Advice on How to Spot Bad WMA Budo

Saw this article and thought it may be of interest....

Legitimate Teachers in the WMA Community: Advice on How to Spot Bad European Budo
by Tommaso Leoni and Steven Reich

The Bad European Budo Checklist

Human nature being what it is, especially when coupled with the powerful allure of the sword and the desire for recognition, it may happen to run into people who are less than honest about their credentials or whose actual skills are far below what they believe and advertise. You may also bump into some who think that lack of safety is somehow positive evidence that they train "for real."

Regardless of the rank or lack of rank of your prospective teacher, certain standards of skills and honesty should apply to anyone who offers to teach you. An amateur researcher claiming expertise in a style that he has never even read about is just as guilty as an individual claiming a Master's certificate that he does not have.

So, we have put together a checklist, loosely adapted from a similar one in Asian martial arts called the Bad Budo Checklist that can help you evaluate your prospective instructor. The checklist is mostly designed to spot dishonesty, personality-cults, lack of real knowledge and lack of safety. The more of these points you can check off about your prospective instructor, the more likely it is that he may be someone who should be best avoided. In our opinion, if your prospective instructor displays more than five of these traits, you should do an about-face and run as fast as you can.

*Does he claim absolute and equal mastery of multiple weapons, systems and related subjects? And do his claims of mastery change, especially when challenged?
*Does the art he teaches have an unusual name, which he justifies by saying that what he practices is rare, pure and unique?
*Does he frequently claim that what he teaches or practices is "the one, true way"?
*If he claims an official Master's or instructor's title, does it come from a nonofficial source, a source with whom he may have a conflict of interest, or from bodies of which he was creator/co-creator?
*Does he bestow official-sounding, community-wide titles or certificates in spite of having no official authority to do so? (This of course excludes Scholar's titles or any such internal ranks aimed at showing progress within one's own school.)
*Is he silent or vague about the identity of his master(s)?
*Has he ever claimed that his master(s) cannot be produced because they are ostensibly itinerant hermits or--even more conveniently--dead itinerant hermits?
*Does he not have believable documentation that his master existed--photographs, letters and the like?
*Does he place his personal experience above the historical texts, making disparaging remarks about the texts and those who study them?
*Does he claim to know historical texts of which he then demonstrates little or no knowledge?
*Does he claim to know texts that are only available in a language he does not understand?
*Does he express himself vaguely and imprecisely, using terms in a non-consistent way and frequently misspelling names of Masters and techniques?
*Does his following or audience consist mostly of his own acolytes? Is he generally unwilling to appear in venues other than his own, be it in person or on the Internet?
*Does he promote a personality-cult centered on himself within his school or circle? The following five points on how to spot personality-cults in a leader are from the SOS Dallas web page:
Authoritarian approach and intolerance of questioning or criticism; lies about and insults opponents
Leader shows anxiety about the world, speaking of threats and conspiracies against the group
Leader regularly accuses dissatisfied members who leave of having something wrong with them, having personality disorders or being transgressors or deserters
Ex members have similar stories of abuse and ill-treatment by the leader
The leader is always right and group members never feel they can be good enough
*Does he have a controversial reputation with other schools or groups?
*Does he frequently dismiss most other schools as being impure, sporty or eccentric and is he frequently the initiator of ad-hominem attacks against other schools or individuals?
*Does he claim many "enemies" within the community, somehow posing as the innocent victim of all of them?
*Does he claim to have fought duels or full-intent bouts with sharp swords?
*Does he tolerate or, God forbid, promote injuries in his training sessions?
*Does he display or advocate a brazenly gung-ho attitude towards swordsmanship, overusing expressions like "survival," "real life" or "the street"?
*Does his website feature poses that make no martial sense but that look impressive to the uninitiated?
*Does his website contain photographs or video clips of his martial performance that would be considered sub-par by any reasonable standard?
*Does he claim in-depth knowledge of Asian martial arts, in which he also cannot demonstrate credentials? Do these Asian martial arts also have unusual-sounding names?

