "Just keep your body straight, it's all arms."

YouTube
"The Pulse" Magazine
The Official Book

Sugino, Yoshio – Martial Arts Legend

Sugino, Yoshio (12/12/1904 to 06/13/1998)

While I never had the opportunity to train with this man, or see him live in action, from everything I’ve read, or heard about from others, his skill in the Japanese martial arts was legendary.

Besides his 10th Dan Hanshi ranking in Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu, during his 75 years of training Sugino Sensei also attained rankings in Judo, Kendo (under Master Shingai Saneatsu, one of the initiators of the kendo reform), Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu, and Yoshinki Ryu Jujutsu.

He is also known for being the fight choreographer of Akira Kurosawa's "Seven Samurai" as well as many of Kurosawa's later movies. In addition, he was one of Toshiro Mifune’s primary marital arts instructors.

For years I’ve known that there was a video available in which Sugino Sensei demonstrates various forms of Iaijutsu and Naginata. He completed this film when he was 90 years old.

Available at Mugendo Budogu for $49.95

However, while I knew the video existed, the price has always been more than I could justify. And, to be honest, I was never sure what I would actually get for my money.

Well, while checking out some of the videos posted on Youtube.com, I came across the below movie clip which shows Sugino Sensei in action.




His technique is flawless. Watching the movie clip, I can see why so many people speak so highly of his technical abilities. It is also really refreshing to witness Iaijutsu as opposed to Iaido.

Now, I’m the first to admit I have a strong predisposition when it comes to my opinion of Iaido. For the most part, I don’t believe that Iaido—the way it is presented to the public and propagated today—resembles the actual swordsmanship employed by the Samurai. That is, I do not think that the way Iaido has developed since the Meiji Restoration reflects how samurai used swords prior to the reign of the Tokugawa shogunate.

Given my baises, I found this movie clip very refreshing since Sugino Sensei does not do any kneeling draws from seiza (sitting posture). The emphasis on draws from seiza is one of my biggest issues with modern day Iaido, and one of the main reasons I feel Iaido as taught today is not traditional swordsmanship. (For more info on this debate, see this thread.)

Sugino Sensei draw his sword from tatehiza (iaigoshi — kneeling posture). To be honest, this makes a lot more historical sense than draws made from seiza do. In addition. Sugino Sensei does not perform any overly broad cutting motions or large elliptical movements, two elements often seen in modern Iaido forms.

In fact, in contrast to many Iaido forms I’ve seen, Sugino Sensei’s forms look a lot more like real swordsmanship. The movements are short, crisp and to the point. There is no wasted motion and there are no overly extended body parts. His movements are swift, controlled, and absolutely precise—just like a true swordsman should be.

While I’m not sure I’m ready to invest $50.00 to buy Sugino Sensei’s video I will reconsider that option. Until then however, I hope more video clips of this legend are posted on the Internet.

Affiliations

Back in March and July of this year when my integrity as a martial artist was being attacked on forums such as E-budo.com and Bullshido.com I was ridiculed for comments I made regarding my affiliations with certain Martial Art Associations.

Basically, the ridicule came from a disclaimer I made which was posted as follows:

While a member of these organizations it does not mean he involves himself in any of their politics, supports or justifies their positions on the merits, abilities, or skills of instructors related, or not related, within their organizations, or believes one organization has more validity to represent the arts than another.

The people discussing this matter were under the assumption that I have the type of ego where I felt I was doing these organizations a favor by being a member of them. They were also under the assumption that I paid to be a member of these groups.

First of all, I’m not doing anyone any favors by joining their group. I’m just a small fish in a big pond.

Then again, hardly any of these organizations have done me any favors by being a member in their group either. In fact, the only benefit I have received by being a member is the knowledge that I should be extremely wary of affiliating myself with any organization, period.

The sad fact is that in the “business” end of the martial arts there are many instructors with over-inflated egos who are only out to make a buck. In addition, there are many others who judge you by the company you keep.

Of course, it was because of these reasons that I was open about who listed me as a member of their group. “Hiding’ the info, which is readably available to anyone searching for it, would just have looked worse. I have nothing to hide and put the info out there myself.

However, by doing so, I realized I had to put a disclaimer since I often don’t agree with many of the practices martial art organizations seem to perpetuate (meaningless ranks, promises to help increase enrollment, upper level training, etc.).

I realize that to the reader this topic may seem as old news and that I’m beating a dead horse, but things have happened recently to remind me that one can in fact become a member of an organization without ever requesting it.

* * *

About two weeks ago I received a large envelope from Germany. I thought it was from my mother who is there on vacation (lucky her). However, what was inside surprised the hell out of me.

The first item was a letter of introduction written by Mr. Siegfried Boedeker, informing me I was now a life member of the Nippon Yawara Ryu Aiki-Ju-Jitsu Renmei.

Now, I have no idea who Mr. Boedecker is or what his organization is all about. Nor do I believe we have ever met. In fact, I doubt he would be able to pick me out in a room if we happened to cross paths. This was absolutely something I never requested, and I have no idea how they got my address.

Now if the membership to his organization wasn’t a big enough surprise, the promotional certificates that came along with it were even better.

I’m proud to announce to the world that I am now an 8th Dan Hanshi according to the World Ju-Jitsu Aiki-Bujutsu Federation.

Click for full size

Furthermore, I have attained the level of Grandmaster 8th Dan Hanshi according to the Yawara Ryu Aiki-Ju-Jitsu Renmei, and I now have a lifetime membership with the group.

Click for full size

If these “awards” weren’t enough accolades, I’m also an Honorary Grandmaster 8th Dan Hanshi in the European Assocation of Daito Ryu Aiki Bujutsu.

Click for full size

Now what does all of this mean? Like I said, I have no idea who Mr. Boedeker is or what these organizations are all about. Then again Mr. Boedeker didn’t ask me for a dime. I’m assuming my life membership is free and all these things were gifts for all my hard work and effort through the years. But this is hard work and effort Mr. Boedeker would have absolutely no clue about since he is no more familiar with my history than I am of his.

Is it a scam, or is Mr. Boedeker just trying to organize a “fraternal” group of like-minded people? I don’t know and I suspect I will never know. I further suspect it’s most likely a combination of things.

I truly believe many martial art organizations started off with genuinely good intent, but unfortunately lost their directions along the way.

Certainly, if it weren’t for the promotional certificates I would tend to give Mr. Boedeker’s group more validation. However, promoting people one has never met, never trained with, or never seen in action is really a big warning sign to me. A BIG BIG WARNING!

All kidding aside, and without wanting to insult Mr. Boedeker, my point with all of this is that it is possible to become a life member in an organization without requesting it. It is possible to be promoted by people one has never met. And that’s were the danger lies.

If this group has a posted membership on the Internet, and my name is on it, people will judge me by the company I keep. However, in this case, as in others I’ve already listed on my web page, I have never met these people, never trained with them, never taught for them, and in all but two cases never requested a membership with them.

This of course leads back to the original disclaimer I posted regarding my affiliation with various groups.

Mr. Boedeker might be a great practitioner of the martial arts. His group may be legit. We might even be on the same page when it comes to our views on the martial arts. The truth is that I don’t know; and until I do know for certain, how could I ever blindly endorse him or his group? Yet, I am now officially a member of this group.

Until I meet the man, train with him, teach for him, and see for myself what he has to offer and what I think of him as a person I will continue to state:

1. I don’t involve myself with any of his group's politics.
   
2. I don’t support or justify their positions.
   
3. I make no claims as to his abilities, or the instructors related to the groups he represents.
   
4. I make no claim that his group is any more valid, upstanding, or ethical than any other group.

The same goes for any other group that I am now or have ever been affiliated with.

So judge me by the company you think I keep. Or, if you really think you’re the better person, take the time to get to really know me before you mock me to the world.

And before you wise guys make the obvious point of why I don’t write back and decline all of this, who says I haven’t? More importantly why should I feel the need to do so? I know what these promotions are worth. So do my students.

[Editors note: For the lineage groupies: It appears that this "Aiki-ju-jitsu" and "Daito Ryu" certification traces lineage from Mr. Boedeker through Cliff Witcher and Martin J. Rogers of "Zen Ha Daito Ryu" (a.k.a. "Zen Kenpo Ryu") and thence to John Williams of "Saigo Ha Daito Ryu." Saigo Ha Daito Ryu does not descend from Takeda Sokaku but traces its lineage back to an older generation of the Takeda clan.]

What Does it Mean to be Aiki[ju]jutsu?

We usually refer to the art we practice as aikijutsu or aikijujutsu as a way of saying that we do subtle traditional jujutsu and weapon arts. Sometimes use these words to describe the whole art and sometimes for specific parts of it. It's hard to describe to people what these terms mean. In fact, I've read a lot of angry opinions on what aiki arts are and who has the "right" to use the word aikijujutsu.

Traditionally, marital arts were not called aikijutsu/aikijujutsu. These are modern (well, post-Edo) words for very subtle jujutsu either coined or popularized by the art of Daito-Ryu. However aiki is a much older word for certain principles of the martial arts.

Defining aiki is not easy; nobody quite agrees on a definition. I like to use the term "misdirection"; aiki techniques are ways of tricking your opponent's body and mind into betraying him. Many Aikido folks use metaphysical—or even magical—concepts of ki to define aiki. The simplest tongue and cheek definition is: any technique you can do to a piece of furniture is jujutsu, any technique you can only do to a human is aiki. The important thing is that techniques accomplished with aiki are very subtle and require little mechanical force. The reams of essays that Gary is in the middle of writing for this blog give some indication of how deep the study of aiki is.

But as for "aiki-jutsu" and "aiki-jujutsu," some controversy abounds. Is any jujutsu accomplished using aiki aikijujutsu? For that matter, is Aikido (which is descended from Daito-Ryu) a form of aikijujutsu? Does only Daito-Ryu have the right to call itself aikijujutsu?

