Martial Arts stuff (from different thread)

Milarepa wrote:

Thaak wrote:

Milarepa wrote:
so, you're cool if you went ot a dojo to learn Aikido, but where taught Muay Thai?

depends. I got my black belt at a dojo. Its company name is National Karate. Yet the style it teaches is an Americanized version of Tae Kwon Do. Furthermore, it is more of a sport version than a traditional version.

That's a bit of an oxymoron. A company whose name aligns itself with a Japanese style of martial arts, that actually teaches a Korean one.

Can you appreciate that when folks decide to take up Karate, they probably want to learn Karate? Or, do you feel that most people couldn't care less, as long as it is a martial art?

Carrying on from my question. Lets say you decided to go to Aikido. Any idea why you would pick Aikido?

Thaak wrote:[
By the way, I believe that my signature indicates what level Reiki I am.

Ahh yes. I never took much notice of it before, .

take care
Wayne

Well I like to be an informed buyer or student so to speak.

So I asked what they meant by Karate. Yes, I can be kinda blunt sometimes when I’m out shopping. They informed me that it was based on an Americanized form of Tae Kwon Do (Jhoon Rhee) from Texas (the style that Chuck Norris studied coincidentally—indeed Chuck Norris was on the black belt panel that awarded a black belt to the gentleman who is our 9th degree master.)

If I wanted traditional Karate, there are several well known schools for Kenpo Karate in the area. If I wanted traditional Tae Kwon Do, there is a school I went to several years ago (2001-2002) that I would return to. I also trained in traditional Tae Kwon Do in High School. There are also a couple Aikido and Jujitsu schools in my area as well as a couple well known Kung Fu schools.

Took me 3.5 years this iteration of my training, to get my black belt. One of the most profound accomplishments I’ve achieved in my life.

Additionally, this isn’t traditional Tae Kwon Do. It is an amalgamation of various different Karate, Tae Kwon Do, and other forms that work using Tae Kwon Do as the basis. But traditional Tae Kwon Do has a lot of high flying kicks and a ton of spins associated with it.

This particular Style that I trained in I believe is even modified from Jhoon Rhee, in that it uses more straight forward techniques and balances its entire style on the side kick rather than the round house or front kick as other styles of Tae Kwon Do do.

In the US, the term Karate has become generic for Martial Art, so an intelligent buyer would ask what style the studio teaches prior to signing up.

Can you break bricks and coconuts with your head?

I am personally good at the art of throwing rolling pins myself!!

Ready for a match?

I just recalled a convo with a martial arts teacher who said that the QiGong that's being taught here in the US is mostly 'not the original' !! he wants me to go to China if I wish to see the real one!!

Thaak wrote:

In the US, the term Karate has become generic for Martial Art..

I do find that crazy. One often picks a martial art for specific reasons. As the each offer different thing. Quite often not just physical movements. Some favour legs {Taekwon do), some favour hands, legs, elbows (Karate), some favour weapons (escrima). Some are designed for security services (Krav Maga), some are complete ways of life (Ninpo), focusing on spiritual aspects. Some are outward attacking (Muay Thai), some are defending (Aikido).

To generically label them an Okinawan Japanese 'empty-hand' style, is nuts, and really confusing, imo.

From Wikipedai on this:

Hypothetically, any unarmed combat system could accurately be called "karate" since the Japanese phrase literally means "empty hand." This is not necessarily an acceptable conclusion. To separate fact from fancy requires understanding issues of nationalism, lineage, primacy, and philosophy.

Take care
Wayne

thehungrycaterpillar wrote:Can you break bricks and coconuts with your head?

I am personally good at the art of throwing rolling pins myself!!

Ready for a match?

Nope. Chuckle…
Have to have highly specific and advanced training (or just be crazy) to do that kinda stuff.

I’m just your basic 1st degree (Dan) black belt.

Milarepa wrote:

Thaak wrote:

In the US, the term Karate has become generic for Martial Art..

I do find that crazy. One often picks a martial art for specific reasons. As the each offer different thing. Quite often not just physical movements. Some favour legs {Taekwon do), some favour hands, legs, elbows (Karate), some favour weapons (escrima). Some are designed for security services (Krav Maga), some are complete ways of life (Ninpo), focusing on spiritual aspects. Some are outward attacking (Muay Thai), some are defending (Aikido).

To generically label them an Okinawan Japanese 'empty-hand' style, is nuts, and really confusing, imo.