This list is our personal opinion derived from our limited experience, and it is of course not modeled after any particular individual in the community.

Good European Budo

So, any teacher who presents several opposite traits than the ones listed above would be a definite go. For instance, you know you have a good prospective teacher when:

*He represents who he is and how he learned swordsmanship in an open and intellectually-honest way.
*He does not claim credentials unless these are objective and official, thereby not cheapening those earned by true Masters.
*He gladly admits his limitations with every system and weapon, especially with those in which he does not specialize.
*If he is a certified Master at Arms, he does not dogmatically extend his authority to weapons and systems (like longsword) that no longer have a living tradition.
*He does not claim to know period texts with which he has little or no experience.
*He expresses himself accurately and carefully and shows a mature observance of the correct terminology and spelling.
*He associates and gladly cooperates with groups other than his own.
*He is well liked in the community and shows joy in what he does.
*He holds sensible and temperate views about the role of swordsmanship, both historically and--especially--today.
*He acknowledges that the serious and martial aspect of swordsmanship must coexist with reasonable safety precautions, and that we don't live in a fantasy world out of Conan the Barbarian.
*The skills he displays are consistent with or higher than the level of experience he claims to have.

Again, this is our personal opinion derived mostly from analyzing the characteristics of the instructors whom we trust and admire.

In conclusion, remember that no teacher is perfect, and that the path of teaching is just as arduous as that of learning. So be generous with your instructor, don't expect the impossible from him and be ready to forgive the few mistakes he is bound to make.

The entire article can be found at...
http://www.salvatorfabris.com/LegitimateTeachers.shtml

Louie

 

Steven Reich has not been a particularly pleasant person online to me he so should really take his own advice. However lets go through it one by one.
First I note the term Budo, This I feel should not be used in a WMA context and should only refer to JMA. Moving on.


*Does he claim absolute and equal mastery of multiple weapons, systems and related subjects? And do his claims of mastery change, especially when challenged?
Can't disagree with this. Seen it many time in my short WMA exposure.

*Does the art he teaches have an unusual name, which he justifies by saying that what he practices is rare, pure and unique?
*Does he frequently claim that what he teaches or practices is "the one, true way"?
Agreed.

*If he claims an official Master's or instructor's title, does it come from a nonofficial source, a source with whom he may have a conflict of interest, or from bodies of which he was creator/co-creator?
Agreed.

*Does he bestow official-sounding, community-wide titles or certificates in spite of having no official authority to do so? (This of course excludes Scholar's titles or any such internal ranks aimed at showing progress within one's own school.)
Erm agreed but who does have authority in WMA. No one, so should we be using certificates at all?

*Is he silent or vague about the identity of his master(s)?
Agreed.

*Has he ever claimed that his master(s) cannot be produced because they are ostensibly itinerant hermits or--even more conveniently--dead itinerant hermits?
Agreed.

*Does he not have believable documentation that his master existed--photographs, letters and the like?
Agreed.

*Does he place his personal experience above the historical texts, making disparaging remarks about the texts and those who study them?
Hmmm this is a tough one again. Many of the texts are not crystal about techniques so sometimes you need to interpret through experience.

*Does he claim to know historical texts of which he then demonstrates little or no knowledge?
Agreed.

*Does he claim to know texts that are only available in a language he does not understand?
Agreed.

*Does he express himself vaguely and imprecisely, using terms in a non-consistent way and frequently misspelling names of Masters and techniques?
Agreed.

*Does his following or audience consist mostly of his own acolytes? Is he generally unwilling to appear in venues other than his own, be it in person or on the Internet?
Erm well this again can be the sign of a good instructor disillusioned with the watering down of an art. So disagree.

*Does he promote a personality-cult centered on himself within his school or circle? The following five points on how to spot personality-cults in a leader are from the SOS Dallas web page:
Authoritarian approach and intolerance of questioning or criticism; lies about and insults opponents
Leader shows anxiety about the world, speaking of threats and conspiracies against the group
Leader regularly accuses dissatisfied members who leave of having something wrong with them, having personality disorders or being transgressors or deserters
Ex members have similar stories of abuse and ill-treatment by the leader
The leader is always right and group members never feel they can be good enough
Agreed.