By my own observation, when a school claims to teach aikijutsu or aikijujutsu, it usually means one of four things (in descending order of legitimacy):

1. The school is related to (or part of) Daito-Ryu.
   
2. The school teaches an old and subtle style of jujutsu and uses the word aiki[ju]jutsu to distinguish itself from harder or more modern jujutsu styles.
   
3. The teacher has learned both Aikido and jujutsu and is combining them, possibly trying to resynthesize more traditional aikijujutsu.
   
4. The school teaches straight-up jujutsu with little aiki but is using the word to stand out from other schools.

Of course, getting an honest answer from an aiki[ju]jutsu school about which they are teaching is hard. Certainly, many schools who are in #4 spin lineage tales to claim a connection to Daito-Ryu, even if they use little aiki (bringing back the question of "what is aiki?"). After all, everybody always wants to be a little more special.

The current consensus (on the English speaking Internet at least) seems to be that only category #1 can be "aikijujutsu" and that category #2 can be "aikijutsu." I do not know if that makes sense or not, but as we are in #2 I've tried to be politically correct in public and only use the word "aikijutsu" on our website. In private, we say aikijutsu and aikijujutsu pretty interchangeably.

This position is probably best articulated in this post by Toby Threadgill. It is worth noting that his art (Takamura ha Shindo Yoshin Kai) is referred to as "jujutsu", even though aiki seems to be a core part of the art.

The most illuminating thing I've read about the usage of the word "aiki" outside of Daito-Ryu is this passage from an interview with Kuroda Tetsuzan

Kuroda sensei does not use the word aiki. When this word was becoming popular his grandfather Yasuji felt that all jujitsu should be that subtle and there was no need for a word to describe it.

Well said.

Navarro’s Martial Arts Championships August 26, 2006 --- A Review

As I left the tournament at about 5:00 PM, all I could keep muttering was: Never Ever Again, Never, Never.

It had been a long day, mostly of waiting around for nothing, and I had had enough. Too much. I had seen too much poor sportsmanship, bad form, lackluster performances, and so much disorganization that they made the Department of Motor Vehicles look like a finely tuned machine.

Yes, all I could think during my whole drive home was Never, Never, Never Again!!!!!!!!

But let me start from the beginning…………………

I received the flier for Navarro’s Martial Arts Championships about two months ago. Now, I like Sifu Navarro and what he teaches. And in the past he has run a fairly decent tournament. Since it had been seven years since I last attended a martial arts tournament I played with the idea of having some of my senior students compete in some form divisions.

The idea wasn’t to go and win trophies; neither my students nor I care about that stuff. Instead I wanted to do a little advertising that the school exits, and to re-connect with some of the local martial art bigwigs I hadn’t seen in several years.

That was the original plan. However plans don’t always work out, and the decision had been made not to go at all. That was until my younger son decided he wanted to go and compete in the grappling division. What’s worst is he had saved his allowance to pay the entry fee, so what was left to argue about.

I woke up Saturday morning semi-dreading spending the whole day at a martial arts tournament I really didn’t want to go to. However, I dug out an old karate uniform I keep for situations such as these, made sure my son and his friend had all the equipment they might have needed for competing, and set off to face the day.

We arrived at about 11:30 AM, and after waiting about 20 minutes in line to register we entered the gym: a single basketball court filled to capacity to with competitors, family, and numerous black belt judges.

The first thing I noticed was that the place appeared to be in chaos. People were standing all over the place, even within the boundaries of the rings where the forms competitions were in full progress. It was so bad that those sitting in the stands couldn’t see what was happening on the floor. Over and over, announcements were made to clear the floor, but no one seemed to hear or care.

Now I can forgive choosing a place that is too small to accommodate a crowd, especially when one has no idea how many people may or may not show up. In addition finding an affordable place to hold any event is extremely hard. So I was ready, willing and able to overlook this issue. Besides, I was there to watch my son and his friend compete.

While waiting for the grappling events to start I distracted myself by watching the forms competition. I wish I hadn’t. If what I saw is an indication of the current state of the martial arts, then we are facing a very serious situation. A situation that calls for an immediate change, otherwise the martial arts will soon become nothing more than a glorified dance method.

As one instructor stated to me, some of the practitioners’ kiais lasted longer than their forms. What was worst was the definite lack of balance, power, focus, and intent almost all the competitors exhibited. I mean, some just flailed their arms wildly in gestures that made them look more like they were on fire than trying to fight an opponent.

Now, there were a few competitors who had skill and exhibited what one would expect to see at a martial arts tournament. However, few of these were black belts, and most were under the age of 15. Scary really, when you think about it.

Fortunately, the forms division ended soon after we arrived and the “fighting” portion of the tournament started. I say fighting portion since there were divisions for Thai Boxing, Savate, Grappling (with uniform and without uniform), Boxing, Kick Boxing, Point Sparring, MMA, Self-Defense, Stick Sparring, and Knife Sparring.

I thought things would get better, but boy was I wrong.

Now I can’t make any comments on the Thai Boxing since these events took place outside the gym and out of my view. All I can say is that a Thai Boxing competition that does not allow elbow and knee strikes isn’t Thai Boxing. However, these rules are most likely for safety and I can understand not wanting to have people hurt at your event.

I also can’t comment on the MMA, since that too was held outside. I also didn’t have a chance to review the rules.

I can however, talk about the Kick Boxing, Boxing, and Savate.

Okay to be fair the Savate never happened, because there weren’t enough people interested. Of course with the event canceled it afforded me the opportunity to talk with the guys who did Savate I learned a lot about Savate history and how some schools still practice the weaponry associated the older form of the art. It was very interesting, and I have to say was the best portion of the day.

Unfortunately, the boxing and the kickboxing were terrible. Now, I’m not saying I would want to be on the receiving end of many of the kicks and punches I witnessed, but almost 90% of the competitors had absolutely no skill. I mean basic skills such as moving off line, or fighting with your eyes open. That’s right, many fought with there eyes closed and just swung wildly. It was really pathetic.

Now, before you start assuming things, I’m not talking about the five to ten year olds. It’s cute to watch them; especially those who don’t seem to have a clue what’s going on, and you know really don’t want to be there. You know the kid who stands there and just becomes a punching bag, or those children who cry even before they are hit. Or how about the kid who charges in like a bull, and misses everyone except the bystander watching on the sidelines or the referee. Yes, I enjoy the kids, I enjoy them a lot, except watching them lose.

Distressingly, my comments were in regards to the older teens and young adults. These are people who should know better, or at least have the ability to be taught better skills. They had no business competing if these demonstrations represented their level of skill. Clearly, their teachers either don’t care about their safety, had no say in their decision to compete, or have lowered their standards so much that this is what now passes for competency.

This of course leads me to my worst observation of the day, and I’m not talking about the grappling events.

Like I said, one of my early reasons for attending this tournament was to re-connect with fellow teachers I hadn’t seen in a long time, instructors who helped me when I first started in the business. I wanted to see the instructors who were old school martial artists like myself, who had learned the hard way: from many, many hours of brutal practice, where blood, sweat, injuries, and tears had been the willing sacrifice we gave to achieve a certain level of expertise.

Anyone who knows me knows that I have a hard time being politically correct or “softening” my opinions when I express them. The truth is that I normally speak my mind, often without thinking about future ramifications or who else might overhear the conversation. This is an extremely bad habit in the martial arts community where egos run rampant. This is a business where when you bruise one person feelings, others judge you solely based on his opinion rather than getting to know personally or learning why you said what was said.

Fortunately, those I talked to during the day mirrored most of my comments regarding my observations of the day’s event. However, agree as they might, they had succumbed to the fact that was just how things are in this day and age. They agreed that it was wrong and was ruining things, but they defended things by saying that was the only way martial art school owners could stay in business.

In other words, they claimed that to run a successful school, standards must be reduced and the teacher has to promote people who really shouldn’t be promoted.

Of course, with the lack of high standards also came a definite shortage of teaching respect for teachers and fellow students, and the ability to even appear as if one had any real skills. If this is what having a commercial martial art school is all about all I can say is, thank God I don’t have a commercial martial arts school.

Now, I won’t bore you by telling you about the grappling events. They were what they were, and many of the competitors were the first to tell you they had very little if any grappling experience or training.

What I will share is this: after waiting almost five hours, my son’s event never took place. By 4:45 there weren’t enough people in his division to hold the event.

Now my son paid $50.00 to compete, and for a 17 year old that’s a lot of money. No, that’s a lot of money period. Of course, we went to the event coordinator to discuss the matter and get a refund. She quickly took down his name and a short description of why we were requesting the refund. Then came the bombshell… We would have to wait for the refund in the mail.

“How long will that take,” asked my son.

“Indefinitely” she answered as she walked away.

“What’s that mean dad?” asked my son.

“I don’t know,” I answered.

“Great, that means I’ll never get it back, $50.00 wasted” he muttered.

“No, I’ll make sure you get it back,” I said, knowing he is most likely right, though I’ll try my best to see that it happens.

So as he left the gym with his older brother and friend, (who also had to request a refund), all I could think of was how I had wasted my day. This day, which should have been fun for my son, turned into a disaster and left him with a negative view of martial arts tournaments.

I left the gym vowing never to go to a tournament again. Never. Ever. Or at least never again until I forget this day, which just might take another 7 years.

List of Classical Japanese Dojos in the Bay Area

Out of some sense of OCD, I wrote up some notes of mine on various classical Japanese martial arts schools in the Bay Area.

http://www.spencefu.com/martial/dojo_list.html

It seems like people are out there, looking for these types of schools, but since they are small and unable to advertise it is hard to find them if you don't know the exact right questions to ask.

It turns out that there are more schools avaiable out there than one might think. Depending on how you count, there are 20-30 classical-style schools I know of that have something valuable to offer students: ranging from aiki-jujutsu to iaido/battodo to kyudo.

Mass Market Mediocre Mini-Mall Martial Arts

I was recently pointed to these two business articles about a chain of martial arts schools that is trying to grow into a nationwide franchised enterprise, like any normal retail business.