From Wikipedai on this:

Hypothetically, any unarmed combat system could accurately be called "karate" since the Japanese phrase literally means "empty hand." This is not necessarily an acceptable conclusion. To separate fact from fancy requires understanding issues of nationalism, lineage, primacy, and philosophy.

Take care
Wayne

It is what it is.

Since that is the way it is in the USA, and has been how it is in the USA for my entire 38 years of life, it doesn’t seem that crazy to me.

Why? Because as an intelligent consumer, I know to ask what it is I’m really getting.

Milarepa wrote:
To generically label them an Okinawan Japanese 'empty-hand' style, is nuts, and really confusing, imo.

Well, even more confusingly, it's said that originally the term Kara-te meant something like 'Chinese Fist' (The Okinawans incorporated many Chinese martial arts influences into their native 'te' fighting arts)
As an independent kingdom Okinawa had strong links with China - until the Japanese 'annexed' Okinawa in the early part of the Meiji era. After an Okinawan master was invited to give demonstrations of karate in Japan - at the request of the Emperor (?) the art gradually began to spread - however the ultra-nationalistic Japanese Government (who were very anti-'all things Chinese') weren't enamoured by the term 'Chinese Fist'.
Fortunately, with so many Japanese words having the same pronunciation, it was easy to substitute a different 'kara', and soon the term kara-te took on a new meaning: 'empty fist' or 'empty hand'.

.
.

Thaak wrote:

thehungrycaterpillar wrote:Can you break bricks and coconuts with your head?...

Have to have highly specific and advanced training (or just be crazy) to do that kinda stuff.

Like they say, If you want to break bricks, you can train hard:
four hours in the morning, four hours in the evening, every day for about ten years...


or alternatively, you can simply go to your nearest hardware store, and buy a sledgehammer...


.
.
.

Thaak wrote:
Why? Because as an intelligent consumer, I know to ask what it is I’m really getting.

What's being taught is really MMA (mixed martial arts). If things were labelled & marketed accurately, there'd be little need to ask what one is really getting, , It'd be self-evident with a cursory check. Unless of course, it's outwardly shown to be MMA.

Take care
Wayne

Rlei_ki wrote:

Milarepa wrote:
To generically label them an Okinawan Japanese 'empty-hand' style, is nuts, and really confusing, imo.

Well, even more confusingly, it's said that originally the term Kara-te meant something like 'Chinese Fist' (The Okinawans incorporated many Chinese martial arts influences into their native 'te' fighting arts)

Yeah true. It's also been suggested that Karate looks quite like Filipino martial arts?

Milarepa wrote:

Thaak wrote:
Why? Because as an intelligent consumer, I know to ask what it is I’m really getting.

What's being taught is really MMA (mixed martial arts). If things were labelled & marketed accurately, there'd be little need to ask what one is really getting, , It'd be self-evident with a cursory check. Unless of course, it's outwardly shown to be MMA.

Take care
Wayne

I'm a huge MMA fan, and I can tell you that what I trained in, is NOT MMA. I learned absolutely zero ground game and no wrestling.

If what you are referring to is MMA in the generic sense that multiple techniques from multiple cultural styles are used... I also disagree in a sense.

All good martial arts, even the traditional ones, incorporate techniques from other styles they run across, that they feel would be a good fit in their own style, that they feel would work, et. al. The natural progression of Chinese open hand and weapon martial arts into Korea and Japan means that almost all forms of eastern open hand martial arts originate in China. As such, all forms of martial arts could be said to be MMA.

I find there to be absolutely no problem with a 9th degree black belt teaching whatever techniques they want to, even if they aren't especially traditional for that particular named style. They have created their own style so to speak.

I've already explained how my style is kinda a Karate/Tae Kwon Do hybrid.

Milarepa wrote:

Rlei_ki wrote:

Milarepa wrote:
To generically label them an Okinawan Japanese 'empty-hand' style, is nuts, and really confusing, imo.

Well, even more confusingly, it's said that originally the term Kara-te meant something like 'Chinese Fist' (The Okinawans incorporated many Chinese martial arts influences into their native 'te' fighting arts)

Yeah true. It's also been suggested that Karate looks quite like Filipino martial arts?

I don't think that Penjak Silat looks anything like Karate.

Thaak wrote:

Milarepa wrote:

Rlei_ki wrote:

Milarepa wrote:
To generically label them an Okinawan Japanese 'empty-hand' style, is nuts, and really confusing, imo.