*Does he have a controversial reputation with other schools or groups?
Well again this is not a good indicators, I know some excellent instructors with controversial reputations and it's amazing how many people repeat these lies.

*Does he frequently dismiss most other schools as being impure, sporty or eccentric and is he frequently the initiator of ad-hominem attacks against other schools or individuals?
Well that depends on the community. A large group of fools doesn't make them any more right.

*Does he claim many "enemies" within the community, somehow posing as the innocent victim of all of them?
Agreed.

*Does he claim to have fought duels or full-intent bouts with sharp swords?
Well if he has the scars to prove it then ok. I've met a couple of serious people who have fought against swords but they all looked like an AA road map.

*Does he tolerate or, God forbid, promote injuries in his training sessions?
Oh contraversial. How can you train with intent without injuries creaping in. So disagree.

*Does he display or advocate a brazenly gung-ho attitude towards swordsmanship, overusing expressions like "survival," "real life" or "the street"?
Agreed.

*Does his website feature poses that make no martial sense but that look impressive to the uninitiated?
Erm, publicity and arts are a different animal. Me I don't like the cheese factor but alot of people do.

*Does his website contain photographs or video clips of his martial performance that would be considered sub-par by any reasonable standard?
Agreed. There are ALOT of named WMA people who's freeplay verges on laughable but have a sterling reputation. So I don't see this one ever enforced.

*Does he claim in-depth knowledge of Asian martial arts, in which he also cannot demonstrate credentials? Do these Asian martial arts also have unusual-sounding names?
I wonder who he is thinking about there?


Good European Instructor

*He represents who he is and how he learned swordsmanship in an open and intellectually-honest way.
Agreed.

*He does not claim credentials unless these are objective and official, thereby not cheapening those earned by true Masters.
The term master is laughable so anyone claiming that title should be eye rolling galore.

*He gladly admits his limitations with every system and weapon, especially with those in which he does not specialize.
Agreed.

*If he is a certified Master at Arms, he does not dogmatically extend his authority to weapons and systems (like longsword) that no longer have a living tradition.
Ahem, yes there is ALOT of that about. Agreed.

*He does not claim to know period texts with which he has little or no experience.
Agreed.

*He expresses himself accurately and carefully and shows a mature observance of the correct terminology and spelling.
Well spelling of period manuals are at best subjective so terminology yes spelling not really.

*He associates and gladly cooperates with groups other than his own.
Only if they are worth associating with. Give time to muppets is a waste of everyones time.

*He is well liked in the community and shows joy in what he does.
Martial arts isn't a popularity contest. Disagree.

*He holds sensible and temperate views about the role of swordsmanship, both historically and--especially--today.
As long as they aren't romantic polically correct revisionist views.

*He acknowledges that the serious and martial aspect of swordsmanship must coexist with reasonable safety precautions, and that we don't live in a fantasy world out of Conan the Barbarian.
Agreed.

*The skills he displays are consistent with or higher than the level of experience he claims to have.
Agreed.

So in general agree but I think this is a carefully constructed attack on some "Names" in the WMA community.

The Bear.

 

Except, of course, for lineages which DO still exist and CAN confer the title of Maestro. There are several. Just not in Longsword.

It's worth noting that Tom and Steven are both primarily Fabris fencers. They spend most of their time in Rapier, Smallsword, and the like. So this statement makes more sense in that context than in the context of Liectenaur or dei Liberi.

I've met and interacted with Tom on a fair number of occasions. Doesn't seem like his style, imo, so I kinda doubt that conclusion.

I can't seem to find a copy online of the original bad budo checklist but here's a discussion with a short list in it. Any of it look similar to Tom & Steven's?

http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17946

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

Yeah I know lineages exist. However the term master is what I object to. In a modern context is it a pointless title since how can you claim mastery in something that you have never used for it's intended purpose. That I find most insulting to the old masters who were warriors that became teachers through their ability. I could never claim a title that I knew was a pale shadow of what it originally was.

