Liars and frauds in martial arts

We all know that there are frauds out there. People who award themselves a black belt and some badges and declare themselves master or grandmaster and such.

Like this guy.
https://youtu.be/5coO_wNwheE

Here's an ethical question.

Let's say someone declares themselves grandmaster, but they don't teach or charge money or anything. Is that OK?

Personally I find it offensive that while some people spend years and years training hard at every opportunity to earn their senior grades, others just pop online and order themselves some accessories for any of the martial arts supplies shops and then go round telling everyone that they're more advanced.

 

At the least, they are deliberately misrepresenting themselves for their own vain glorious ego. I don't respect that.

Worse still they may be attempting to develop a cult of personality around themselves. Which is unhealthy and dangerous for everyone concerned and I have no respect for it.

people might also try to implement what they teach and get seriously hurt.

All those things can and do apply to teachers in 'legit' styles too. But making it all up is a step even farther below.

Edit - also, just watched the clip...awkward! Haha

 

I was in McDojo for about a year. Now it made me very skeptical of the martial arts. The sad thing is that I have seen so many frauds that I didn't even know what the real deal was anymore.

Luckily now we have very active instructors and I have sparred with the muay thai instructors and rolled with bjj instructors and I now know it's the real deal. The proof is in the pudding.

 

So there is a difference between reality, and the measures we are able to make of reality.
For instance, most people will see a belt color and know that it is supposed to indicate a certain measure of skill.

Such measures often fall apart when gamed/focused on.
E.g.,, someone whose focus is "I must become a black belt" or even "I must earn my next belt" might do better if instead they think "I must become skilled enough to deserve a black belt" or "I must become skilled enough to earn my next belt".
This is a subtle but important difference.

It is similar to many measures of knowledge workers productivity. I'm going to focus on programming for this example since that is what I know.
Measuring # of lines of code a programmer produces is one way to measure productivity. (It isn't a great way to do so.)
But if the programmer thinks "I must increase my line count", that is not actually going to boost productivity. E.g., you could
write
code
like
this
to
boost
your
line
count.

Just like awarding yourself a black belt doesn't actually mean you have the skills to back it.

When the visible measurement we use for something becomes the goal to attain instead of becoming better at the thing it measures, the measure no longer really works.

It is understandable that people who actually do have the thing being measured (skill) get upset at the people who game their way into getting a good measurement (e.g., a black belt) without the underlying thing (skill in this case) actually being present.

 

Why do you personally find it offensive? Are they stealing your students? Are you placing responsibility for your self-worth in somebody else's hands? Do you judge yourself according to what others believe?

I've always detested that saying "the proof is in the pudding". What the heck does that have to do with martial arts? Also, how do you define "the real deal?" Is it only real to you if you can compete in a ring?

I'm sorry, but that's incorrect. Only those people that are unfamiliar with martial arts will think that. People that are familiar with martial arts will know that a belt color only means something within the school that granted it, and means nothing at all outside of that school.

No, it isn't understandable at all. Those of us that have practiced martial arts for a long time are not doing it for the recognition or for measurement. We are doing it for our own edification and desires. What others do has no impact on that what so ever. People engage in martial arts training for a myriad of reasons. If someone wants to be seen as "grandmaster soke poobah" within their invented art, then it's no skin off of my nose. I may stop long enough to have a good laugh, but it has zero impact on my own training, and it certainly doesn't upset me.

The ones that do usually get upset by the frauds and cheats are usually young men that haven't been training for too long, so they feel that their training somehow defines what they are in other people's eyes. They grow out of it eventually.

 

I'm really good at fishing, I'm a grandmaster baiter.

 

I have gone fishing quite a few times and have yet to catch one When I DO catch one, it'll be the tastiest fish I've ever had

 

When I say the proof is in the pudding I mean that if they can beat someone in a fight with it, it works. Not a scripted "you do this, now I do this fight" but like one where you don't know what is coming and they can shut you down.

 

I'm guessing you must go through a lot of fishing buddies? Probably hard to talk em' in to that second fishing trip after they've witnessed your level of mastery. :jawdrop: :hat:

 

It's all in the wrist...

I go through 'em like kleenexes, it's the weirdest thing!

 

I see. So according to your definition, all of those martial arts that don't fight in a ring aren't pudding? Or are you experienced enough to be able to see what someone is training and just know that they aren't pudding?

What I'm trying to say behind the snark, is that you shouldn't confine yourself to such narrow views. If you do, you need to understand that they are narrow views and a great many others won't share them.

Super soke McDojo master baiter!

 

No they don't have to fight in the ring but they at least need to spar. I'm highly skeptical of those grandmasters when I want to see them in sparrring, rolling, randori, etc and they are like, "Oh no, all of the moves are too dangerous. We can't spar." To me that seems suspicious or like they are a hustler. You want to see that the moves work and if the you never see them in action then it just seems like a joke.

 

I agree will Vinny.

It doesn't have to be in the ring, but a culture of inherent pressure and an emphasis on efficacy in physical implementation of technique against resistance is key.

Otherwise it's just on faith that a) you can get it all to work b) they can get it all to work c) those who developed it can get it all to work.

It doesn't really matter what format the pressure takes.

Just too add, I too am not arsed about mcdojoism other than to warn prospective students and to occasionally crack a sideways smirk. I focus on my training but critical evaluation of training in general helps inform your own.

 

You don't have to be a great or even good fighter to be a good or great teacher. Experience is important to a degree but don't let it cloud your judgment if the teacher is known for getting results. There are some great teachers out there who have poor to no fight record whatsoever. Even in Thailand.

 

Living on the asian side of the international dan line usually means that once you hit alaska or hawaii on your way to the states, you are automatically promoted from a colored belt to GM level by mere association or lineage ties to the asia country of your arts origin.. I can tell you that after running across a lot of military trained instructors who lived and trained in certain asian countries and studied martial arts, they were promoted by proxy after hitting the international dan line and became national champions

 

Who peed in your cornflakes?

 

Exactly. Let's take bjj for example. The moves are taught like bjj like they are in japanese ju jitsu and judo...first do this, then this, then this. They seem like they would work but you really don't know.

However then you roll. And let me tell you, when the instructor allows you to roll with him and you roll with him and his students and everyone can throw you around like a rag doll and make you tap quickly you gain faith in the system fast.

 

Let's put it this way. I think most teachers should able to beat you. However even if the teacher is old and decrepit,, and is too old to fight, I would have faith in them if a lot of the people they taught could beat me.

 

I would however like to add, this is how my level of faith increases in a system:

1) The instructor can own me in a fight.

2) The instructor's students can beat me in a fight.

3) The instructor and/or his students can beat people from other schools.