Is a school that teaches more than one system, or a combined system automatically a "McDojo"?

"McDojo" was a coined termed primarily on the website and forums of http://www.bullshido.com/ they were one of the first places that really took a concentrated look at people who were outright frauds in the Martial Arts community.

In general it was a place that had poor quality instruction and was geared towards making money. I.e. teaching soccer moms and kids watered down Martial Arts that wasn't overly hard and handed out belts like candy for a fee.

So going through your list:

1. Define "extensive" background, I have 2 Black belts, hold rank in quite a few systems (including IKMF Krav Maga), fought amateur and professionally, but I don't consider myself as having an "extensive" background. Dan Inosanto, Don Draeger, those are guys I consider to have an "extensive" background. Guys who hold mid to high level dan rankings from known organizations in multiple Martial Arts. Some other guys in specific aspects, Erik Paulson for example I would consider his rank and experience as being pretty extensive. In general guys who have real extensive backgrounds tend to be rather well known, well respected, and older. I don't consider someone showing other aspects of arts they have trained in, but if he is listing that as a qualifier for his experience and as a selling point, and as a curriculum I would be wary of that. Nothing wrong with say showing some Judo techniques to your Karate class as something to help them. But if you market yourself as a style that "combines" Judo and Karate, and you don't have extensive background in both... that is a warning sign to me.

I teach striking techniques from boxing and muay thai, and how to close distance, ground based striking, striking defense, leg locks, spine cranks, neck cranks, wrist locks, etc. to my Judo students... but I make no bones that my schools is called a Judo school, I don't market the other things, they are just things to help my students in general. I encourage them to seek qualified teachers in other aspects such as boxing.

However if I called my school Judomofojitsu, "combining MMA, Krav Maga, Judo, BJJ, Sambo ,Kyokushin, Hapkido, Tomiki Aikido and Catch Wrestling into one dynamic style that well teach you TRUE Self Defense"... then I am beginning to wander into bullshidoka, mcdojo territory.

2. Again, if he is making his own style, marketing it as such. I'd be wary personally, unless the guy has not only achieved mid dan ranking (3rd degree or above), certification in those styles, and proven experience in each of those styles he is combining... again that seems odd. I'd be wary of anyone teaching something that combined Judo who doesn't have a known competition record, and a known record of coaching Judo on its own for sometime. Look at MMA schools, they combine their style by bringing in coaches with experience in 1 style... specialists. Students learn from each of the specialists and combine it for an in the ring sport.

3. So there is a difference between a bullshidoka, and a McDojo. But again what is the qualification for the "practicality and effectiveness" is this person a former LEO who has been in countless physical encounters.. is he someone who came from a high crime/war torn area where his style has been proven to work and sought out. Focusing on "real world" application is always shakey ground. Define real world... does it involve eye gouging, and things too unsafe to spar? Does it go through de-escalation techniques, recognizing body language, improvised weaponry, complying with armed attackers, reacting to getting sucker punched, fighting hurt? Or does it focus on pre choreographed drills with one or two attackers coming straight at you. "real world" unarmed techniques are largely unnecessary, and less efficient then being competently trained with fire arms, edged and improvised weapons. Real world is very little physical conflict ever, and even that is largely avoided... "genuinely qualified"... by who? by what standards? "it works"... sure in what aspects... a success story here or there also comes from extremely weak watered down self defense courses. Those have more to do with the individual then their training.

Just food for thought.

4. That doesn't make a McDojo, but if someone was genuinely interested only in people getting techniques that worked for them from multiple styles, they would have experienced instructors in each of those multiple styles working with him and his students. At the very least seminars. Because of my background and having competed in Sambo, I could say that I do Sambo and teach people what worked for ME from Sambo. However, I am not genuinely qualified, because some other technique or methodology for the particular technique I am showing might work better or differently for another person or body type. I would bring in a Sambo coach who has spent decades teaching Sambo to help a student adjust a technique or use an entirely different technique for their body style. I lack the experience to determine what works best for EVERYONE.. I only know what works best for ME, aside from the styles I have spent YEARS coaching.

5. Again schools that train more than 1 style aren't Mcdojos, teachers that teach more than one style aren't "Mcteachers" but there are "Bullshidokas" as in people who have some limited experience in other styles (not nearly enough to be authoritative on them) and MARKET themselves as utilizing that experience to "provide proven real world effectiveness".. it might not even really be an intentionally misleading thing as it can be someone who is just misguided, doing what they think is best. Like I said, I have no problem showing techniques from other arts, I just don't market that as a system, they are just additionally techniques I show. I don't call it something different, I don't use it as a selling point, I stay within the style I am a certified coach in and show these other techniques to help expose my students to it, and help them be well rounded. If they want true striking, I point them to certified, experienced striking coaches/Senseis.