Well, even more confusingly, it's said that originally the term Kara-te meant something like 'Chinese Fist' (The Okinawans incorporated many Chinese martial arts influences into their native 'te' fighting arts)

Yeah true. It's also been suggested that Karate looks quite like Filipino martial arts?

I don't think that Penjak Silat looks anything like Karate.

Yeah, hehe, i meant to type fujian.

Thaak wrote:

Milarepa wrote:

Thaak wrote:
Why? Because as an intelligent consumer, I know to ask what it is I’m really getting.

What's being taught is really MMA (mixed martial arts). If things were labelled & marketed accurately, there'd be little need to ask what one is really getting, , It'd be self-evident with a cursory check. Unless of course, it's outwardly shown to be MMA.

Take care
Wayne

I'm a huge MMA fan, and I can tell you that what I trained in, is NOT MMA. I learned absolutely zero ground game and no wrestling.

If what you are referring to is MMA in the generic sense that multiple techniques from multiple cultural styles are used... I also disagree in a sense.

As such, all forms of martial arts could be said to be MMA.

Perhaps they could. Yet, imo, there was more usefulness in Bruce Lee naming JKD, than simply suggesting it is Kung Fu, (shrug).

MMA is a relatively modern term to describe a realtively modern phenonemon. Not learning ground work does not mean it's not MMA, per se. It's only in recent times fighters have choose, and found success in using 4 main aspects. And really, they call it MMA themselves. MMA is, by obvious definition a mixture of martial arts. the mixture is up to who is teaching, and who is learning ultimately.

Thaak wrote:
I find there to be absolutely no problem with a 9th degree black belt teaching whatever techniques they want to, even if they aren't especially traditional for that particular named style. They have created their own style so to speak.

Of course, but does that make it Karate? There's absolutely no problem with anyone creating their own style, i've had tuition in Chum sut (his own style), (the founder being a Vale Tudo world champion), and found it really cool, .

If however, i amalgamate aspects of JKD, Muay Thai, and Karate, and then tell everyone it's Karate, that doesn't mean it is Karate. Just because i say so, .

Take care
Wayne

Milarepa wrote:
It's a relatively modern term to describe a realtively modern phenonemon. Not learning ground work does not mean it's not MMA, per se. The Graicie family dominated since early 1900's mainly with groundwork, though now, since early 1990's a more comprehensive approach seems to work. MMA is, by obvious definition a mixture of martial arts. the mixture is up to who is teaching, and who is learning ultimately.

But in the USA, there are dojos and studios opening up that specifically teach MMA. You learn the comprehensiveness of all the styles and how best to use them to combat the alternate style. Typically you will have instructors in Boxing, Muay Thai (kick boxing), Wrestling, and Ju Jitsu (most often the Brazilian variety). If a school were to label itself an MMA studio, the expectation would be that people would learn to succeed in a modern MMA match.

Milarepa wrote:

Thaak wrote:
I find there to be absolutely no problem with a 9th degree black belt teaching whatever techniques they want to, even if they aren't especially traditional for that particular named style. They have created their own style so to speak.

Of course, but does that make it Karate? There's absolutely no problem with anyone creating their own style, i've had tuition in Chum sut (his own style), (the founder being a Vale Tudo world champion), and found it really cool, .

If however, i amalgamate aspects of JKD, Muay Thai, and Karate, and then tell everyone it's Karate, that doesn't mean it is Karate. Just because i say so, .

Take care
Wayne

Yes. Just like Kung Fu has 20 million (probably an exaggeration, but not by much) different styles, and yet still calls itself Kung Fu, if the style is based and has overriding influence from one particular style, calling it that is not the issue.

Obviously, if a studio advertises Aikido, and you go and find out you are learning Kenpo Karate, that's an issue. But if you go to learn Aikido, and that particular sensei incorporates hopkido, judo, and some jujitsu, that isnt' an issue at all. You are learning Aikido with elements from other styles. Absolutely nothing wrong with this.

Not to mention, that the martial art has been misnamed. Aikido is actually the spiritual practice while Aikijutso would be the martial art. But even you called it Aikido.

The traditional Tae Kwon Do I took in High School was definitely a Tae Kwon Do studio. We had to learn some Korean terminology, traditioinal Tae Kwon Do maneuvers and techniques, and even to some extent Korean cultural discipline and philosophy (although this was understated.) They did incorporate Hopkido (joint locks), Judo (throws), Kung Fu (some circular blocks and some forms of flying spin kicks). Yet, it was a Tae Kwon Do school.

There is no problem with learning extra material, especially when it ultimately creates a better, more rounded, martial artist.

