Mods versus Traditional martial arts

Andy wrote...

Surely in theory there shouldn't be a rivalry at all. 'Trads' and 'mods' must choose to continue they're system for the benefits it gives them. Not every one wants to be a ripped MMA star others are quite content playing samurai. In reality maybe not enough people choose they're system based on merit and go for what is either local, cheapest or happens to be the first one they look in to. If more people were convinced they're art was truly for them they wouldn't need to feel the need to shout they're corner based on insecurities. Thus feuling a rather immature rivalry. Don't discriminate look into everything and steal from everyone:)

Posted by: Andy  | November 28, 2007 6:50 AM

Pete B wrote...

Well, for me if you are studying martial arts it is a personal choice, and therefore whichever system you want to choose is fine by me. Your choice may not suit me or be anything like what I consider to be 'the way' - but that's fair enough. I'll dip into whichever art I can, see what I think and do what I feel. If a particular art originated 1000 years ago or 10 minutes ago, it's all the same to me. And I expect (and respect) others who make their own choices.
Having been on the receiving end of the fall out of some of these petty rivalries on more than one occasion, in more than one art, I agree - do what you feel, get on with it and let others do the same.

Posted by: Pete B  | November 29, 2007 9:06 AM

phil doherty wrote...

To both and Pete.
yes I agree that you should be open minded about martial arts as no one system is the best.
However, in my experience most people don't have an open mind and are 'fixed' on their chosen art.
I once tried to introduce some Wing Chun into a karate class and you'd have thought I was bringing satanic rites into a church from the reactions I got!
It is as if people feel threatened by things which are new, different and not their norm.
And how many instructors actively encourage their students to explore other arts? Very few.

Posted by: phil doherty  | November 30, 2007 5:41 PM

Steven Mclaughlan wrote...

Over the years i joined and left several martial art clubs for various reasons. Every instructor i have ever met was convinced they study & teach the best martial art to the best of their abbility. Let's face it they teach it, and get paid to do it, so they have to instill a feeling of pride in thier students to keep them coming back. NO STUDENT - NO CLASS
I think it is this feeling of pride and belonging to your relavent martial arts club / association that is the basis of this Mod - Trad discussion. Some clubs cling to the traditionl label claiming to teach a pure, undiluted or commercialised, martial art. Other embrace the modern, busy, flashy new world by reinventing the wheel and doing it in a differant way.
Mod or Trad - it's all the same and a choice generally based on local availability rather than a burning desire to where a white Gi or colourfull satin pants.
Todays traditional art was yesterdays new boy the latest MMA Cage Fighting is just the next chapter in 100's of years of natural progression.
But the DFM is by far the greatest and i'll knack anyone who say's otherwise. Isn't that right Sensie Doherty sir (i got a grading coming soon) :)

Posted by: Steven Mclaughlan  | December 3, 2007 10:36 AM

Pete S wrote...

Traditional? Modern? Traditional arts can be viewed as arts built upon previous fighting systems. And are therefore modern in their time. Most arts are either adaptions, variants or modifications of previous arts developed to suit the needs of their times. Also as extensions of the personality of the individual/s who developed them.
But maybe as its natural for most things to change for whatever reason, we should embrace any change, adopt/adapt or discard as necessary. But dont ignore change as we may miss something really interesting and useful - also we can keep an eye on what the potential opposition is doing. All knowledge is good. I change what I do constantly (sometimes to the chagrin of my more 'traditional' colleagues), but (without being naive) still try to maintain the principles and ethics of my art.

Cheers all. P

Posted by: Pete S  | December 3, 2007 1:19 PM

Anonymous wrote...