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2003/09/15/story4.html?t=printable
http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2004/12/13/story7.html?t=printable

The question comes up: why should martial arts stay a matter of family businesses and local chains in an age when all other retail stores are becoming efficient national chains? This is the first time I've heard about a school getting venture capital to grow. As I think about it, it surprises me that it would be unusual...why should martial arts be different than any other business?

* * *

As a member of a small traditional martial arts dojo, it is of course my knee jerk reaction to be against the corporatization of martial arts. However--having sometimes found myself on the wrong side of the knee-jerk exclusionism of other traditional martial artists--I believe it'd be better to think this though a little.

I'll start off by saying that at this point in my life, I've had two excellent experiences spending years training in a small school with a dedicated instructor who did not teach full time. In between, I spent one year at a commercial school run by a teacher who rarely instructed (or left the office) and had ambitions of expanding. I think that this experience was best exemplified with the Sifu telling me "train for a second year, I'll give you a black belt, and you can be a paid instructor when I open a new school." I left shortly after that (when my year-long contract ran out).

So was that commercial school an unmitigated "bad thing?" No. First off, I actually really enjoyed my time there, I kept in great shape through the hours of working out, and in the end I did learn quite a lot (but learned none of it well). In the end I regret quitting when I did because I then spent a year not practicing and getting out of shape until I moved to San Francisco.

So yes, there is a benefit to commercial schools…I just think there is more benefit to non-commercial schools. But yet, let’s be realistic…not every martial arts student is a passionate dork. Most people do not train in martial arts to learn to be warriors, preserve a culture, master themselves, or any other traditional "budo" goal. They train because they think it is more fun than going to the gym, or because they want to feel confident on the street, or to get their aggressions out by sparring, or because they just want to be part of a community. Commercial schools thrive because they cater to this.

Yes, these schools are watering down martial arts, but they are also spreading the martial arts and improving peoples lives (through exercise, discipline, social structure, etc). As long as they are not dishonest about what they teach (which many are), it is hard for me to see where they are harming people.

I think traditional martial artists are quick to say "that's not right for what martial arts are to us", so thus it is not right for anybody (as an aside, I have seen passionate essays written by traditionalists on why the way "other people" practice martial arts is not "budo"…they feel that if you are not traditional like them, you do not deserve the word "budo").

This snobbery is a powerful thing, and I feel it within myself as well. I've recently been elitistly looking down on an excellent instructor I'm familiar with that is licensing instructors around the country who have learned his art through seminars and trips. He is clearly watering his art down…but spreading it further and showing more people what it can be. Who am I to judge him for that?

* * *

I think that the useful analogy here is Starbuck's. Starbucks makes mediocre espresso for a high price (a San Francisco snob speaking here). People are always afraid that Starbuck's is going to drive local coffee houses out of business and blandly yuppify the country. But a funny thing has happened: it turns out that when a Starbuck's shows up in town, the business of local coffee houses actually increases.

What really happens is that Starbuck's shows people that coffee can be more than just burnt tasting diner drip; most are happy with how Starbuck's has improved their caffeine addiction and stay loyal to it. A minority of Starbucks customers however have had their eyes opened and are inspired to become coffee gourmets.

What I'm saying is that I think pervasive mini-mall martial arts can have the ability to improve the lives of those who would never dig deeper into the martial arts anyway while simultaneously inspiring other students to dig deeper and find a "gourmet" martial art that is appropriate for them. At the least, a consistently mediocre corner karate school is probably a better way for kids to be exposed to the martial arts than anime and kung fu movies. I also think that a well run national chain could universally improve the quality of the many of the local mass-market martial arts schools.

I often state that most people vehemently oppose Walmart, and then shop there. Meanwhile, I fully support Walmart and what they've done to improve the lives of Americans (mainly through lowering inflation), but I absolutely hate shopping there. I think national martial arts in an American commercial model could be a good thing; but you will never catch me dead practicing in one.

[update 11/06: I saw a newer article that states that Kovar's is changing their name to "Satori Martial Arts Academy" and plans 150 storefronts within 5 years. I wouldn't bet against them.]

A Brief Social History of Japanese Martial Arts

I've been pretty frustrated by most histories of Japanese martial arts that I've seen. There are two main concerns I have: They often only look at the development and lineage of styles and schools rather than the interplay between martial arts and society. They are rarely written by historians, but instead by martial artists who bring in the biases and dogma that the arts they practice give them.

Rather than following the descent of styles, I'm interested in what caused feudal job skills to evolve into the often stylized and spiritual disciplines we know today. Most histories avoid the questions that I think are most important. I especially feel that writers gloss over the warping of the martial arts during early 20th Century militarism, and the reactionary changes that happened to arts in the post-war period. There seems to be a central dogma among martial artists that styles remain unchanged from their conception over the centuries as long as their lineages are unbroken.

Of course, I'm no historian myself. I am not referencing primary sources and I have my own set of biases. I might be misinterpreting facts, or even have some facts wrong. My theses will certainly change in the future as I learn and understand more.

I wanted to write up this sketch of history to help organize my own thoughts and to lay a foundation for other essays. At the least, I hope it causes some readers to think about things a little differently. I will be happy to discuss any polite disagreements; I may even revise this if you convince me I'm wrong.

* * *

I'm dividing this history in to four periods punctuated by three major
historical pivots:

Late Medieval (Muromachi / Sengoku Period)
   Final Pacification of Japan and End of Medieval Warfare (1615)
Pre-Modern (Edo Period)
   Abolishment of the Samurai and Modernization of Society (1868)
Early Modern (Meiji through WWII)
   Defeat of Japan in WWII and Occupation by United States (1945)
[Post-]Modern (1945-Present)

* * *

Late Medieval (Muromachi / Sengoku Period)

Martial arts in Japan extend back before the dawn of history, of course. However, records of the arts dissolve into legend before about 500 years ago. The late medieval "Warring States" Period (~1467-1603) is where the clear trail starts.

In this time, samurai were professional soldiers; martial arts were their primary career skills. Styles and schools were less organized and more to the point than in the Edo Period. A martial artist learned whatever and where ever he could to find what worked best for him. The individual and his clan were more important than they would be in later Japanese culture; a samurai's skill brought honor to himself and to his house more so than to his martial school or his lord.

Schools were centered not around tradition and curriculum but around the personal teachings of talented fighters--"sword saints" as it were. Good martial artists survived and passed on their techniques. The need for battlefield effectiveness kept the arts honest.

This was the last period when martial arts were truly alive. Most current Japanese martial arts trace their lineage and inspiration back to this period.

* * *

Pre-Modern (Edo Period)

During the Edo period (1603-1868), a quarter millennium of peace reigned and the Tokugawa Shogunate reformed Japan into an autocracy with a feudal patina. The last medieval battle was in 1603; the generations of samurai after this were "warriors" who never knew war. Most samurai became white collar workers who carried swords as identifiers of rank rather than tools of trade.

But still, the martial arts were part of a samurai's education. Each clan would send their kids to the local dojo to learn the basics of fighting. However, for most of the 2 million or so samurai men, the martial arts were not central to their lives. Without battle, the practice of arts became rote and lifeless over the centuries. Authorities tried to fight this trend. They formalized concepts of bushido--the way of the warrior--to inspire the men to embrace their warrior culture. Many schools changed their curriculums to put energy back into practice: introducing more self-perfection, spiritual discipline or increased sparring to get students to engage. Many schools also focused more on dueling techniques, like quick sword draws, rather than armored battlefield techniques to stay relevant.

On the other hand, a minority of samurai still trained to a professional level. Those in martial occupations--military commander, castle guards, police (doshin and yoriki), ronin working as bodyguards or thugs, etc.--still needed some form of the arts as life skills. Some families kept pride in military prowess as part of their identity and heritage, training their children from a young age and practicing throughout their lives. Of course, the families who ran martial arts schools put a special emphasis on retaining and refining their arts.

In this time, many samurai had the benefit of leisure time; serious martial artists were able to refine their arts to a level of subtlety and elegance that was not practical in the medieval period. The Edo Period was when martial arts flowered from skills to arts.

* * *

Early Modern (Meiji through WWII)

When the Meiji Restoration came in the late 19th Century, the samurai class was abolished and society embraced Western-style modernization. Military power was no long embodied in the trained elite with medieval weapons. Massed peasant conscripts with modern guns became the true martial force. While some former samurai became police or officers in the military, for most martial arts were now anachronisms.

Styles died as the feudal clan structure disappeared and fewer students wanted to learn. In many cases, schools disappeared as they folded their skills into new (gendai) arts like kendo and judo, preserving the martial arts but loosing their individuality. These new arts, along with imports like karate, became part of the national culture and drew practitioners from all classes of society. Eventually, kendo and judo were taught to all school children.

Some schools, now called the Koryu, were strong enough in students and stubborn enough in tradition to maintain their integrity. They kept training as they had in the Edo Period. In other cases, individual families kept their heritage alive and kept forcing their children to learn.

As Japan militarized, martial arts and the precepts of samurai bushido were co-opted to brainwash soldiers. Many influential martial artists joined ultra-right-wing groups like the "Black Dragon Society." Officers during the "Rape of Nanking" proved their martial spirit by competing to see who could behead the most Chinese with swords. The spirit of bushido was going to drive Japan to glorious victory over all of Asia with no mercy.

There were also many martial artists who were disgusted by this neo-bushido, although it was difficult to go against the government. Jigoro Kano, for example, fought to keep the government from bending his judo to their means. Some just kept their heads down and stayed out of politics. Some fled the country.

* * *

[Post-]Modern (1945-Present)

But then the tide of World War II turned against Japan. Martial artists died in battles or in bombing raids, taking their styles to the grave. Many saw their children die on the field, leaving them no inheritors. Some were sick of violence and hung up their swords in the name of peace. Others retired in disgust, feeling betrayed and humiliated by defeat. The perverted bushido of militarization had failed.