Well why would you put your name to something that really doesn't need to be said. Is it going to stop duff schools ... nope. Is anyone other than those who already are aware of the issues ever going to read it ... probably not.

I was told on SFI that the mark of a good WMA practioner was someone that has written lots, turned up at alot of seminars and had read lots of treatise. Nothing was mentioned about martial skill or the martial intent of their training. I think this needs to be corrected before we start worrying about McWMA.

The Bear.

 

Well, I guess it's just a difference of opinion on what "Maestro" (master, etc.) really stands for. For instance, I wouldn't heasitate to trust Maestro Martinez in a "real sword fight" (whatever). At the same time, I'm not all that bothered by what titles people have (or give themselves). I recall sitting in as an "outsider" on a discussion with some more-or-less known "names" in the Professional Stage Choreography biz. The subject came up that some WMA folks were kinda ****ed off when they see the credits roll and "Sword Master" scrolled across the silver screen. These pros all felt that it was a simple misunderstanding. The term "master" in those circumstances just means, "the person who has ultimate responsibility and authority for X in the making of this film." Hence, the "Prop Master" has the ultimate responsibility for all the props, the "Grip Master" for all the grips, etc. I told them that, as an outsider with no experience in the industry, when I see the term "Sword Master" scroll by I automatically assume that it's some fella for whom the title is intended to imply martial mastery of the sword. But, I continued, it didn't bother me at all, even if the fella is some unrecongnized dweeb that no one in the WMA community has heard of because I've see countless "Masters" of the sword/unarmed/whatever-martial-arts who barely knew which end of the weapon to hold much less be truly martially effective with it. So it doesn't matter a whit to me. I'll evaluate the relative skill and knowledge of the individual myself.

Who says it doesn't need to be said? You and I know that there are countless shams out there, and joe sixpack ought to, at least, have some direction on how to spot one. Wasn't it on this forum (or was it SFI?) that a gentleman discussed how he had a "student" come in for a 6 week introductory class in Longsword and then proceed to open his own "School" a short time afterwards? Sure would be nice for a consumer to have a some hints on how to tell without having to "figure it all out" on his own, right?

I don't think that's the goal.

My personal experience tells me otherwise. It's surprising how far flung articles can become (speaking as a guy who's written a small number myself). Did you know that I'm quoted two top Judo websites despite having only been doing Judo for a handful of years? I was quoted in both JudoInfo.com and BestJudo.com well before I ever started Judo (in the former I contributed content to a MA FAQ which was thense inculded and in the latter, I posted an "article" to a forum which the web maintainer liked so much that he republished it, with permission of course, to his Judo website). It's surprising (to me anyhow) how far my articles on cbd.atspace.com/articles.html are referenced and how far the manuals I republish (for free) get linked on the web. I've been linked to by sites who's language doesn't even properly display on my screen.

Now, who's to say that a "consumer guide" type article wouldn't be republished, linked to, or referenced in some sort of Consumer Advocacy site or off-line newsletter?
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft%3Aen-US&q=www.salvatorfabris.com%2FLegitimateTeachers

Now, while I most certainly will NOT deny that there could be certain, specific persons that this particular article is targetted at, my personal experience with one of the authors (Tom), with internet "publishing," and with consumer "issues" in general tend to make me doubt that thesis.

<shrug> Everybody is entitled to their own opinion. Personally, I think that a practicioner's skill is pretty important too, just as you do. Maybe the person who told you that simply assumed that was a requirement and wanted to add to it. I dunno what he was thinking and I'm not really inclined to defend the statement.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

master

I agree with the last statement - in our school - skills are also proved -next to knowing the theory and syllabus of course - by doing several types of free sparring - going from light contact wooden sparring to contact sparring with soft weapons to full contact wood with full armour/protection on ( Canne - baton-Quaterstaff -Sabre-Pugilsm )- and so far as teacher - since i am the founder of our school I think that everyone should fight every one - even the teacher against complete beginners - meaning for training as well as for graduation - so the proof for me lies in proving your knowledge and capabilities under 'severe' pressure

 

Bouting beginners (safely) is a very important practice. They teach you things about your ability to control a completely illogical fighter because, quite often, they do things that they don't know will get both of you killed. And you, as the "experienced" fighter, have to deal with that.