Bruce Lee had the right idea. Those martial arts masters who were so embroiled in tradition, had become stagnant and their styles were becoming stagnant. He went on to prove such with his new style he'd created, before he was assassinated.

Thaak wrote:

Milarepa wrote:



If however, i amalgamate aspects of JKD, Muay Thai, and Karate, and then tell everyone it's Karate, that doesn't mean it is Karate. Just because i say so, .

Take care
Wayne

Yes. Just like Kung Fu has 20 million (probably an exaggeration, but not by much) different styles, and yet still calls itself Kung Fu, if the style is based and has overriding influence from one particular style, calling it that is not the issue.

Perhaps, i could accept that's a gray area. What i do find strange is your own example, in that a Karate school is actually based on Tae Kwon do, yet still outwardly says it's Karate. Going by your above quote, should it not be labelled as Tae Kwon do then?

Thaak wrote:
Not to mention, that the martial art has been misnamed. Aikido is actually the spiritual practice while Aikijutso would be the martial art. But even you called it Aikido.

Are you refering to Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu, which Morihei Ueshiba was a student of?

I call it Aikido, since the Aikido world headquarters, which is recoqnised by the Japanese government ( Aikikai Foundation) calls it Aikido also.

Thaak wrote:
Bruce Lee had the right idea. ...before he was assassinated.

I'm interested in what you can say about this. I've no opinion either way, but i'm all into conspiracies, hehe. .

Take care
Wayne

I’m not sure the exact reason why Pat Worley, John Worley (the grand master of my school), Larry Carnahan and the other one (forget his name right now as he’s not associated with the school today —www.nationalkarate.com has some good info) chose the word Karate.

My conjecture is that it was during a time frame where the term Karate was more widely known than Tae Kwon Do, and as such, they used the term Karate as a marketing ploy.

But for whatever its worth, there are two things to note:

1) National Karate associates itself with the North American Sport Karate Association (NASKA) and puts on the crown jewel tournament, the Diamond Nationals ever year. The traditional Tae Kwon Do schools typically do not attend the NASKA events or the NCKA (North Central Karate Association) events. So National Karate associates itself with the Karate schools nation wide, rather than the Tae Kwon Do schools.

2) The style I learned between 2004 and present is similar, but has some significant differences to the traditional Tae Kwon Do training I had between 1987 and 1989.

Thaak wrote:..My conjecture is that it was during a time frame where the term Karate was more widely known than Tae Kwon Do, and as such, they used the term Karate as a marketing ploy...

Or perhaps they were simply using the term 'Karate' by way of analogy.

Back in the day (Ye gods, did I really just say that?! I've definitely been watching far too many imported US crime series )

ahem;

many years ago, (early 70's ) when here in the UK, primarily thanks to the Bruce Lee movies, the term "kung fu" was slowly beginning to find its way into general conversations about fighting, I remember on several occasions hearing someone - in response to the common question: "kung fu - whats the heck's that?" reply something to the effect of:
"well, you know what Karate is?, well its a bit like Karate - only Chinese, not Japanese"

In fact its possible the analogy might have stuck and we might all have adopted the descriptive term: "Chinese Karate"

Instead though, we all knew better, didn't we - we called it "kung fu"
- only that's even more of a misnomer for the art than "Chinese Karate" would have been...

Nope. Chuckle…

Andy is a scaredy cat,
Andy is a affraidy cat!



I can take a coconut, wrap it up in a towel and slug people, can you do that???
( Saw it in a movie!
added inference:- Coconuts are weapons. It can be used for chutneys and before making chutneys can be used as weapons too! )

ROFL, I find this off topic very funny!

Have to have highly specific and advanced training (or just be crazy) to do that kinda stuff.

Movies are full of lies. ( pout)
c'mon, didn't you ever try something crazy??

I’m just your basic 1st degree (Dan) black belt.

Isn't black belt a big deal?? what are you talking about?

Don't you do that spin and break a board -thingy?

I have this incredible urge to mock 'fence fight' every time I see an umbrella!
specially the really big ones...
I once tried it on a beautiful, sunny day on a beautiful lawn when visiting Europe, it was so much fun.

and

One of these days, I want to slice a full watermelon.......

thehungrycaterpillar wrote:

Nope. Chuckle…

Andy is a scaredy cat,
Andy is a affraidy cat!

My nope was bout breakin a brick on my head! Ouch!