Hi young steve. Just a little correction - most instructors I know dont get paid to teach - some, the lucky few are in positions where they do but in most cases the income barely covers the time and expenses. Most do it for the love of the art and enjoy the company of like minded people who train with them.
Just wondering - passing thought - if you compare the time, effort, expense, knowledge, skill, etc a martial arts instructor has to amass and puts into his art, how would that equate to for example professionals - a solicitor, doctor, plumber, builder, etc who charge for their services. Average (when I was a lad) 6 years to reach 1st dan not being a belt chaser another 24 years ish to sandan (constantly training and teaching)along with the thousands of pounds cost of insurances, equipment, travel, courses all over the place, etc.
Would I and my fellow instructors be regarded as 'professional'? Even though the vast majority do it for the love of the art - sorry dont have time to continue at mo - lunch time over!

Comments please

Posted by: Anonymous  | December 4, 2007 1:20 PM

phil doherty wrote...

Hello Anon,
I think professional is a term that would cover the vast majority of instructors out there regardless whether they get paid to do it or for the love of the art.
Its the attitude that counts, the right attitude to getting the best out of their chosen art and their students.
As for belt chasers - belts are just a coloured bit of fabric that lets your instructor know how much knowledge you have (hopefully) retained before he teaches you the next level.
And colour belt gradings are not really traditional having been invented by Sensei Jigoro Kano (Judo) for children in between the wars.
Steve is also right in that most people chose the most convenient art at their leisure centre rather than hunt out something that would really suit them.
Unless you are in the know then one art is as good as another.

Posted by: phil doherty  | December 4, 2007 2:32 PM

Peter S wrote...

'Does the team think' thats showing my age! Some arts are non competitive in the sense that there are no organised 'competitions' between individuals or teams. The main focus of such arts is usually self improvement (as with most arts - but more so) - competing against ones self. Though in practice you have to compete as you train to see if what you do works (randori and the like). These arts seem to be below the sights of the general public and are not well publicised. They are sometimes put in the 'wellness' category as something that may contribute to the general wellbeing of the participants - but not given the same serious consideration as the mainstream competitive arts.
Have you had any experience of this - or any other comments please. In case I forget Happy christmas and a healthy NY to E1. P

Posted by: Peter S  | December 5, 2007 1:04 PM

The flashing blade :-) wrote...

What does it matter what you learn (traditional or modern)so long as you enjoy it. For to long there has been conflict between systems and styles and even instructors on who is right or wrong. Any instructor worth his/her salt will tell you in a real life situation anything can happen, there are no guarantees when dealing with violence. A piece of dyed cotton does not make you a fighter. As with most of you guys i have trained for over twenty years in the martial arts, I love what they do and stand for. The way they change people and make them more confident in themselves, the moment i teach my lot for profit is the day i give up training and teaching. I believe everyone should keep an open mind, learn from each other and share the knowledge ancient or modern.

One thing i would like to add for anyone considering studying a modern or traditional art, look around try as many as you can. But you must also ask yourself why do you want to learn these skills, tradition, history of the art,to get fit or for personal safety. I have been unlucky enough to have been hospitalized several times, once was quit serious and i train in modern and tradtional arts. 3rd dan or 10th kyu makes no differance when you faced with an angry mob with botttles, sticks and knives.

Until next time train hard fight easy and enjoy whatever you train in.

Posted by: The flashing blade :-)  | December 5, 2007 6:22 PM

Andy wrote...

I think the trouble is there are too many clubs and instructors who are perhaps not exactly the stand up individuals you want them to be. Have a mosey round some of the glorious internet sites available and see how many people claim to be the 'Master' of their art or claim that they can show you techniques that can beat men 10ft tall and 10,000 times stronger than you. It's people like this that feul the argument soiling the name of both traditional and modern martial arts and providing negative examples for each to throw at each other. Ofcourse this happens on lower levels like knife disarming techniques that are clearly unsafe and blocks that wouldn't stop a straight punch from paddington bear, we've all seen them. I couldn't give a flying frontkick what your art is or its origin but if its a japanese history lesson sell it as such and not a fool proof self defence course. If it is modern street combat that tickles your fancy don't claim you're a master of the ether just to get the attendance figures up. Combat techniques whether 'trad' or 'mod' come with responsibility and when taught with respect all, every single one, have merits.

