Note: I wrote this essay regarding the development of Tekkenryu jujutsu. However, I think it is applicable for all methods of self defense. It may also explain why martial arts are the way they are.

Catholic, by definition, means universal or "broad minded".

I could pull out STACKS of manuals, syllabuses, films, and related research material that cover an ENTIRE range of unarmed combat.

Some methods advocate wrestling as their base, others use boxing or savate. Some jujutsu and judo while others call their systems "rough and tumble" or "all in", and there is even a system based on American SPORTS. I have an old manual on YOGA for self defense. The material ranges from current to OLD, some very old.

These varied systems have everything! Striking and kicking methods drawn from EVERY method and "nationality", GRAPPLING methods from Lutte to Judo, from Sambo to All-In Wrestling. They range from standing to the ground; all aspects, all methods.

The guys in our crew have trained in an impressive array of systems and methods. They have a fantastic "pool" of knowledge, SKILL, and TRAINING to draw from.

OKAY, so WHAT? See if this makes sense............

Damian, Clint, and I worked out a comprehensive syllabus of instruction. It is based on a catholic approach to combatives. We drew these methods from a number of varied sources and training. The problem as we saw it was in the PROGRESSION of instruction. Here's how we attempted to solve this fundamental problem:

Very few individuals will start so-called "martial arts" instruction or training and stay with it for any real length of time. Many combative skills are JUST that, SKILLS! They require dedicated time and training to inculcate to the extent that they will be "useful" in a REAL fight or even in a controlled "free sparring" environment.

Japanese Judoka have a saying - "One year for Newaza, TEN years for Tachiwaza". In other words, proficiency in groundwork can be gained in a year, standing techniques require ten. So, here we see an acknowledgement that "different" SKILLS require varied amounts of TIME, TRAINING, and DEDICATION.

So that was our problem. MOST people will simply NOT invest the time and effort to "master" MANY of the skills involved. MOST people will "train" for a limited amount of time and then move on to the next "thing" that catches their interest.

What then is OUR responsibility as "instructors"? What we did is set a curriculum that takes this into account. The syllabus, for the first three to six months, includes NOTHING but the most BASIC, easily UNDERSTOOD, SIMPLEST METHODS of EFFECTIVE PERSONAL PROTECTION. Someone can train for a limited time AND still get something USEFUL in terms of "SKILL". What was our basis on selection of "method