Soon the American led reconstruction government banned all martial arts as part of their attempt to pacify Japan. The remaining teachers retired or went underground. As the ban was eased, many arts adapted so that they could continue to practice; they presented themselves as sports or spiritual practices rather than military arts. Some of these changes stuck in the long term, others did not.

Between the government discouraging martial aspects, some teachers trying to purge the stain of pre-war excesses, and the increasing distance between modern culture and samurai culture, many arts became noticeably softer, more spiritual, or sportier. In other cases, many older arts have stubbornly stuck to their traditions and tried to change as little as possible.

The social changes wreaked by World War II and its aftermath are still working themselves out--both in martial arts and culture as a whole. People are starting to look to the past again now and want to recover what was lost; it is an open question as to what they can find.

* * *

Appendix: Japanese Martial arts in the West:

There have been three main vectors of martial arts being introduced to the West:

Japanese martial artists came to the United States as either economic or political migrants during the pre-war period and subsequent reconstruction. Many of these teachers only taught their families or other members the Japanese community for the first generation, others taught publicly. As the older path, some of these arts have adapted quite a bit to Western ways. Brazilian Jiu Jitsu is a prime example, as are many of the arts that have come through Hawaii.

American soldiers, other Western workers, and their families stationed in Japan during the post-war period studied martial arts while overseas and continued to practice and teach when they returned to the West. This is how Japanese martial arts first became common in America, especially arts like Karate, Judo and Aikido.

In more recent decades, Westerners have traveled to Japan specifically to study Japanese culture and martial arts. Often these students are seeking deeper or more "pure" knowledge of arts they already study. In other cases, they are seeking out Koryu or other arts unavailable to them at home. This generation of teachers seems to be on the rise now.

Another vector worth mentioning is Japanese who have come to the West over the years specifically to teach and evangelize martial arts. There have been fewer of these, but some have been quite influential.

* * *

About the only general history of Japanese martial arts I've read that I can recommend is Armed Martial Arts of Japan by G. Cameron Hurst III. Many martial artists have written negative reviews to a degree that I think is encouraging. It shows that Hurst, whether his theories are right or wrong, is cutting through the dogma.

For the history of a specific art from an insider's perspective, Legacies of the Sword by Karl Friday is worth reading.

Most other books I've read suffer from contain little insight beyond lists of styles and lineages and/or are written by amateur historians with too little objectivity.

Martial Art Hall Of Fames

It happens at least two to three times a year. I go to my mailbox and inside there is some official looking packet, from some martial arts association, informing me that I have been “nominated” for induction into their Hall Of Fame.

You can just imagine my surprise. Me nominated for such a prestigious award. Why, I’m so flattered. I never ever expected this to happen. It makes all those hard years of work all worth it. When and where do I have to go to pick up my award!

Wait, what’s that small print? It’s going to cost me $189.00 for this honor!? In addition I have to pay my own airfare to the event, and the hotel, and other travel expenses.

Excuse me, I thought this was award! I thought I was the 2006 Master Instructor of the year.

Okay, if you couldn’t tell I was being sarcastic. The truth is most of these so called Hall of Fames are meaningless. They are nothing more than a way to inflate egos, generate business, or line the pockets of those organizing these events.

Now I’m not saying it’s wrong to honor martial artists within ones organization, but the term, “Hall of Fame,” implies something more meaningful. Especially to the general public, who are used to such hall of fames dedicated to baseball, football, and basketball.

In other words claiming that such an event is a “Hall of Fame” is misleading: an overstatement of the actual merit of the event.

First of all, there is no physical “hall,” such as those that exist for the sports of football, basketball, and baseball.

Secondly, there is no national, fully accepted, governing body, which oversees the martial arts. Put ten martial artist who have never met before, and I bet they will have ten different opinions of who is worthy of such an honor, and who isn’t. Sure, given time they could find many worthy candidates, but no matter who they picked, there would be others who would question their choices.

Further more, I doubt they would select someone like me who runs a very tiny school, is basically unknown, and so far hasn’t contributed anything so amazing or outstanding to the martial arts world. (I’m not debasing myself; I’m just being realistic.)

Lastly, in order to validate a “Hall of Fame” those inducted have to have certain credentials. They must have done something above and beyond the abilities/norms of most of us who practice/teach the martial arts. They must be the best of the best.

For example: pioneers like Gichin Funakoshi, Jigoro Kano, and Morihei Ueshiba, instructors such as Wally Jay, Gogen Yamaguchi (The Cat), and Judo Gene LaBell, fighters like Joe Lewis, Benny the Jet Urquidez, and Super Foot Bill Wallace, and actors like Bruce Lee, Stephen Segal, and Jet Li.

All of these men set a certain standard, which many of us look up to, and try to emulate today. Many paved the way as well as aided in the popularity and propagation of the martial arts. These are contributions that are worthy of being honored.

Of course when one reads the letters that come with the nomination forms for most of these Hall of Fames, those with the above credentials are not their target audience.

A recent letter I received states:

“Most of you know of “Black Belt” magazines “Hall of Fame”; giving top honors to our famous types we all read about and see on the Big Screen. Many/most of us will never achieve this Honor! If you do…”hats off & congratulations”! However, the average Instructor(s) are our focus… and always have been & will continue to be our reason behind this project.

“Average” instructor! Since when do we honor people for being average? Since when does any organization place ordinary individuals in a “Hall of Fame?” Doesn’t the word ”fame” alone imply more than average.

Of course the above quoted letter goes own to justify these types of induction by stating the following:

“Many Instructors work multiple jobs, many Instructors work more hours in their schools than regular jobs, and many Instructors behind the scenes put countless hours at home and weekends planning projects for their schools. They have sacrificed normal lifestyles in exchange for their love of the people and new people coming into their schools. They have gone through major financial distress to keep their schools going; 2nd mortgages, some it cost marriages/relationships, because their love of the arts! Most people don’t understand what it takes to be an instructor, a father image, big brother, counselor, teacher, mentor, best friend, & more! People count on us (Instructors) to make their worlds easier not even realizing what it takes out of us! But WE LOVE IT!!

Some instructors have enjoyed a great living from their schools & some do it for the love and volunteer teaching time! None the less, we’ve given an continue to give.

So…why not have a Most Elegant Day for those who are well deserving of this day! Lights! Cameras! “HONOR”!!”

Based on these justifications, many of which I have definitely faced, almost every martial art instructor on the planet should be inducted. Then again the same could be said for a lot of other occupations, which also meet these qualification, yet clearly have no Hall of Fame.

What is worst is that these Hall of Fames don’t stop with instructors. Looking over the list of possible categories for induction I counted at least 60 categories, ranging from master instructor of the year, to most improved student. There was also one for most martial arts spirit, competitor of the year (female and male), humanitarian of the year, and student contributor, what ever that means.

As for me I my latest nomination was for “Black Belt Excellence.” I’m not even sure what that means, or what the qualifications for such a title would entail.

Since I don’t wear a black belt, and my school does not have a belt system, it really makes me wonder who nominated me. A question I always ask myself, since none of the forms I’ve read stat who that individual was. I wish they did, because I would love to ask them what they were thinking.

My biggest problems with these “Hall Of Fames” are the awards they hand out. My recent packet promised the following:
1. One huge plaque (three times the size of the previous ones)
2. 11x17 Diploma/scroll suitable for framing
3. Hall of Fame induction patch
4. Hall of Fame inducted members lapel pin
5. An official press release that can be sent to one’s local media (This group actually offers to “bombard” one’s local media with stories about one’s accomplishments and induction into their Hall of Fame.)

Sounds quite impressive, and if the media thing were true, that alone would be worth the $189.00 fee. After all, advertising the school is very expensive. However, where I’m located, San Francisco, CA, I doubt the local media would take an interest. We already have our share of martial art celebrities.

Of course, the certificates and awards that accompany these inductions make great wall decorations, and impress most students/potential students who aren’t savvy enough to question their value. After all, who wouldn’t want to be taught by someone who is a member of the Hall of Fame--especially someone who has been inducted on numerous occasions for a myriad of reasons.

One instructor I read about on the Internet has over thirty of these awards, all of which are posted on his website. I don’t know the guy, so I won’t comment about his qualifications, but if I were a novice looking for a school, and saw all his awards, I would most probably be impressed enough to sign up for classes, compared to a school where the instructor had none.





Like I said before, I have no problem honoring the “average” martial artist like myself. Just call it something else. Don’t make the award sound more prestigious than it is.

If the award is limited to people in a specific organization that’s fine, but label the award properly. Instead of stating that the person is “The 2006 Hall of Fame Master Instructor of the Year,” title the award in some manner such as, “The 2006 Galactic Martial Arts Federation Master Instructor of the Year.”

Who knows, depending on the organization, and the services rendered by the individual to them the award could actually be legit. Maybe! After all, an award like that is at least based on the organizations requirements and nothing else.

By the way if an organization such as the Galactic Martial Arts Federation exists I apologize for using you as an example. I wasn’t aware of your existence. But if you do exist, I’ve taught enough Power Ranger, Klingon and Jedi wannabes to qualify for the Galactic Martial Arts Instructor of the Year award. Thanks in advance.

(Note: Before people start sending me e-mails reminding me of the fact that I was inducted into the USMA Hall of Fame several years ago, let me state once again for the record that I always thought the “honor” was silly. It was an excuse to travel, and meet others who have spent a lifetime practicing and propagating the martial arts.

Yes, the certificate once hung on the wall, but I’ve always been the first to tell others what it was really worth, especially those that have asked what I did to win such an award. (Basically, I was honest and said I didn’t know.)

And before you think my opinion of these types of the awards has changed recently, you would be wrong. I have always felt this way.

However sometimes its just fun to involve yourself with some silliness. After all who doesn’t like dressing up and being the center of attention: if only for a few moments.)

The true meaning of “Black Belt”

I’ve already expressed my opinion on this point in a previous article, but I really like the way the author Hidetaka Nishiyama, expresses his opinion on the topic. Further more, I think his opinion carries more weight, as a he is a karate-ka, and a 9th Dan in Shotokan Karate, a martial system that utilizes a belt system.