Posted by: Andy  | December 6, 2007 2:17 AM

The flashing blade :-) wrote...

I can see your point of veiw Andy, and it is a valid point of view in many repects. I have trained all over the uk with some great instructor but also some really bad one's, the money grabbers & attention seekers were their only concern is how good they look in a Gi and how much money they can squeeze out of a student.

Thankfully these guys are rare but it is all to easy to wrap a belt around your waist and tell everyone your a expert in martial arts etc.

Your point of teaching knife techniques is also valid, if an instructor teaches a system as the ultimate combat system and gives his/her students a false sense of security and they eventually have to use these techniques it could end in with disastrous consequences.

However i feel we all need to be carefull when discussing these issues as most styles or art have something positive to offer all of us providing their on the level and taught by competent instructors with a genuine interest in getting the best out their students.

Your coment on websites is a classic point of view, when sitting behind a keyboard the individual can choose to be whatever they wish, but living up to those wishes is alot harder as i have witnessed on various courses and events.

Matrial arts, combat sytems & self defence are a mine field for discussion. Just like politics or religion, every one wants to believe there art or system is the best or unbeatable. This simply is not so, there is no perfect art or system or we would all be learning it. But i also stand by my previous comments on why people learn martial arts etc, is it for the history, to get fit etc. Research these things before making any sudden decisions. If its a simple case of someone wanting to pack a punch like a mule then may i suggest boxing, but even then there is no guarantees you'll protect yourself from been a victim of violence. I hope from this blog page we can all learn something from one another, but i suspect somewhere along the discussions someone will get upset with a point of view.

Since the day my street combat class opened i have kept the club numbers under ten, even turning people away from the club. That way i can concentrate the system and focus it better towards the students, if a practitioner askes me questions i can't answer i'll find out the answer even if it means bringing other instructors to the class and i have to learn with them.

Train hard fight easy.

Posted by: The flashing blade :-)  | December 6, 2007 11:54 AM

Wand3223 wrote...

Like everyone else, I have encountered the Trad vs Mod argument so many times its untrue. And, when i first set foot upon the martial way it seemed a very valid question.
Fotunately i had stumbled into a Trad Wado ryu karate club, with intructors who loved their art.
Instead of stifling my questions they encouraged me to try other things. My instructor even accompanying me on several occasions to other martial arts clubs in different styles and helping me understand what they were about.

It soon hit me that it wasnt so much the style that was important as the instructor.
The style only comes into the picture, if you have a choice of good instructors, then perhaps it becomes a question of what you expect from your training and no doubt that will change through out your life.

I now train as a "Mod" but am so proud of my "Trad" roots, and anyway, I doubt i could cover them now, even if i tried. Fortunately I have an instructor who is largely in the same boat

To the "Trads" the whole point of an Art is that it is your expression, not a poor copy of someone elses, we should not fear change, the founders of your arts weren't.

And the "Mods" can we really be so arrogant as to believe that we are doing anything more than artistically interpretting the past ?

Perhaps the only thing we need to remember is we are all on the same path - Budo.

Posted by: Wand3223  | December 6, 2007 12:08 PM

Peter S wrote...

Does everyone think that introducing martial arts into schools would be a good idea. I can think of a few positive reasons for including the option into the PE curriculum.
The obvious benefits we all recognise - develops confidence, respect, fitness, teamwork, goal setting, achievement etc. Maybe it would help with the general decline in behaviour and lack of discipline in our schools today? (I work in this area and this trend worries me). The general lack of respect shown by a lot of kids is shocking and getting worse and they know they can get away with it. This behaviour overflows into the streets and beyond, already people are becoming afraid to tackle bad behaviour and see fear stalking the streets (bit heavy but its getting there). The system and of course the 'trendies' are somewhat to blame - kids have loads of rights (which is fine) but have no sense of responsibility. They are pandered to everywhere and it does them no favours. Saying that 90% of kids are great its the rest to varying degrees who if not addressed will continue causing problems.
Anyway after that ramble - do you think it would be a good idea - Marts in schools.