I forget which classical maestro it was but, ims, one of them recalled to this sort of sword fighter as the "vulgar fencer."

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

I agree we only fight with steel and you have to learn control from an early stage. So we have an unarmoured "light sparring" system. That is slower and more controlled than our free play. Which very few people escape without injury for long. So I guess we would fall into bad Budo.

The Bear.

 

Before the complaints roll in..... By 'unarmoured' light controlled sparring it should be noted that participants still wear 1600N masks & padded gloves.
GOOD BUDO!
I think all of the 'Injuries' - bruised nails, cuts - have been sustained by the more advanced members inflicted by less experienced opponents who don't have the same control!
GOOD BUDO!

Louie

 

Ummm .... not entirely accurate.
Since Hamster (our chief instructor) has stabbed me once in the arm and hacked my finger once.
Not to mention your stabbing my chest.
So does that mean the HAMSTER is a BAD BUDO INSTRUCTOR!!!!!!!

The Bear.

 

Does he tolerate or, God forbid, promote injuries in his training sessions?
I spend my day screaming at students to take care, I purchase and advocate the best kit to protect the sods, I drill into them safety and to fight safely .... and still fingers get chibbed. ITS A BL**DING MARTIAL ART! not a bunch of foam sword swinging LARPers although some american wma 'names' would like it to become that.

 

Now watch it Hamster so places that attitude would get you banned. Luckily your on MAP where there are atleast some serious martial artists about.

The Bear.

 

I think I may have found me a new sig

 

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTRD4jIWQEQ&feature=related"]YouTube[/ame]

I would say this would constitute bad western martial arts. An alliance between Knights of the Gray aka Will Gray and Dan Bowen.


The Bear.

 

The foam sword brigade can kiss my aketon! :hammer:

Can I also note for the record that the majority of our injuries were caused by deflections and partial blocks OR where our padding failed to protect.

 

Hi Bear...

Not at all.... I was referring to the sparring which is "slower and more controlled than our free play. Which very few people escape without injury".
It should be stressed that GCD participants "not cleared for freeplay" have NOT recieved any noticeable injury (touch wood) but occassionally the more experienced opponent facing them, have!

Louie

 

my bad punctuation error. I was meaning freeplay which very few people escape without injury.
Although Donald did get a knee in the gut yesterday as part of his toughening up for freeplay training.

The Bear.

 

Every time someone watches that clip, God kills a kitten. It's true, I swear.

-Mark

 

Then God bobbed a kitten's tail because of me.

I watched about 1/5 of it and was too horrified for words before hitting stop.

I mean, what the?!?!?!?!

Even if you were to ignore the boffers (which, it seems to me, are sometimes reasonable to START with for SOME people), where was the measure, the tempo, or ANY of the fundamentals?

There was no sense of parrying, or even decent blocking and body positioning for that matter, just "stick it out there." The "cuts" (such as the were) didn't even have close to the proper mechanics, much less any intent (and how could they when they were so far into measure that they should have been grappling? - egad, they were too close even for knife work!).

And that's just what I noticed from only watching a little of it. I shudder to think what the rest was like.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

WTF! I swear if there is a god of martial arts, (s)he had a special plane of hell and many many red hot pokers on standby for these people!
I have never seen such unadulterated cr@p in my entire life. They actually started in krieg!
Dan is bad enough, we know where his heads at but this Will Gray needs beaten with something a lot harder than a boffer.
Sod the kittens, this file nearly made me cry ... if I hadn't been so shocked, stunned and a not a little amazed that anyone would put this mince on the net with their real names attached to it.