Mcdojo is more of a term of McDonalds of Martial Arts... most McDojos do teach just one style.

Bullshidoka is someone who embellishes their credentials, (for example claiming an extensive background, when they just have some limited exposure to other arts), and marketing themselves based off of embellished credentials.

Learning more than 1 style is great. But you should learn each style from someone who has been doing those styles for YEARS. Someone who has dabbled in other styles can certainly show what they learned from that, but it is merely information and something that worked for them. There also stands a chance that they are going to teach it wrong and not understand the fundamentals of that technique properly. Therefore not really something they should be marketing as part of a complete style of their own.

Just my two cents.

No, that is not the case.

First of all, it depends on how you define "mcdojo". I think of Mcdojo as being a school entirely focused on making a lot of money. They give frequent and expensive belt gradings, usually have long term, expensive contracts, and, above all, teach no quality of martial arts whatsoever.

There are plenty of good schools that teach multiple styles, or a combination of styles, etc. Also like Kokoro said many styles were created by combining other styles. Also like others have said, you can't have one instructor teaching a bunch styles. That's just a jack of of trades, teaching little from a lot of styles, but not being very good at one thing, and martial arts in general. In order to teach a style, you need to really know it, and that require your primary dedication to that one art.

Another thing, a lot of people are so quick to slap the word "McDojo" on any school that seems bad. McDojos are extreme cases, with the stuff mentioned above. There are few things that are, for the most part, automatically McDojos. The ATA is an example. But not all bad schools are McDojos. There are plenty of bad schools that are not "McDojo-like" at all, they're just bad in quality. Again, not many things are automatically McDojos.

In the end, all it comes down to is the instructor and the student.

Not necessarily of course, but when someone walks or drives and sees a martial arts school and the school says Aikido, Karate, TKD, BJJ, Kickboxing, Boxing and another 4-5 styles or combat sports, while it is as big as an apartment.......that does not really attracts him/her to check it out. That is the truth:)

It's not a matter if it is a Mcdojo or not..It's a matter if someone wants to learn a specific style, most probably he/she will find a place that they teach and focus on that specific style and not in 10 of them..

Now if someone wants only self-defense and nothing else and he/she does not care to learn a specific style, then he/she can find someone with an extensive successful real experience to teach him/her that even if that person is an ex-thug, an ex-mafia, an ex warrior of any kind, who cares?.

People normally care to learn a specific style from a good instructor of that specif style, in a good, healthy and friendly environment, to have fun and to improve. That is the case of average people doing martial arts.

So....:)

To me a good teacher is one who is able to teach his students in a way that they can understand and grow in. If they are teaching multiple styles, but their students are very capable of handling themselves in a fight and hard continuous sparring, I think that they are good teachers. To me it doesn't depend on the style or styles, it depends upon the results and ease with which the students gain those results. I believe a "McDojo" is a school that doesn't care about the quality of the students and advances them without their skill truly growing in fighting and self defense situations.

So basically as long as the teachers know how to teach well and consistently produce skilled fighters than I don't care if they did it by teaching one or multiple styles. They are good teachers and they have good students that can defend themselves well and fight in any situation and that's pretty much what it boils down to.

-----

"My focus has always been to learn a much as possible from as many systems as I come in contact with, and use it to develop an eclectic system of self defense that individuals can shape to their personal expression (ala Bruce Lee)."

I completely agree with you here. That is what I also do with every martial art as well. Though I am trying to keep it so I have a strong base with one and then off-shooting anything that works well for me from that base. (Which I don't have as much as I'd like due to moving and finances and whatnot.)

The pejorative term "McDojo" refers to an outfit that is primarily geared to making money, and in which the level and quality of instruction is highly suspect.

Features often include such things as binding contracts, guarantees of rank by certain dates, things like that.

Just because multiple styles are taught is not relevant; PROVIDED the instructors are certified and competent.

There is also nothing wrong with an individual of sufficient background teaching a synthesized system of his/her own, again provided the person is actually competent and techniques taught are effective.

That's a time-honored method... It's what Bruce Lee did....

If an individual claims to be teaching a particular style....he should have certification of qualification in that style. A certificate from the Shotokan or something similar. This should be checkable.... You should be able to write or e-mail the organization and see that the fellow didn't just get his certificate from Kinkos......