Posted by: Peter S  | December 6, 2007 1:14 PM

phil doherty wrote...

Hello Peter - yes I agree martial arts lessons in schools would be a great idea. But you wouldn't get it past the liberal brigade I'm afraid. They would just seeing it as teaching violence because they wouldn't understand the discipline side at all - and probably wouldn't agree with that either!
Martial arts odf course are taught in Japanese schools and they don't have anywhere near the problems with kids being violent that we have in the UK.
Martial arts is recognised by sports experts as being one of the most rounded exercises that you can do as it involves suppleness, strength, stamina and both local and general muscle explosion.
I was a bit of a lad when I was younger and was always getting into fights. It was only when I started doing Wado Ryu Karate under an ex-para that i stopped being an idiot. He taught me self-discipline. He also taught me the Way and that Way was not violence but having respect for yourself and most importantly respect for others. Something that a number of kids today seem to lack...

Posted by: phil doherty  | December 6, 2007 2:03 PM

The flashing blade :-) wrote...

Wand 3223 makes a good point about mods, most of us know that there are techniques from Trad styles mixed up with something new to create a system for the present society we live in. But i agree that it's the instructor you train with that's important, first of all he/she has to give a dam about there students. Respect them and guide them in the right direction and be honest to them. It's no good giving a person false hope and confidence telling them there ready for violence knowing full well they're not or that they great at your martial art when there not.

Peter S, would back you to the hilt to get martial arts taught in schools but Phil's right the politicians wouldn't go for it. My answer to the current state of the youth today would be to bring back national service and get some discipline into them. Most instructors have had an unruly young student in a class at sometime only to learn their bullying people with the techniques their learning.

Of course it's not fair to blame all the youth of today for the attitude we're facing from them, but it does seem to be getting worse. How many school kids would actually use a martial art for it's intended purpose, to learn about themselves and respect others.

Personally i won't teach anyone under eighteen but that's just me, I have no experiance in teaching children or young teens. I dont want to teach the youth of today how to wield a dangerous weapon or show them CQB techniques and they really hurt someone or themselves.

As instructors our job is to pass on the knowledege of our arts or styles with honesty and sincerity to the next generation, and keep it's original intention alive.

Posted by: The flashing blade :-)  | December 6, 2007 4:16 PM

Peter S wrote...

My organisation has classes for a wide range of ages and some of the more positive remarks made are by parents of the junior students who say that the behaviour of their kids has improved markedly since they started training. A martial arts friend and colleague who is a brilliant instructor also liaises with the local schools her young students attend. Between her and the school staff they monitor behaviour and if for example one of her students is naughty at school she is informed and it is mentioned to the student along with the appropriate number of press-ups or similar marts 'chore'. As its all done in a positive light hearted manner (but also seriously)it works wonders! And the kids go along with it and love it.

Posted by: Peter S  | December 7, 2007 9:36 AM

wand3223 wrote...

Martial arts in schools would doubtless be a good thing. Instead of fighting in the play ground, progression in martial art could establish the social order within the school. I belive this has already been implemented to some degree in Australia, although I am not sure of the details of the scheme or how widespread.

I think all within Martial arts believe in it's positive influence on the self. However this all seems pointless in the current climate, certainly within this country, where the self can never be truely to blame for wrong doing. It's always society's fault, or drugs, or alchohols fault. So if the self can so rarely be to blame, whats the point in trying to correct it with Martial arts or national service? First there needs to be a change in the thinking of the powers that be - whoever it is that actually makes the decisions, and actually hold the individual responsible for their actions. Both Martial arts and national service work on the principle that there is always a bigger fish. If you do wrong in the Dojo or in the forces, there will be a concequence. Eventually people ammend their behaviour to ensure these concequences are avoided. Other institutions like schools, the police etc, used to have the power to create concequence of an individuals actions. These have been eroded so far now that many have no fear of retribution.

I dont remember whose quote it was, but it is Fear that keeps us decent.