I'll spar anyone, any day of the week. I am pretty good by the way (consistently won under belt competitions.)

thehungrycaterpillar wrote:
I can take a coconut, wrap it up in a towel and slug people, can you do that???
( Saw it in a movie!
added inference:- Coconuts are weapons. It can be used for chutneys and before making chutneys can be used as weapons too! )

ROFL, I find this off topic very funny!

hehe

thehungrycaterpillar wrote:

Have to have highly specific and advanced training (or just be crazy) to do that kinda stuff.

Movies are full of lies. ( pout)
c'mon, didn't you ever try something crazy??

Yes, but not usually involving something that would intentionally cause myself pain.

thehungrycaterpillar wrote:

I’m just your basic 1st degree (Dan) black belt.

Isn't black belt a big deal?? what are you talking about?

Don't you do that spin and break a board -thingy?

Funny thing about that, is my current style doesn't do any board breaking at all. But I was doing spin hook kick and jumping back-leg round house breaks in High School at blue belt.

thehungrycaterpillar wrote:I have this incredible urge to mock 'fence fight' every time I see an umbrella!
specially the really big ones...
I once tried it on a beautiful, sunny day on a beautiful lawn when visiting Europe, it was so much fun.

and

One of these days, I want to slice a full watermelon.......

I kinda feel the same way when I see a big debarked stick laying on the ground. My friends (or when I have a significant other) don't usually like partaking in that play though.

Rlei_ki wrote:

Thaak wrote:..My conjecture is that it was during a time frame where the term Karate was more widely known than Tae Kwon Do, and as such, they used the term Karate as a marketing ploy...

Or perhaps they simply using the term 'Karate' by way of analogy.

Back in the day (Ye gods, did I really just say that?! I've definitely been watching far too many imported US crime series )

ahem;

many years ago, (early 70's ) when here in the UK, primarily thanks to the Bruce Lee movies, the term "kung fu" was slowly beginning to find its way into general conversations about fighting, I remember on several occasions hearing someone - in response to the common question: "kung fu - whats the heck's that?" reply something to the effect of:
"well, you know what Karate is?, well its a bit like Karate - only Chinese, not Japanese"

In fact its possible the analogy might have stuck and we might all have adopted the descriptive term: "Chinese Karate"

Instead though, we all knew better, didn't we - we called it "kung fu"
- only that's even more of a misnomer for the art than "Chinese Karate" would have been...

It's maybe a weakness of mine this. I can't seem to get my head around the belief that a teacher should first of all know exactly what it is they are teaching. That's a primary aspect of being a teacher, one you get to the level of teaching, or at least, should be.

And secondly, label it accurately. Be it, a mixture of various arts, or a mainstream one, but simply call it what it really is.

Take care
Wayne

Milarepa wrote:

It's maybe a weakness of mine this. I can't seem to get my head around the belief that a teacher should first of all know exactly what it is they are teaching. That's a primary aspect of being a teacher, one you get to the level of teaching, or at least, should be.

And secondly, label it accurately. Be it, a mixture of various arts, or a mainstream one, but simply call it what it really is.

Take care
Wayne

I think you are thinking too much about it to be honest. I earned a black belt in a martial art, which was fairly similar to one I really enjoyed in high school.

If they called it something completely different than what it was, I'd see your point. But Karate or Tae Kwon Do are similar enough (unless you start getting into things like Kenpo Karate, then its fairly different) that I don't think whether its called by a Japanese name or a Korean one is significant in this case.

Just the same way if I use Chakra instead of Seika Tanden (to bring things full circle... hehe).

Thaak wrote:

Milarepa wrote:

It's maybe a weakness of mine this. I can't seem to get my head around the belief that a teacher should first of all know exactly what it is they are teaching. That's a primary aspect of being a teacher, one you get to the level of teaching, or at least, should be.

And secondly, label it accurately. Be it, a mixture of various arts, or a mainstream one, but simply call it what it really is.

Take care
Wayne

I think you are thinking too much about it to be honest.

Yeah, you told me that before. And like i replied before, maybe you're thinking too little?

Thaak wrote:
If they called it something completely different than what it was, I'd see your point. But Karate or Tae Kwon Do are similar enough (unless you start getting into things like Kenpo Karate, then its fairly different) that I don't think whether its called by a Japanese name or a Korean one is significant in this case.

then i'll illustrate my point better, .

It's not only the name that's different. Tae Kwon do, is some 70% leg work. and this is what distinguishes it greatly from Karate, or southern Kung fu.

In fact, the WTF (World TaeKwondo Federation) say TKD is very different from many oriental martial arts. They're the offical governing body, recoqnised by the Korean government.