It's rare that Someone under 50 can grasp and be able to teach mote than one style well. This is because if your getting a third Dan or equivalent which is an acceptable ranking to think about starting to teach it takes about 1600 hours of on mat experience. Then you need advanced medical , coaching and social/knowledge skills. Once you get the coaching stuff you don't need to get it again just stay up to date. Basically what I'm saying is I won't learn under anyone who doesnt live and breath there art and has for a long Time. self defense is its own thing I don't buy into modern self defense for various reasons and never will so I don't speak on it. It's actually not that complex if your training in more than one style its usually good to have more than one teacher that lives an breaths his or her art. If you want muck around with self defense with relatively new organizations that's your choice. It's a mc dojo in my thought if there not got atleast 1000 hours on mat experanice.

I think there are some good answers here.

teaching multiple styles doesn't make a school a mcdojo. But if the school has one instructor that claims to be a master in 7 styles and is teaching them all it is highly probably it is a mcdojo. If the instructor is under 40 and claim to be an 8th Dan it is a mcdojo. If the school has 8 year old black belts it is a mcdojo. If the average time to get a black belt is 2 years it is a mcdojo. If the pass out rank like people do candy at Halloween it is a mcdojo. If they guarantee you a black belt for any reason it is a mcdojo. That system is so watered down that everyone can get a black belt.

I know you asked Shaeeck, but I will respond too. No blue belt should be teaching as the lead instructor to anyone. That is not to say they don't have some knowledge to share with others, but this should only be done under the guidance of a qualified instructor. A 1st Dan should not be teaching without being under the guidance of a qualified instructor.

All of these things point to the quality of instruction and maintaining high standards.

Just because the instructor ha a 7th Dan doesn't mean they aren't operating a mcdojo. I met a guy that is at least a 9th Dan in TKD some years ago. He might have been a 7th or 8th then. It was more than 20 years ago. His schools are mcdojo/mcdojang. He has qualification or so his website says he does.

Internationally Certified First Class Referee, Instructor & Examiner

Highest Rank - 9th Degree Black Belt

Taught Special Forces in Korea, Europe, Hong Kong & 22 other countries

Over 30 years experience

* 1979 thru 1982 AAU Regional 8 states Chairman

* 1982 Director, U.S. Junior Olympic Championships

* 1985 Master-of-the-Year from World Martial Arts Federation

* 1988 U.S. Olympic Delegate for Taekwondo Team

* 1989 U.S. Head of Team of 1st International Junior Olympics

* 1990 Head of U.S. Senior National Team for 9th World Championships, Seoul, Korea

* 1992 Head of U.S. Collegiate Team, 3rd World University Championships,

Guadalajara, Mexico

* 1994 Local Sports Coordinator, U.S. Olympic Festival, St. Louis, MO

* 1995 Featured on the cover of the Taekwondo Times Magazine

* 1992- Present President of Missouri Taekwondo Association

He tries to lock you into long term contract. Red flag.

He guaranteed me a black belt in 1 year RED FlAG

It cost more to be in that black belt club Red flag

He tried to use high pressure sales techniques to get me to join

Motivation was money over teaching good martial arts.

His school could only compete in one tournament a year against student from one of his other 4 schools. RED FLAG

what is your definition of a mcdojo?

i have never read anywhere that a qualification of a mcdojo is teaching multiple styles. by definition a mcdojo is out to rip people off, they have bad techniques, there focus is not on self defense or sparing, they dont care about the quality of the student only how much they can make.

every style of karate is made up of multiple styles at least 3 in some case as many as 8 to 20 different styles. many of the tae kwon do styles are the same as well. by your definition they are all mcdojo's, which is far from the truth.

Not if the person instructing in the art is qualified to be teaching in each of the styles which they are teaching. I am qualified to be teaching GJJ and MT so if i teach in them i am able to do so, but if i then decide well damn i had 6 months of TKD so i can teach something from that too then thats a joke. This is what many people do.

No Blue belt should be teaching a style because they dont even understand it themselves. I could twist a blue belt in knots in less than 15 seconds, so what makes them think they have the knowledge to be teaching it to someone else?

EDIT>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Would a blue belt be better than an inexperienced person, absolutely, does a blue belt have the knowledge and understandings of why we do certain things and how they are done? sometimes - are they qualified to teach them? NO - this is like a first aid officer performing surgery. just because they have more understanding than a normal person does not mean they can do most of the things required, it does not mean they know enough to be teaching.

You should not be instructing beginners in GJJ until you are mid level purple belt. then more advanced stuff when you are a black belt.

It's not an "automatic" sign of a McDojo, but it does typically raise an eyebrow. And here's why.

1) In your first argument, you talk about someone with "extensive knowledge" of multiple arts. Define extensive. Last time I checked there were 365 days a year and 24 hours a day. In other words, only a limited amount of time you can claim to spend on training to begin with, and if you spread that time out among different arts, the less and less you spend with each. Considering the amount of time and effort it takes to learn even one art "extensively", logic would dictate anyone be skeptical of one who claims to have extensive knowledge of multiple styles. At best a person can call themselves a Jack of all Trades, which is knowledge about many but master of none.