Posted by: wand3223  | December 7, 2007 12:00 PM

Anonymous wrote...

Very well put - hits the nail on the head. I know the present government has to work within the current 'woolly' EEC directives on the law, individual rights etc and they may appear to be selling our rights as an independant country. Maybe this is to blame for the general short sighted, ill thought out, way they tend to blunder from one crisis to another (General consensus - where I work anyway). No more so than the way there is now very few real consequences at hand or applied for a wide variety of acts of a criminal nature (full prisons - let them off with it then shall we). Violent crime, especially perpetrated by youths casts a pall of fear over normal life. If a normal law abiding person even defends themselves when confronted with violence, it is usually they who are arrested and put through the mill. The youths are laughing up their sleeves at the system and are given the green light to escalate their violence. The LA citizen then thinks I'll not bother reporting anything to the authorities - its pointless. Look at the recent incident with Jeremy Clarkson - those kids were obviously intent on a 'happy slappy' escapade and would quite happily see Jeremy dragged through the courts as being the one who started the incident - horrible little ********.
What rights has the normal citizen got???????
I see the government are presently trying to alienate the police themselves over the recent pay claim/agreement - v short sighted - more demotivated people.
Sorry about rant but it sometimes brims over.
Anyway how do martial artists stand legally if they have to defend themselves?

Posted by: Anonymous  | December 7, 2007 1:15 PM

Peter S wrote...

MMM? Yes good question, does anyone actually know how a martial artist would fair if they defend themselves?
With the perceived misconceptions the media and the authorities seem to have (or manipulate for whatever reason)how are martists actually seen/viewed in a fracas situation?
Ive heard in the past about a '6 months veteran' at karate who was involved in an 'incident' and the media had him down as an expert who used his 'great skill' on some poor thugs who attacked him. Not sure of the outcome but he didnt get good press due to his 'vast' marts experience (a whole 6 months - cant even walk properly in that time).
Are martial artists penalised for trying to learn to control violence and make themselves better citizens etc.
Do we immediately become cast as aggressive, violent people? Does it actually make a difference to the authorities and how do they really view it? After all the police are trained in arrest, restraint, armed (to various degrees) tactics etc. Does that make them martial artists?? Some of this is tongue in cheek but also serious - would be great if someone from the media or authorities could give their take on the subject.
Have a great christmas & NY everyone.

Posted by: Peter S  | December 20, 2007 1:42 PM

phil doherty wrote...

Hello Peter S
The main reason why martial artists get bad press in papers is simply down to pure ignorance by the majority of journalists.
They just haven't got a clue what martial arts are about and therefore make fundamental errors.
Also, the golden rule of journalism is to simplify and exaggerate. This is how a numpty with six months training becomes a 'Grandmaster'.
In Kent where I worked a journalist I knew wrote a story about a "ninja" who used his skills to attack people on the streets. They claimed he was an expert black belt in the system.
However, closer inspection by moi found that this guy had attended a couple of KARATE classes years previously and had never even got a single grade in that style never mind Ninjutsu.
I guess ninja sounded moere exotic and frightening than an everyday karate guy.
My advice to anyone who is caught up in a street altercation is DO NOT tell the police you do martial arts.
They seem to take a dim view of people having the same or more skills than they do!
Far better just to say you were attacked and defended yourself.
Another little pointer - if you injure the opponent then as soon as you make it to a safe place and are out of danger then phone the police and an ambulance for your attacker.
This shows you are a responsible citizen and in any subsequent court case that your plea of self-defence is more likely to be accepted.

Posted by: phil doherty  | December 20, 2007 2:08 PM

Baz wrote...

Just picking up on a point made earlier about the view of the general public on martial arts. What I can never get used to is the reaction martial artists get from the general public. Of course some people scoff and mock with their chest puffed out that martial arts are over-rated but usually there’s a sort of suspicious respect and generally it’s the same questions: What style are you? What grade are you? What would you do if I punched you in the face? Often followed up with a bad joke about how they better not upset you.