THE TRUE MEANING OF "BLACK BELT" AS IT SHOULD BE.... AND AS IT IS
by Master Hidetaka Nishiyama

In English history a man of valor and dignity who excelled in the arts of combat and social amenities was rewarded with the title of Knighthood. A designation which let it be known to all that he was a man not only of honor, but also of great fighting ability. This was true in Japan where the same type of men were called Samurai. In neither country was the man nor his rank to be taken lightly. For the prowess and title of each commanded respect! At this time both of these countries consisted of feudal states in which men, like the knights and samurai, were a necessary product of the social conditions in which the lived. A situation which does not exist today. Yet the desire for a man to excel in a martial art, for discipline and self-defense, still exists.

Today a man strives initially in the martial arts to become a "Black Belt" in karate to learn to fight. But as his training progresses he should become aware of a stronger calling, the molding of himself into a better person, not only in fighting ability but also in dignity and honor. This has traditionally been the goal of the martial arts student. The black belt is an award or honor given to the modern knight or samurai who has sacrificed many hours in disciplining and honing his body and mind to achieve the epitome of physical and mental attainment. The black belt is the symbol of an expert. Originally, the ranking system was established to provide a series of levels by which students could measure their progress. The first black belt awarded for karateka is known as a "Sho-dan".

This means the student has mastered the basics of the art and is now ready for a more advanced form of training. The student who continues training will now receive "Dan" ranks or degrees of black belt as he progresses. This ranking system has worked very well in motivation the student, but it also has developed some problems.

First, there is a disparity of standards. A proper ranking system should remain universally constant; just as on a ruler one inch is always equal to one inch, so should the standard of rank be equal. However, it must be remembered that the ranking in the martial arts consists of testing human reaction and because of the individuality of each person it is difficult to declare a definite set of standards. Yet this is what must be done if the rank of black belt is to have meaning. Judo and Kendo have one international standard of testing which prevails through the world. This is due in part to both of them having their origin in Japan where the rules of rank grew with the art. But with karate there were many different schools with each having its own set of standards when it came to testing. So when karate was propagated internationally the various countries embraced each style and each set of standards. This made possible a situation in which unscrupulous individuals were able to set up their own organization in which they handed out black belts to many unqualified student s who in return decided to set up their own schools and hand out their black belts. Many of these same people also decided to promote themselves for financial gain. The end result is that many black belts are a disgrace to not only themselves but to the art of karate. Someone once commented that just as there are international money exchange counters to re-evaluate foreign money, there will have to be black belt re-evaluation centers also. To this another added, that if these ever came about, the exchange list would be as thick as a telephone book.

Since the public is not aware of the differences in ranking and the ability of a true black belt they are easily lured into clubs which will award a black belt to students after only a short period of training. This is not only dangerous to the student but degrades the quality of all karate. The public should be wary of those clubs which use the word black belt as a come on to cheat people out of their money. In a reputable club a black belt can be earned in three to five years of hard work and only under competent instruction.

It is for these reasons that karate should have a standard system of testing as soon as possible. It is also the responsibility for those of us in karate to educate the public as to the significance of the karate black belt. Likewise each karateka must realize that the black belt is not a gift, but a goal, a symbol of one’s great effort. In setting up a high quality ranking system, not only the student but karate in general will benefit. Thus instilling a greater sense of pride and achievement in the receiving of a black belt. The knights and samurai of old allowed nothing to tarnish their honor. Should the Sensei and black belts of today desire anything less?

Source: www.fightingarts.com


Hidetaka Nishiyama started his martial arts training in 1942 under the instruction of Gichin Funakoshi. He is considered to be a pioneer in the art of Japanese Karate, and in 2000 the Emperor of Japan designated him as a living national treasure. An award given to only a few individuals, which have shown a life long dedication to their craft and have endeavored to preserve Japan’s cultural heritage.

On Associations and Organizations

On my web site I list several associations that I have, or once was a member of. Of the five or so listed, there are only two I have ever been really active with, and only one that I still have some lose affiliation with.

There is also a disclaimer about my membership in these organizations, which it seems several people have misunderstood, and made comments about.

First of all, I don’t believe I am superior to any of these organizations or any member associated with them. I think many of these groups have many talented members, many of which have something to offer towards my growth as a martial artist.

I’ll be the first to admit I still have a lot to learn, not only regarding techniques and transmission of technical information, but also the business end of teaching and running a school.

My disclaimer is based on the fact that I do not support many of the political agendas of these groups, and/or agree with many of their policies.--policies such as Hall of Fame awards or promoting people to higher ranks. I especially disagree with when they try and promote people like me in their own art, something they don’t have experience in or the authority to do.

I also have no desire to be put in a position where other groups or individuals think I’m part of their political positions or agendas, or assume I agree with the way they conduct themselves, professionally or privately.

While I believe many of these groups mean well when they start, I think many get lost along the way, and their organization turns out to be little more than a way to generate extra income for those in charge.

You know the type of organizations I’m talking about. Those are the organizations that offer you all sorts of things such guaranteeing that if you join, then your student body will increase, and that you will be promoted to higher and higher ranks. They will certify you, help you with your curriculum, and advertise in the local media for you. They will give you stickers for your window and papers to hang on your wall to help you legitimize your school and tell others how your school is superior to the others in your area.

The problem is they don’t follow through with any of these promises. The papers they issue are meaningless, even to most of the public who doesn’t even know better. They can’t generate students: people are either interested or they are not. And, at least in my area, to get mentioned in the local media requires some major event, or a lot of cash to place an ad.

Unfortunately, these promises are very appealing to someone starting out in the business of running a martial art school, and are extremely tempting--myself included. After all, who doesn’t want to run a successful school full of students?

I was a cop prior to having a martial arts school. I knew nothing about the business end of running a school. I looked to many sources for help, some which were clearly the wrong ones to choose. However, making wrong decisions and learning from them is part of life. Hindsight is 20/20.

I also have the disclaimer because many martial artists have very fragile egos, and base their opinion of you on the company you keep. If they don’t like somebody and feel they are a political foe, worthless, a scammer, or fraud obviously you must be also.

That’s a ridiculous assumption, but it happens.

For example I know a jujutsu instructor whop travels the world teaching. He is invited to Japan all the time to teach, and is highly respected there. He was also in line to inherit his system of jujutsu from his teacher when he died.

However, with all these credentials, if you mention his name and that you like the guy locally, people look at you funny, question your integrity, and brush you off.

Now, their opinion has nothing to do with his skills as a martial artist, or as a teacher, and these are the only reasons why I respect this guy. Their problem is that twenty plus years ago he had a relationship with another guy’s wife.

I didn’t know him them, I don’t know the woman, and for me this is a personal/moral issue that has no bearing on the jujutsu he does. Okay, he may have made a bad decision, one can even question his moral character, but I don’t train with him to build moral development.

I don’t go to him to learn how to make passes at other people’s wives either, so if I like this guy and want to train with him why should I be automatically condemned for his past conduct? I have skeletons in my closet too, but I always have and always will conduct my personal life according to my morals and beliefs and not anybody else’s.

Another comment that has been made regarding my affiliations with the listed organizations is that my disclaimer appears to suggest that these groups recruited me, rather than the fact I sought them out.

Sorry to disappoint people who make this assumption, but that is partially true. Some of these organizations contacted me before I knew they existed, and even offered me free membership. I don’t know why they did, since I’m barely known, and don’t seek such attention. In addition I’m clearly not worthy of such special treatment either, as I have no special gifts, or have done anything to promote the martial arts in any special manner.

While I could make assumptions as to why they contacted me (MONEY MONEY MONEY), all I can state for fact is why I decided to join some of these groups (as well as others), and why I have disassociated myself with some over the years.

Part of this issue is based on youth and being a little naïve about other martial artists and the martial arts industry. It is also a case of not doing enough homework and research prior to making a decision to join or not join an organization. However, one of the major reasons I did what I did--and my justification for my earlier mistakes--is that I once many years ago had a desire to belong to a larger martial arts community.

My training was basically limited to one teacher. I didn’t have any prior exposure to martial art organizations, other styles, or the petty bickering over ego and politics between many instructors. Having had limited exposure to other arts and martial art practitioners, I was interested in exploring what others were doing. I wasn’t interested in getting involved with all the other associated factors that seem to have come into play over the years.

Like I said, I’ll be the first to admit I made some wrong decisions. One example is when I allowed myself to be inducted into one of the many Hall of Fames that are out there. Yes, at the time I knew it was very silly, but I enjoyed the silliness. I enjoyed the weekend learning from numerous other inductees, the banquet, and how serious they made such a meaningless event. For me, it was a fun excuse to travel away from home for a few days.

Then again I never put much emphasis on the award itself. I knew I paid for it. Any real award has to be earned, and the dinner, ceremony, and award (trophy or certificate) in honor of such an award is normally free of charge--at least for the person receiving the honor.

So far I haven’t done anything to deserve such an award, nor do I feel I ever will.

Lastly, the point was brought up why I am not a member of any Japanese martial art associations. That’s a good one, with a simple answer--an answer that goes back to the entire question of legitimacy to my school, my teacher, and our lineage. Simply put I lack the necessary credentials to even apply to most organizations.

Things might be different if I could afford to travel to Japan, and spend a few months/years there demonstrating what I know. But I can’t.

Of course, even if I were a member of some of these organizations I would still be caught between a rock and a hard place.

Simply put, no matter what organization I would choose, even if it was considered by most to be the most prestigious of them all, there would still be those within the martial art community who would question my choice of affiliating myself with them.

In other words you can’t please everyone, so I choose to please myself and not care what others think.

Belts …….What are they good for?

“The one who fully understands his own abilities and skills
realizes he has obtained these abilities and skill through his hard work and dedication,
and further more has the capacity to cherish what he has done
for himself and not for the sake of those that may judge him,
is a thousand times more enlightened
than a man who relies on a certificate of achievement,
or a worthless rag around his waist,
awarded to tell him what he has gained or accomplished in the eyes of others.”