2) Independent systems? I actually am skeptical they even really exist. What you could argue is independent, is hardly revolutionary enough to not be found in other systems. The best anyone could argue is "I found how to make karate work for me." Or "I found how to make aikido work for me." But at the end of the day, don't we all just kick with our feet and punch with our hands? Even though I'm barely good enough to tie my belt right (been doing this 20 years, which I would never claim is that long at all) the more I see other styles, the less difference I see between them.

3) He might have "extensive" knowledge in many systems, but I'm betting he has only one "fight theory". A fight theory is your theory in how to best win a fight. Everyone has ONLY ONE fight theory, and people tend to settle with a style (or more accurately a teacher) that matches their independent fight theory. Yes, it can be changed over time as you mature and understand yourself and others better, but you still only have one. So with many syles all with different fight theories, he basically will have only one style that's useful to him, and the rest are just wasting his time. So what's the point?

4) He can care all he wants, but he doesn't know anything himself, what good is that?

5) I admit I learn multiple systems. That's not the issue. What becomes the issue is the attitude that a person has when they do train in multiple systems. Like I said earlier, the more you train, the more all styles start to look the same. Suddenly, there's no such thing as a throwing art and a striking art. They're all just martial arts. You start seeing Judo throws in your karate kata and start seeing karate kicks in your judo throws. There's no rule that says karate can't be a throwing art or judo can't be a striking art. Who wrote that rule? Well people who claim they've trained extensively in many arts. They're the ones that catagorize martial arts into throwing and striking arts placing up these boundaries where the is no such thing. They do it for their own ego and that is all. They limit the arts so they look good.

So yes, anyone who claims to have "extensive training" is a McDojo.

EDIT: So I read your reply. Now, I'm a little confused. Are you here with a serious inquiry or are you here to brag and get validation? I might not know nearly as much as you think (key word: Think) you know about martial arts, but being a woman, I kind of know how the validation game is played, and you're playing it perfectly. Unfortunately, I'm not in the least bit impressed with the knowledge or lack thereof, you've so far displayed here. You stated that if we took karate kicks out, we get judo... actually if you leave them in, you still get judo. It's all really the same in the end. Only a layman who doesn't really know what either style actually looks like would try to say otherwise. I got to Aikido I end up doing tai chi, karate, and aikido all at once. Why? Because it's all the same.

The average person answering here is far from being what most people would call really knowledgeable about martial arts in general. Many of them have a black and white view of the martial arts and do not see (or want to see) that the answers to anything are not one thing or the other. Knee-jerk answers tend to be common here. There are many variations like, all traditional styles don't work, or all MMA is only for sport. These attitudes and the fact that everyone has a different definition of things makes this an impossible question to answer. I know several people that are highly skilled and raked in more than one style. But, all of thyem have spent many years training in each of those styles. It is not fair to say that all instructors that claim multiple styles as background and teach multiple styles are not legitimate. What I watch for is people claiming 10 or 20 black belts in different styles. If they have legitimate ranks progressing in order for each style, and they come from known, legitimate sources, then that is fine. What I see a lot now is someone of high rank claiming that rank in one style, but their resume does not support that claim. For instance if you look at many resumes you see someone claiming say a 7th dan in style A. but their background is not solid up to that rank. What they often do is get a black belt in one style. Then go to another style and learn a little and are given a second degree black belt in that style. Then they go to a third styles and repeat the same thing ending up with the third degree black belt in that style. I have seen a number of people that are claiming rank like this... The truth is that they have a black belt in one style and a bunch of what we old timers call a Cross-grade rank. A cross grade rank is one that is given in a style as a courtesy. In other words lets say a person legitimately earns a black belt in a style, then changes styles. The new organization may give them a black belt in that style. But the person never learned all the style up to that rank. So, he is not really a black belt in that style. It is easy for people to style hop like that and get to high ranks, but know little or none of the styles they have ranks in. I have had a few students leave me after years of training only to pop up again 5 or 10 years later claiming a rank or ranks they could not possibly have earned from legitimate training in those arts. Cross grade ranks are not considered legitimate ranks. The Japanese and Okinawans do not give out cross grade ranks often. when they do they usually write cross grade or honorary on the rank certificate. The writing may be in Japanese so the person receiving the certificate may not know that it is not a valid rank.

Bottom line is simply this... There are a small number of people that hold legitimate ranks of first degree black belt in multiple styles. But there are many more people that have multiple ranks gotten in the manner I described.

...