To give an example for you; I was asked by a friend about my marts training. I told him my grade and a little about how we train at my club, he was impressed, that makes a kick-ass fighter so he reckons. Now to me the colour of my belt means I’m pretty good at the basics. Yes I know a few things but I’m a long way from being expert. The colour of my belt doesn’t matter much to me, a black belt will hold my gi jacket closed just as well as a white one. No matter what I said though, my protests couldn’t dissuade him from the idea that because I have a few years martial arts experience I am somehow an invincible warrior. I’m sure I’m not alone in having experienced this reaction.

It seems as though the general public still believe the stories of the shy 7 stone guy who trains in martial arts for 6 months and then goes back to beat up the 18 stone bully who kicked sand in his face (metaphorically speaking of course). This kind of tale, far-fetched as it sounds to us in the know, would seem to sound perfectly plausible to Joe Public who knows nothing about these mystical fighting systems from the Far East apart from what he’s seen in Bruce Lee and Jackie Chan films.

This can work to our advantage in terms of filling up clubs but it does make me wonder whether martial artists involved in self defence situations will ever be treated fairly by the courts and by the media.

In cases where martial artists have been discriminated against because of their training/ability is it, due to the success of martial arts propaganda in the media?

In many cases, I think so.

What does everyone think?

Baz

Posted by: Baz  | December 20, 2007 10:33 PM

Stuart Gavin wrote...

Phil, was just doing a google when can across this. I have both a trad and mod background.

Instructors claiming that their art is the best really gets my back up. I tell my students to try everything and if they find a better style or instructor then that is good as they are training for "them" not for me.

As long as they continue training in something my job is done...

As for the great debate (Trad v's Mod) I teach what I think works, regardless of what style it comes from. Does it matter if I hit someone with a traditional punch as long as it works, I think not.

I was once asked on a forum what I thought was unique about the style I teach. My answer was ME.

My view of the stances and interpretation of the techinques. Not ego, just the fact that I teach it different from anyone else due to me being unique.

I expect my students to form their OWN style of MA which is unique to them. If a technique is a letter then it is up to them the story they write during the fight and every fight is different as is the ending they have to write. So I agree with you we are all MODS

Posted by: Stuart Gavin  | January 16, 2008 11:31 AM

phil doherty wrote...

Hello Stuart,
I personally agree with you that if it works then use it. I don't understand when people see a great technique but won't use it because its not their 'style'.
Most of the truly great and innovative teachers from the past blended old with new ideas to form new systems. This has been going on since the Macedonians (Alex the Great) took Pankration to India and most likely for millennia before that.
All styles really are is a person's interpretation of martial arts in relation to their body type and knowledge. What suits one person, however, may not suit another, ditto instructors.
A punch is a punch and kick is a kick - I doubt that if you are facing a knife-wielding maniac in a dark alley I doubt any martial artist would care if it was a karate kick, kung fu kick or whatever as long as it works and gives them time to leg it! (My favourite self-defence move. Can't catch me...can't fight me!)
But I suppose it really comes down to why you are training in the first place - for some people maintaining their styles is very important from a asthetic point of view. While others are more concerned with maintaining the traditions behind their systems. For me personnally I don't care how it looks or whether its traditional or not as long as it works.
Like you I encourage my students to be open-minded and to train with others.

Posted by: phil doherty  | January 16, 2008 12:05 PM

Pete B wrote...

Well it's not exactly on subject, however I want to share a couple of bits of information I found out when talking to a senior Aikido Instructor who is also a serving police officer. He mentioned that he is being called as an expert witness more and more often. So in theory if you an advanced grade and break some attackers wrist, the expert witness would be called to see if you (as the person being attacked) used too much force and could have defended yourself without unduly hurting the poor attacker.
Hmmm.... interesting point of view. I wonder if anyone else has heard of this being done.

Posted by: Pete B  | February 14, 2008 11:24 AM

Borsebragosse wrote...

argenbrownou@yandex.ru

Posted by: Borsebragosse  | April 2, 2008 8:06 PM