Yachigusa, Hiroshi Sensei


I recorded that quote when I was about 16 years old. My teacher, who barely spoke comprehendible English, had to repeat it to me several times, but I think I captured the essence of what he was trying to convey.

This quote is one of the few things he said that I wrote down verbatim, though at the time I don’t believe it meant as much to me as it does now. Of course I now agree totally with this philosophy.

Maybe I’m old-old-school, but I think the colored belt system and many of their associated ranks were a disastrous innovation in the martial arts. Some systems, such as those that have numerous 15th degree black belts, clearly make me feel as if the once-prized “black belt” is basically a meaningless symbol.

Worst yet are schools that give 10 year olds, or younger, a black belt. I’m sorry I just think that is so wrong, for so many reasons. I simply don’t care how gifted you feel the youngster may happen to be.

I come from a system with no belts or ranks. Never had them. Never had a need for them. My teacher, his father, and their ancestors didn’t train to impress others, and if the need arose to show/prove their abilities I’m sure a belt around their waist or piece of paper on the wall wouldn’t have been enough to deter or settle the dispute.

The system I was taught was intended for warfare, and certificates, belts, ranks, and awards have little meaning on a battlefield.

Over the years I have been asked countless times how long it takes to get a “black belt” at my school. Sometimes I’m asked how much it will cost. My answer has always been it takes a few hours, and about $7.00.

No, I don’t offer an accelerated course, that’s simply how long it takes me to go to the store and buy one, and the actual amount of money it takes to cover my expenses.

To date no one has taken me up on my offer.

I’m sure that when Jigoro Kano, (Founder of Judo), and Gichin Funakoshi, (Father of Modern Karate), adopted a colored belt system they had the best of intentions. However, I’m also sure they would be appalled to see the current state of belt systems today. More importantly, I doubt it was ever their intentions that such a major significance would be placed on such a material object.

Now don’t get me wrong, I once used a belt ranking system in my school. Only for kids though, and only because they went to tournaments and tournament officials needed some way to place them in the proper divisions. (I teach kids very differently than adults.)

Even with a belt system in place, I never once promoted any teen to black belt, I never asked for test fees, and my testing schedule was only twice a year. To get promoted by me, meant you worked your butt off, had to maintain at least a “C” average in school, and helped out the school in various ways (help teach, come for cleaning days, demo team, etc). You could be 100% technically proficient during the test, but if you failed the other two requirements I would not promote you.

Because I had belts, I studied their “evolutionary history,” (or lack of history) and as much I would like to deny it, I was even once guilty of propagating several myths regarding them. However, I made sure never to emphasize the belt system for my students, or make it sound as if they had any historical merit. They are after all a modern innovation.

The story I love the most regarding the various colors of karate belts and how one became a “black belt” in the old days goes as follows:

The story starts off with a novice ,who of course wears a white belt.
Since, in the old days, many martial art practitioners trained outdoors, the belt would get soaked with sweat and soiled with dirt. The mixture of continuous dirt and sweat caused the belt to become discolored. Over time the belt would turn green, the color of mildew.
A few more years would pass, and the decaying mildew, combined with more dirt and sweat would cause the belt to turn brown.
More training, more time, more decaying mildew, sweat, and dirt would eventually turn the belt black.
But the story doesn’t end here.
Further training would cause the belt to fall apart, until one day it opened and the practitioner was once again a white belt. Not just a plain white belt, a double white belt. A true symbol to show the world he had mastered his art.

The above story is a very romantic notion, and I can see how it can captivate the imagination of many people. Most martial art legends and myths are designed to instill a “supernatural/spiritual association” to one’s training.

However, that story doesn’t cover why we now have yellow, orange, blue, purple, red, striped, and various mixed color belts today.

I trained for many years at the beach, covered in salt water and sand. While my obi (a white belt designed for Iaido training) did get dirty and ultimately rot away, it never went through any color phases, except dirty beige. Maybe a little red when I bled, but nothing else. I guess with that said when people ask me what belt I am; I should be obligated to say beige with crimson spots. I can just imagine the odd looks of confusion if I would actually do that.

Now please don’t think I’m naïve about why there are so many colored belts today, and why such an emphasis has been placed on obtaining them. I know exactly why, it’s great business. Not only is it a good motivational tool, but it is a great means for generating extra income.

I know one school in the city that has 17 belts (eight colored belts, seven striped colored belts, and two levels of brown belt). Each test is $40.00, and the instructor tests every two months. One student testing 17 times brings in an extra $680.00 into the school, on top of his monthly fee, and other associated training costs (uniforms, equipment, tournament fees, association fees, etc.).

And don’t forget the black belt test. That’s an additional $500.00. That’s a total of $1,180.00 per student who makes it to black belt level.

I figure that this instructor has about 40 to 60 students at any given time. If just twenty students test during each testing date, he makes an extra $800.00 every two months. That’s pretty good money for a few hours of work.

I guess if one can find students willing to pay such fees, then more power to them. I on the other hand can’t imagine why a black belt should ever cost $500.00: unless it comes framed in 14karat gold.

I know what you may be thinking at this point. I have something personal against this instructor. You would be wrong. I like the guy. I also think he has some excellent martial skills. I also realize he has a rent to pay and a family to provide for. I know he works very hard to be successful at what he does, and that the school is his only source of income.

I also realize he is not the only teacher out there that does such things.

The sad thing is he and others like him have sacrificed their arts in order to run a successful business. They have changed the curriculum they were taught, watered it down, and placed an emphasis on symbolism in order to meet their business needs. Instead of teaching as they were taught (for those who were taught older traditions in a traditional manner) they now follow plans set by financial planning companies such as EFC (Educational Funding Company).

Their schools have become a belt mills.

Unfortunately in the case of my friend these changes have had a direct impact on his students, and the art he says he propagating. Many of his old timers left him years ago, when they witnessed these changes, and the decline of emphasizing real work ethics.

Gone were the days when hard work and sweat were rewarded. Now promotions are based on a formula, and given to people just to keep them motivated. Now a student can earn a black belt in three years, instead of the ten it took most of the guys to earn one twenty years ago when he first started teaching.

While I know his students work as hard as their teacher expects them to, many of their technical abilities are really poor. There are upper level black belts there who can’t perform basics, or who don’t have any real grasp on the materials they are responsible to teach. They go through the motions, but there is nothing of merit behind any of their movements. It’s more performance art than martial art.

Sure some of them can break bricks, do cartwheels, and perform aerial highflying kicks that wow audiences, but they couldn’t fight or defend themselves against a little old lady. Unfortunately, for traditional martial artists, these practitioners pass these circus acts off as martial arts, since the public isn’t really martial art savvy enough to know the difference between what is real and what is fantasy.

What is even more unfortunate is the fact that, because these students can do these flashy techniques and have been awarded rank, they believe they possess real martial skill and get very insulted when one questions their abilities. Distressingly, many of these individuals have an inflated ego to go with their inflated rank.

Yes, it’s clear I’m anti-belt. Not because I think it was bad idea, it did once have a specific purpose, I just dislike the way belt systems are utilized in many school today.

There is an old African proverb that states:
“I pointed out the stars
And all you saw was the tip of my finger”

In a nutshell, this quote sums up my opinion on how the value of obtaining a black belt has diminished. So many martial art practitioners are looking at the tip of the finger, rather than the stars. They would rather have a symbol to stroke their ego and/or show their friends, than ever take the time to learn the true meaning of what the martial arts are all about.

The truth is that a black belt is nothing more than a symbol that you have some understanding of the basics and are now ready, maybe even worthy, to start learning.

However, belts or no belts, true mastery comes when one can acknowledges they don’t know everything, have the resolve to seek out that knowledge, and come to the realization that more than one life time would be required to master it all.

“There are people who, instead of listening to what is being said to them,
are already listening to what they are going to say themselves.”
Albert Guinon

Comments on previous

Just to add my two cents while counting the time as the flaming kindles.

My single largest frustration in this enterprise has not been the skepticism and disbelief that many people have publicly expressed upon reading the history of Yachigusa-Ryu. That is all reasonable.

My frustration is in the rhetorical tricks applied under the assumption of superiority. The fraud vigilantes seem insist that any attempt to question their motives means you must be guilty. Anyone who has studied the McCarthyist Communist hunts will recognize that tactic of rhetorical inviolability.

It’s the old witch hunt: We’ll burn you at the stake: if you die that proves you were guilty. If you fight back, it also proves you are guilty because you know you’ll be saved if you are innocent.

Cest La Vie.

In the end the only defense against overwhelming shouting is to say your piece and hope that your detractors make bigger fools out of themselves than you do.



Well, maybe that's all a bit over the top rhetorically. I tried to reach out to people with an open heart, and the mean-spiritedness that a few folks returned hurt. Nobody likes being treated like a liar and a fool, so I suppose I'm still a touch bitter.

Thankfully, we have nothing to lose except pride. However, we do have a lot to gain by reaching out to people and trying to build community. And rather than seem like we are flaming the members of e-Budo universally, I should point out that there were a number of posters who did sincerely seek information and tried hard to keep the discussion pure. I would have been happy to keep a thread going with them, and will do so in another medium if they wish to talk to me further.

As always, feel free to send Gary or me an email (our addresses are listed above). We'll respond to comments and questions that are sincere and courteous. I'd like to keep up a dialogue with readers and seekers.

Koryu Purists

“Though a cock may be brave in war
He strikes his claws in vain on a brazen falcon.
A cat is a lion in catching mice
But a mouse in combat with a lion.”
Sa’di (The Gulistan) 1258AD

“If a sufficient number of people wanted to stop war really did gather together, they would first begin by making war upon those who disagreed with them. And it is still more certain that they would make war on people who also want to stop wars but in another way.”
George Ivanovitch Gurdjiefff

“The strongest oak in the forest is not the one protected from the storm and hidden from the sun. It’s the one that stands in the open where it is compelled to struggle for its existence against the winds and rains and the scorching sun.”
Napolean Hill

Have you ever known that what you’re about to write or say is sooner or later going to come back and kick you in the butt? Well, this is one of those times. However, despite facing a potential backlash, endless debate, and a full out assault on my character--or lack of thereof--I think this is something that needs to be addressed. If for no other reason than my own peace of mind, since this issue has been irking me for a few months now, I feel compelled to write.

