"Fraud arts", I see this all the time. What are the "fraud arts", in your opinion?

We all know who uses that phrase often to describe certain martial arts. In over 46 years of being involved with the martial arts I have never seen a Fraudulent martial art. However, I have seen many fraudulent instructors and even more that are not frauds, but are just not good or knowledgeable.

Note that the use of fraudulent arts is never done by anyone that is respected here as having 20 or more years of training in any recognized martial art style. It is the guys that have a tiny bit of training in some school of which we know nothing as to if the training was legit or not. Note that some of these guys say they trained X number of years in a traditional style. They say that like we should accept it as them being knowledgeable about the art. But then they also admit that those years of training started at 6 years of age. Now honestly, at what age is the average kid mature enough to get anything out of the training? Even more at what point and age are they beginning to really understand the style they are doing? When you see someone trash any martial arts style by saying it is fraudulent or not effective, consider who is saying it.

...

I am not aware of any fraud arts.

I am aware of some supposedly self-defense courses that the only thing that they teach are stuff like the defender is supposed to kick in the groin and then run or something and stuff like this, accompanied with lots and only, fear lust theories, that people obviously do not need a course to learn those stuff...Those can even hinder the ability of people rather than enhance it.

Other then that, I do not know any art that can be considered as fraud....We are talking about an art how is supposedly to be, with its movements, its concepts, its training methods e.t.c or a good transition of it from country to country, or individual to individual, always with the necessary flexibility and what is appropriate for each individual. Like that no I don't know any.

I'm inclined to agree, to some extent. Pretty obviously, there are things in the martial arts field that are, to be charitable....Unproven. Or to be snarky.... Nonsense.

Things like "kiajutsu" or "pressure point knockouts".

However, these things are pretty rare and also pretty quickly unmasked. Of more concern, as the other posts indicate, is unqualified and fraudulent teachers who purport to teach a system without being in the least way qualified to do so.

I've been around long enough to recall the first "kung fu craze".... When there was virtually no kung fu instruction at all in the states and then the David Carradine TV series became a big hit and all of a sudden hundreds of schools around the country hung out "kung fu taught here" signs and started teaching people.

Obviously these people were just cashing in on the craze... They bought a couple of books from Ohara Publications and Zip!...Instant kung fu.

Likewise the Ninja craze that came along a few years later. At the time the ONLY authorized teacher in the whole US was Stephen Hayes. Yet dozens (or hundreds) of schools sprang up all over the country.

I saw a grossly-obese woman teaching eager 12-year-olds "ninjutsu" locally out of a garage....

That's fraud.

I don't use the phrase, and so I can only guess at the usage. Fraud means to deceive, and so, a style built to deceive others would be the meaning. I can think of no style built on the premise of defrauding its students - either technically or financially.

Some quick thoughts would be ninjutsu, wushu, and krav maga, considering there are many schools that teach them, yet few are legitimate. But this isn't the style's fault - it's the instructor. So no fraud styles here.

Another quick thought would be BJJ, marketed as a way to handle the 90% of fights that go to the ground. The marketing may be fradulent, but the style itself is sound. And not all instructors spout this statistic. So no fraud style here, either.

Another thought might be ATA Taekwondo. There isn't any marketing claims here, nor is the style's raison d'etre meant to defraud its students, despite the contracts and fast pace nature of its advancement. And deception and fraud committed can only come from the instruction, not the style. So again, no fraud style here, either.

I would have to say that anyone labelling a style as a fraud is either using it to disparage a particular school, or is ignorant. As to ignorance, only one's motives can provide answers: it could be unfamiliarity with the style, it could be because of few observations of legitimate practitioners, it could be a bad experience with a school. It could be many reasons.

There are no fraud arts, only fraudsters - the instructors.

It's someone whining who got ripped off by a con artist/martial arts teacher because they did not do their homework/read the small print before throwing money at it and now don't want to look stupid/take responsibility for it. So they blame something/someone else to make themselves feel better.

It's someone lazy who didn't try hard or came to class with an attitude that they knew it all already and are better than everybody and don't want to take responsibility for it. So they blame something/someone else to make themselves feel better.

The only real 'fraud arts' I have seen were the ones developed by individuals with the purpose to deceive people and take their money. They use parts of the real thing to give it a real appearance and the illusion of authority. Kind of like some religious cults are run. Other than that it is people defrauding people and people not paying attention and then blaming something else.

There is no such thing.

There are people that aren't good teachers. There are schools that rip people off. You also have poor instructors. There are people that attempt to reinvent the wheel by combining several arts. It is a waste in most cases, but as long as they are teaching good techniques you can still benefit from it. There are those that are teaching that are not qualified, but the art itself is not a fraud There are people that teach watered down martial arts. But no such thing as a fraud art.

Fraudulent art is a term created by someone that want to put down what others do in oder tp make themselves look legit or greater.

Edit:

i just want to respond to something said by Jacob. A soft art is not a bad term. It refers to an internal art. It is an art that teach you to yield instead of meet force with greater force. One art that should have been mentioned in this category that wasn't but it is popular in mma is judo.Judo when done and or taught correctly you do not use any force. You use the attackers momentum against them. What Jacob sees as flaws aren't actually flaws. It is Jacob lack of understand of those arts. This is not a jab at Jacob. I couldn't point a finger at him without pointing one at myself. I once saw obvious flaws in different arts/styles. I later found out the only flaw was in my level of understanding. I was ignorant to what was being accomplished in those arts and the techniques in how they were being used. After learning more and experiencing the effectiveness of these things I became enlightened of my own ignorance.

A person trained in Kajukenbo for about 6 months. He learns 2 katas and about 15 self-defense techniques. He opens up a school. He trains people who open up chains of schools. They claim that their roots are from Kajukenbo. They are notorious for being McDojos.

I won't name any names. But the Top Contributors consider these arts to be McDojos and tell any who asks to stay away from them.

I consider these particular martial arts to be "fraud arts" because they are riding on the reputation of a legitimate martial art and operating McDojos.

There are no such things as fraud arts. All arts are inherently good and effective.

There are bad teachers, bad schools, practitioners that refuse to learn and blame the style for it, McDojos, people that water down martial arts but the art itself is not watered down, etc.

'Fraudulent arts' do not exist.

Every art I know of definently has something to offer. In my opinion some have more to offer than others. The arts I feel have less to offer are the "soft" arts; aikido, tai chi, certain Forms of Kung fu. I know calling them soft by definition is incorrect but you know what I'm refurring to. Every art is made by people and not perfect divine beings so it is highly improbable that every martial art is equal when taught right. I would love break down the flaws I see in certain arts but I don't have the time.

i find it funny how they were legitimate arts 10 or 20 years ago now there fraud arts.

arts are not frauds people are