Tae Kwon do was the first martial art i ever went to learn, i've a great affinity with it. It's true General Choi initially taught his soldiers Karate, yet he wanted to devlop a martial art, supperior in spirit and technique. whcih he done in 1955.

I can't comment on what you have learned, but having had tuition in this, and two forms of Karate, and knowing what's said officially, TaeKwondo is much different from Karate. Or at least, should be. You obviously won't take my word for it, so go check out the WTF, or better stil ask them if it's different than Karate. .


you might wanna check out.... http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1111801/karate_tae_kwon_do_same_difference.html

Thaak wrote:
Just the same way if I use Chakra instead of Seika Tanden (to bring things full circle... hehe).

you're entitled to call it a tractor wheel, if you feel so inclined personally, . Though Takata sensei still didn't teach the chakra system. It's not being suggested that svadhisthana doesn't exist, only that in Usui Reiki that Indian system wasn't taught.

Take care
Wayne

Wayne, there is more than one type of Karate.

Ishinryu(sp?)
Kenpo
Shotokan(sp?)

all different types of Karate. To say that Tae Kwon Do is different from Karate across all types of Karate I think is thinking all Karate is the same.

Indeed even all Tae Kwon Do isn't necessarily the same either.

And please don't tell me I don't know what Tae Kwon Do is. I studied traditional Tae Kwon Do for 2 years in High School. I know what its like.

The style I am currently training in is not the Tae Kwon Do I studied in high school, even though the basis for the style was Jhoon Rhee Tae Kwon Do. I don't know how Jhoon Rhee Tae Kwon Do differs specifically from the I.J. Kim Tae Kwon Do I took in high school.

The master, during tests and screenings, still uses Korean counting and commands.

But the style of martial arts I earned my black belt in has significant differences that can mostly be attributed to a Karate styling.

More direct attacks rather than some of the circular attacks you often see in Tae Kwon Do. The back punch is highly emphasized. You also see a complete thrust of the hip and twist of the back foot on the ball of the foot when punching, which in Tae Kwon Do, while you did see the use of the torso, hip and a twist, you didn't see that much emphasis on the pivot of the back foot. The kick mostly emphasized in the style I take is the front leg side kick. A quick chamber from the floor to knee pulled back past the midline of your torso and leg held parallel to the floor at just above waist height, and then thrust straight outward connecting with the heel into your target. The back foot pivots to point away from your target and you thrust your hips along the line of your knee.

None of these techniques are Tae Kwon Do in origin. Tae Kwon Do uses mostly dramatic flip kicks and snap kicks, emphasizing the round house kick.

So what ended up happening, and I'll have to go verify this with one of my instructors, is a Tae Kwon Do base was modified with Karate techniques, and the school chose to call itself a Karate studio based on this, and probably the marketing factor I mentioned earlier.

But while what I'm taking is based in Tae Kwon Do, it is not traditional Tae Kwon Do.

From a marketing standpoint, you don't make up a new name, "Worley Te" and become a successful 23 schools (20 in the Twin Cities--Greater Minneapolis/St. Paul footprint and 2 in Chicago and 1 in Ohio.) Are they gipping their students because they think they are taking Karate and it really is some hybrid based on Tae Kwon Do?

Depends on your viewpoint I suppose. The thousands who have taken classes at National Karate, and the thousands who have become black belts and gone on to successful personal lives, careers, educations, and athletes probably wouldn't think they were gipped at all. If you are going into a situation looking for something very specific, and you actually have the knowledge to know when you aren't getting what you are specifically looking for (I'd wager that you aren't looking for something that specific unless you do have that knowledge), then you'll find out by talking to the instructor, asking a few pointed questions, and spending 20 minutes out of your day watching a class. All free except for the 20 minutes you spent.

But then, if you are looking for something that specific, my guess is you aren't going to the corner "Karate" studio. You look online or in the phone book for terms like...

Shotokan, Kenpo, Wing Chung, Kung Fu, Traditional Tae Kwon Do, Aikido, Jujitsu, etc.

If you stop off at the local "Karate" studio, chances are you are just looking for a place to train in some martial arts, have fun, get in shape, lose some weight, and enjoy yourself.

I have tried studios in the past, and absolutely hated them. They were traditional Tae Kwon Do. I didn't hate them because they taught differently than what I learned in High School, but because I thought the instructor wasn't a very good instructor and was more worried about being in control, than teaching his students.

I got nothing to say for once....