I have opened this essay with the quote from Sa’di because it reflects my opinion of people who choose to post their opinions and/or beliefs on message boards. People who apparently have nothing better to do than surf the Internet, and then make comments and assumptions about people they have never met in person, and most likely will never meet in person. People who make themselves feel superior by questioning others about their validity, or who throw the word “fraud” around like it can’t have future repercussions.



If I sound a little miffed, I am. These people, like the “cock” or the “cat”, rely on the fact that the Internet allows to interact anonymously. They will never come face to face with the “falcon” or the “lion.” They post things that they would never say in person to whomever they are writing about, since that would require a sense of decorum. They pose as experts without presenting their qualifications or expertise. They speak authoritatively, and treat those they are speaking about as if they were on trial.

Here in the US the presumption is someone is innocent until proven guilty: but not to these people. They unceasingly ask questions, yet fail to read the answers. Or should I say they fail to fully comprehend the answer that is given. Or worse yet, that they ignore what is written.

Then they become angered when one refuses to answer their allegations, although they seem to feel they have a right to be derogatory or obnoxious when demanding answers. Or they make snide comments. With a feeling of superiority, they truly believe others have the obligation to answer everything they ask, even if the question has been answered countless times.


Okay by now you’re wondering what all this angst is about. Well, a few months ago several members of an Internet site call E-budo.com found my web site and decided to attack the validity of my school’s history. Many called me an outright fraud.

Yes, the word fraud was used, which makes me wonder if these people understand what libel is. But I forget, their righteousness and quest for the truth afford them the right to speak to people in manner not even acceptable in a kindergarten classroom. Remember that was a period in life when we are all taught to treat others, as we want to be treated, and talk politely to others?

Then again, isn’t training in the martial arts suppose to instill the virtue of respect among it’s practitioners?


Now, I’m not defending the fact that the history of the school lacks validity. I’m also fully aware there were some things that were on the web site which were open for scrutiny, and could have been omitted or more clarified.

However, I’m not a fraud. The definition of fraud is:
fraud (frôd) n. 1. A deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain. 2. A piece of trickery; a trick. 3.a. One that defrauds; a cheat. b. One who assumes a false pose; an impostor.

What have I gained? I can’t think of one person who has entered my school in the eleven years I’ve had one, who came because of the history, or more importantly stayed because of the history. No one has ever left due to the history, or should I say lack of history of the school either.

Since I’ve started teaching I’ve also been the first person to question the history of my teacher, and tell others I had my doubts about certain things. Didn’t anyone ever consider the fact that these questions were asked, debated, and discussed long before I had a web site or E-budo discovered it?

I’m not an imposter. I don’t claim to be a master, a guru, or even that I am privy to some special secret technique(s) that makes my style better than others No Tengus taught me my fighting skills on a mountainside, and I haven’t spent any time sitting under a waterfall in deep meditation searching for enlightenment. Though I did spend many a freezing morning knee deep in the ocean, since the beach was one of my teachers’ favorite places to train his son and I.

Since I don’t--and have never claimed to--have mystical, divine, or superior martial skills, all I can be accused of is claiming the following: I’m Gary Moro, a retired police officer, father of two, and husband to my wife Shirly.

As for the martial arts, I know what I know, and teach the best I can. People who see the value of what I have to offer stay, others who don’t leave. Over the years I’ve sent many potential students away just because I knew they were looking for something else, and would be happier in another school. I’ve also kicked people out of my school just because they didn’t attend class often enough, even though they paid every month.

Furthermore, any one who knows me can affirm that I’ve always said I would rather teach one or two serious dedicated students, than a room full of people who were strictly hobbyists.

So I ask again: What have I gained? Show me, and those who read these posts, how this so called fraudulent endeavor of mine has profited me, especially if you’re going to have the gumption to make such an accusation in a public forum.

Besides being accused of being a fraud due to a lack of provable credentials, I can also see how some might have taken offense to certain things that were written on my web site, though there was never an intention to misrepresent what I teach, or claim affiliation to any other martial style. While their nitpicking on these types of issues was annoying, I can fully understand their concerns. Those concerns will also be addressed when the web page is updated.

While my students may feel that readdressing the issues discussed on E-budo.com “just dignifies their trolling,” and that I have already done enough to defend myself and lineage I guess I’m just too stubborn to let sleeping dogs lie.

Yes their advice is practical, and the right thing to do. A bigger forgiving man would do it. However, their conduct struck a nerve in me, and I just can’t close my mouth and pretend nothing happened.

So with that said lets discuss the main issues that were brought up, and I was scrutinized for. These issues were:
1 - The lack of historical validity
2 - The fact the term Koryu was used to describe the art
3 - That I call the school a “Ryu”

#1 - As far as the first concern, Spencer (one of my senior students) and I fully acknowledged and admitted there is a lack of provable facts regarding the history of the school right from the start. How much more clearly can that be stated?

My teacher, Yachigusa, Hiroshi, lived under an assumed name. Either out of necessity or delusion, he lived his life as if he were a fugitive from justice. He left no paper trail, and over the years I was with him only gave me tidbits of information regarding his past.

Whether what he told me was true or not is subjective. Yes, it is easy to dismiss what he said. If he could lie about his name he could be lying about anything. However, he had nothing to gain by doing so.

First of all, he had no initial desire to teach me at all. It took years to win his trust, and make him see I was serious about learning what he had to teach. Obviously, looking back, even though he decided to teach me techniques, I never won his trust completely enough to be privy to his real name or specific facts of his life. However, I’m sure Yachigusa Sensei never imagined I would one day open a school, nor that others would ever be interested in a man which considered himself so unworthy of such attention.

I’m also sure it always amazed him that some American was more interested and eager to be taught than his own children were. Simply put, I trained with my teacher by choice; his children had no decision in the matter.

Secondly, I never paid for classes, so there was never an issue of him profiting from my lessons. A strange fact when one considers that he had no discernable source of income, and lived in near poverty. Clearly, the potential to make some extra income teaching others like myself was there.

As far as I’m aware there was no one else teaching classical Japanese fighting arts in San Francisco at the time. Even today finding a teacher who teaches traditional Bujutsu in San Francisco is extremely hard.

Third, he never claimed to be a “samurai,” from a family of samurai, affiliated with any martial originations, trained or ranked in any other martial styles other than what his father and grandfather had taught him, or that he even had the capability to fully propagate what he had been taught.

All I can say for sure is that he did not teach me Karate or Judo, since after being exposed to both arts in college he was of the opinion that they had little martial value. He also didn’t care for Aikido; at the few demos we attended together all he could do was make comments about the performers lack of technical ability, and how the Aikido techniques presented were bastardized versions of older techniques. (Please note these were his opinions that I don’t necessarily share.)

Of course, in my thirty years of martial practice, I have also seen and trained in enough Karate, Judo and Aikido schools to know what I do is very different. The Aikido and Karate practitioners I know would be quick to concur.

Lastly, and most interestingly, is the fact his son didn’t know much more about Yachigusa Sensei’s past than I did. He was basically told the same information that I was, although he most likely understood things better than I did since he spoke Japanese.

If his daughter knew more than we did I can’t say. Since she was fifteen to twenty years older than me, and was busy with her own life and friends, we rarely if ever talked at length.


#2 – The “Koryu” issue. The major issue of them all, and the one that caused the most intense commentary.

I’ve never once described what I teach as Koryu. The man who designed my web page put that term there. He did so since he believed it was appropriate based on the fact he had grown up in Japan, and his knowledge of Japanese history and culture. I didn’t have him change it, since it really didn’t matter to me, and I didn’t think it was such a major issue.

To be honest until I went to a Diato Ryu seminar about ten years ago I had never heard the word, “Koryu,” before. Even after that it wasn’t until a few years ago I was informed what it meant or more importantly what it is supposed to signify.

Even now, with all the various definitions of the word on the Internet, I’m still not sure what the term fully means or what qualifications--besides the date of existence--make an art worthy of such a title.

I’m still unclear as to who makes the decision (governing body) if a school is Koryu or not or what criteria they use to make this determination. Lastly, and maybe most important of all by what authority, by whose authority, do they the right to make such decisions?

Given the current political atmosphere of martial arts, and the egos of many martial art instructors, I can see how some styles could be excluded simply due to personal/philosophical differences, political agendas, or similar to my case in recent years an unwillingness to be part of a lager political body.

No one on E-budo made any mention on these details, though I’m fully aware there are organizations throughout Japan that validate the authenticity of traditional martial ryu.

For now, based on my research I will use the following definitions to define the word “Koryu.” These definitions are:

“By "koryu" (literally, "old schools") we are referring to those Japanese combative arts which originated before the end of the feudal era in Japan, ca. 1867. In a broader sense, these are arts meant for use on the battlefield, which were practiced by and intended for the professional warrior class. They are distinguished from the more modern Japanese budo forms with which most of you are doubtless more familiar: judo, karate-do, kendo, aikido, and so on. These koryu are, in the strictest sense, true "martial arts." That is, they were the province of the military class. Commoners had no use for them and would have had very, very limited access to the traditions that taught them.”
Sighting the Grizzly
Understanding Abuses of Japan's Classical Martial Traditions
by Dave Lowry

“Koryu is a Japanese word that translates literally as "old school" or "old tradition". It refers to schools of martial arts that predate the Meiji Restoration, a political event that precipitated Japan's modernization. While arts post dating this event (gendai budo such as judo, kendo, iaido and aikido) are valued either as sports or arts for self-improvement, the koryu are the teachings of a feudal military culture. Koryu styles often contain both armed fighting with several different weapons and unarmed techniques.”
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Of course based on these definitions my teacher could have been teaching a Koryu system. His family existed prior to 1867. According to Yachigusa Sensei his family ancestry went back to the 1600’s, and they had been passing on a family martial art system from one generation to the next uninterrupted during all those years.

