> How do you value ability?

How do you value ability?

Posted at: 2015-05-07 
Knowledge of the art and how it is applied. It's about utility and how a technique is applied etc.

Character - I suppose so. A good moral upstanding person who is mature, not arrogant, etc.

Time and experience to me is a must. At least 20 yrs doing an art.

Real self defense situations not so much though I suppose that would be nice.

I value almost everything you mentioned and more. What I value most is the way the instructor trains. Does he train to fight? Do you spar and fight daily? Is what you a learning applicable and real world self defense? Etc.

A bad teacher, makes a bad student, bad student can become a bad teacher, cycle repeats. Heck, just look at Bujinkan. Great art if taught right, but 85% of it is a fraud bc of bad teachers. It's terribly sad.

So yeah. That wraps it up I guess.

I base that on experience and attitude as well as their skills. I have seen for instance some pretty good athletes who had horrible attitudes and it affected them becoming fighters. Fighting being the individual sport it is they have nobody but themselves to blame or take things out on if they lose or are not doing well. That can be doubly hard especially if they have done well in other sports also is what I have sometimes seen. Also not all fighters make good teachers or coaches-that takes a person who can also communicate and motivate others and not all fighters or students can do that.

When looking at an instructor or coach that is the first thing I actually look at is that ability to coach or train others and motivate them. I have seen many fighters for instance that could pummel their coaches or beat them into submission. They don't though out of respect for that coaches knowledge and ability to train them and will usually respect a good coach. So if we are talking about a teacher, coach, or sensei I think that is a very important quality is the ability to teach and motivate others.

Ability and experience also comes in there to some extent but I don't rate that over the above when looking at a coach or sensei. I would train with the man in the moon if it made be better in some way is the way I really look at it.

Someone who can teach me how to defend myself the most efficiently and completely. If someone saved 25 people, cool, but how? If he used a gun then that has no merit as a martial arts instructor. Also, if someone has successfully defended themselves in the street, even on multiple occasions, doesn't mean they're a complete fighter. If someone got in 10 fights and won all 10, then that would be evidence supporting that they're a good fighter, but in any of those situations, did they have a knife pulled on them? Was it more than 1 opponent? Did the fight go to the ground? Someone could be a great 1 vs. 1 fighter with great striking ability, but have no weapons defense, multiple attacker defense, or ground fighting skill. High ranks aren't a bad thing, but can be deceiving. For example, in BJJ it takes about 10 years to get a black belt, while in other arts like Taekwondo is can take as little as 2 or 3. They're both black belts, but the time they've been training differs vastly. All in all, it would be somewhat reassuring to know that your instructor has used his/her martial arts to defend themselves, but not necessary at all. High rank is good but can be deceiving (as mentioned above), Knowledge is obviously a good trait. Good character is also a good trait, but it'd rather train with someone who has bad character and could teach me how to defend myself, than someone with good character who couldn't teach me how to defend myself. Also, if an instructor was in the military, then they most likely have a feel for what real combat is like, and how real warriors train, which would be a plus. Same goes for (most) cops, federal agents, etc.

Good question, and I think thats part of the problem in the martial arts community, is that we measure ability through things other than ability. It isn't time on the mat that gives us ability, nor is it rank, character or any of those things. Ability is ability. It is being able to apply technique against a fully resisting opponent. If you can't do that, then you don't have ability, and you shouldn't be recognized.

Other styles choose to have pity parties, and reward trying, and time spent in the dojo. But at the end of the day, I have no problem with people rewarding someone with a belt for trying, and for consistently working. I do have a problem though with dojo's giving people a false sense of confidence, and telling them that they can defend themselves on the street. And unfortunately, with rank comes that validation of so called skill. So I don't see any way to reasonably reward someone for trying.

I don't care if my instructor is an ex-Marine that's killed fiddy men. I want someone that has knowledge about the proper application of technique, and allows me to demonstrate real-world application, which is through a resisting opponent. If a tiny, frail, elderly woman has that knowledge, then I want her as my teacher.

wisdom and application. Plus knowledge of technique is always good. Pretty much how savvy you are and able to execute.

By knowledge, character, time of experience, rank, real self-defense experiences??...

For example....would you prefer to have an instructor someone that you are certain that has saved 25 people in 15 occasions from getting seriously injured by psychopaths, would you prefer someone with more knowledge, would you prefer someone with a high rank and a good character??? What combination would you prefer for your instructor and how do you value ability??