Just because they did not operate a “commercial” dojo, doesn’t make their art any less valid. It just makes it less known.

Additionally, my teacher’s grandfather was most likely a low ranking yoriki / doshin (police officer), based on everything I was told about him.

He would have had the necessity to know how to fight, and restrain other people. From all the stories I know about him, he sounded like a real ruffian, who didn’t hesitate to use his skills at the slightest provocation.

Yoriki and Doshin, as far as I can tell from my research were samurai.
“The constabulary consisted of two levels of officials, yoriki and doshin. The yoriki were essentially the officer class of police, with some bureaucratic duties as well, sort of like police detectives in the U.S. The doshin, who were directly under the yoriki, were constables. Both posts were filled, often father to son, by members of the very lowest stratum of the samurai class.”
IN THE GOOD (?) OLD DAYS
by Richard Cleaver

Further more per Don Cunningham:
“To handle day-to-day affairs and the general police duties of their office, the machi-bugyoh had assistant magistrates called yoriki. Although they were the Edo magistrate's primary subordinates, yoriki were also victims of a rather unique class prejudice. As samurai, their social rank was far above the townsmen in which they held daily contact.
On the other hand, they were shunned by their samurai contemporaries and discriminated against by their superiors because of their connections to death through the execution of criminals. Although the yoriki did not usually perform actual criminal executions, they were still barred from many things, such as entering the castle, for fear of possible contamination.
The yoriki developed their own individual style of dress, with neatly groomed hair and a uniform consisting of hakama (wide-leg skirt-like trousers), haori (overcoat), and daisho, the two swords which marked them as members of the samurai class. The yoriki were primarily section managers, responsible for directing the daily activities of their assistants, the doshin
Actual police patrol duties were performed by low-grade samurai called doshin. The doshin had their own distinctive uniform, wearing only one sword and tight-fitting trousers instead of the traditional hakama, even for ceremonial occasions. As the lowest ranking police officers, there were three groups of doshin, called sanmawari or the three patrols. Like uniformed police today, the jomawari-doshin and rinjimawari-doshin made no attempt to conceal their identities, patrolling the streets of Edo with their Jutte, the badge of their office, prominently displayed. The third group, the onmitsumawari-doshin, would often investigate criminal activities in disguises.”
Don Cunningham --- Ebudokai.com

If my teacher’s grandfather had been a yoriki/doshin is it possible that my teacher’s family may have been a victim of such prejudice? Maybe their status precluded them from consideration when it came time to select arts were to be listed as Koryu and others were not.

Of course given everything I know about my teacher’s family, especially his grandfather, I really believe that if some authoritative group of martial artists had come to “legitimize” the martial art system of his family he would have told them to get lost. He would have seen no need for this, and considered the matter closed.

My teacher’s grandfather was clearly not happy with the social, political, and cultural changes of his time period, and was very weary of authority figures in general. He instilled these values in my teacher, which led to my teacher’s eventual estrangement from his family.

Naturally these assertions leave room for further questions that can’t be answered, as well as the debate whether the Japanese had “family based martial art systems.”

It should also be noted that I also don’t, and never have claimed that any of these assertions are factual.

In the end, I could care less if the term Koryu is removed from my web page. It most likely will. Not because of the fuss, we were already discussing the issue, but because I don’t teach in a manner attributed to a true Koryu art, and I have a lot of respect for true Koryu systems.



#3 – My usage of the term “Ryu.”
“Ryu” defined is:
“The classical martial arts centered on the ryu or ryuha, a Japanese institution often glossed as "school" or "style" but which might better be thought of as a tradition, a reified or incorporated body of techniques, customs, behaviors, beliefs and teachings embodied in a group of people engaged in martial training.”
Meik Skoss “Classical Martial Arts &Ways: Who, What, When….?”

Is my school a Ryu? I think it is. My teacher learned from his father who was taught by his father, who was taught by his father. If this is true, and I believe it is, then there is a definite tradition of martial training present.

If nothing else Yachighusa Sensei past his tradition onto me, and I am now passing them on to others.

To be honest I think this point is extremely petty.

Well this entry is a lot longer than I anticipated. If you’re still reading, thanks for reading my rant.

In closing, I want to make it clear that not everyone on message boards, even E-budo.com are arrogant, self righteous individuals, out on a “witch hunt.” If Spencer is correct over 1,000 people read the posts. Less than 10% wrote something, and only a small percentage of those people were rude, argumentative, and/or obnoxious.

However, I’m not the first individual they have done this to, and in one case there is pending legal action against them. Whether they do this to me, or a 100 other people still doesn’t make it right or acceptable behavior.

My rant, or my anger towards these individuals is simple. In my opinion I’m harming no one. They would disagree. They have the right. However, they went about it the wrong way. Debates are fine, but baiting conversations, trying to invoke hostility, and accusing people of criminal behavior (fraud is a crime) is wrong, especially on an open forum where these things can be read by anyone.

I have no time for people who don’t have the common sense to be civil. I also have no respect for people like that.

Simply put, these people have never met me. They have no idea what I know, what I teach, or who I am. They read a web page. I’m more than a web page. Meet me in person, watch me teach, exchange ideas, methodologies, and then form an opinion.

Lastly, and this fascinated me, was that most of the “rude” people who posted have no affiliations with a Koryu system. Why do they care? What business is it of theirs? My students believe it’s a case of jealously and spite. A case of Koryu purism and superiority fostered by the likes of Dave Lowry.

My answer is that if Koryu means so much to them, they should pack their bags, and move to a city where a legitimate fully documented Koryu School exists. Then maybe they will spend more time training then sitting behind a computer posting messages.

On Masters and Apprentices

Master has become a poisoned title in the martial arts community (see previous post). Every teacher with too much ego wants to be known as "[[Great-] Grand -] Master Bob", while anybody with a sense of perspective now avoids the term as tainted. To wit, Gary always dismisses the term by insisting that he is not a master because he does not have slaves.

The funny thing is, the title "master" is highly appropriate for the martial arts if we think about what the term means--or once meant--in English. Indeed, fencing instructors in old Europe were called Masters. We should consider "master" as an analogy to the "master craftsman" of the old European guild system.

The metaphor of a medieval craft guild helps to show how martial arts are learned at their best. We start as apprentices, spending years learning from the practical example of our betters. Once we have absorbed what we can that way, we need to leave the master's workshop, broaden our horizons, and be our own teachers as practitioners: journeymen. After many more years, the rare practitioner who gains a deeper understanding of his art becomes a master and guides the next generation along.

Contrast this with the "academic" analogy that is our default metaphor in the U.S. Martial arts cannot be learned by attending lectures, reading books, or writing essays (and what am I, myself, doing here?). Your education must be practical. And, like an apprentice, you have more responsibilities than just paying dues. Yet, I think Americans really like to believe that learning a martial art is simply taking a class and passing a test. The numerous Professors contribute to this image. (Professor is a specific academic rank in this culture--one might as well appropriate a military metaphor and presume to be a Colonel or Rear Admiral.)

The majority of modern martial arts teachers are journeymen. This is not a bad thing, it's just something to be aware of. We no longer live in a world where melee combat is a way of life; the dedication and experience required to achieve mastery are rare. More teachers should be honest about--and even proud of--the fact that they are still students and have a long way to go towards perfecting themselves. Good journeymen/teachers teach the basics well to their students, learn from them, and bring them along on the Quixotic journey towards mastery.

Anyway, what do I know? I'm just an apprentice.

Or perhaps I'm Sancho Panza.

On Masters and Students

From an interview with Yukiyoshi Takamura (originally appeared in Aikido Journal #117):

Everyone is looking for a master or guru in the West, but the word "master" is so overused today as to be meaningless, much like having a black belt today is meaningless. A genuine master is almost impossible to find because you won't quickly recognize him. He is much more than a teacher. Genuine teachers strive to be masters but only one in a hundred thousand finish the journey. There are only a handful of true masters on the whole planet. Funny how they all end up in the San Francisco yellow pages! All the time I tell people this truth. It is not amendable or conditional. Anyone who calls himself a master or allows his students to refer to him as "master" in his presence, isn't a master. Occasionally, he may be a well-meaning teacher who misunderstands the definition of the word, but most of the time he is an ego-driven narcissist seeking adoration. He will have very little to teach because there is so little room in his heart for his students. Instead of looking for a master, just look for a good teacher with a sense of humor, especially if he's driving a crummy old car. (Laughing while motioning towards his old Toyota.) My old friend and Sensei, Matsuhiro Namishiro used to say, "There must be lots of smiles along the way or the journey is not worth it." He was correct you know!



This paragraph resonates with me for many reasons--including the crack about San Francisco. I think he really captures the degree to which people often prefer a false master to a humble teacher.

Martial arts attract a lot of people who are looking for a "master" to provide something that is missing in their lives. Sometimes they are looking for a spiritual guru; sometimes they are looking for hierarchical clan to replace their family; sometimes they want to be part of something that is a little magical and larger than life. If your "leader" is special, that makes you feel a little bit more special just by being his student.

This is not to say that there are not genuine masters about. I know a few people--including a former student of Gary's--who have dropped everything and moved to a different city when the opportunity to learn from a true master appeared. There are a lot of people who uproot their lives to live in Japan and learn from masters there. However, almost all of these dedicated students have first studied for years with good-but-not-masterful teachers. And they have all sacrificed a lot--certainly more than I am willing to--in order to achieve their goals.


I have always felt that training is all about finding the teacher you will learn best from at a class you can regularly show up for. It's not about signing up with the school that has the best or the baddest art. It's not even about finding the most skilled and famous teacher in the area. It is certainly not about feeling special because of who you think your "master" is.

It's about the teacher who is passionate and is willing to invest himself in his students: one who has a temperament and teaching style that works for you. And it is about dedicating yourself to your training above and beyond just signing up and paying your dues.