The “Anomaly” Con-Game

  I am repeatedly encountering “instructors” of Tuite (whoever's form they happen to be teaching) who (repeatedly) whine about how their technique doesn't/won't “work” (on an individual), because “that” individual is a part of that (small) percentage of the population that fall into the “Anomaly” group of people (that it doesn't work on).
  Really?,...Your going with that argument?... It appears that in addition to not knowing how to perform the technique, they are blaming the “1” (individual) in 10 to 50 thousand (yes, that's 1 in 10-50,000 people) that some of the technique's will not work upon (in the manner desired).
  They are attempting to convince people, that they encounter these “anomalies” on a regular basis? (WTF?). I don't think so. I would have to state that the odds of that occurring are FAR greater (against it even happening) than the failure rate that they are admitting to.
  Tuite (which is Oyata's form of limb manipulation), requires a greater level of anatomical understanding than the majority of “what-ever” it is being taught at these “seminars”, that the vast majority of these guys are showing (and yes, I purposely didn't write “teaching”).
  The “other” argument (against the practicality of Tuite) is the “smaller” people (usually females) can't perform them on bigger subjects (ie. “males”). That too, is complete Bullshit. It's a failure of the instructor, not the student (or of the technique).
  There are many of these technique's that can be performed with limited training. But that doesn't assure competency with that technique, only familiarity. I know from personal experience, that after being shown 1 particular technique, I spent the next year figuring out how to make it work (correctly).
Strangely (at least to me, LOL), it's the (more) fundamental technique's that I see being performed incorrectly (and more often).
  The majority of the “seminars” that I've observed (appear to) want to focus on the more (involved?) “busy/flashy” forms of techniques. Rarely (if ever) do I see a seminar being advertised for the instruction of “Beginning/Basic” technique's for Tuite.
It is those technique's that will most often be utilized in a defensive situation. Yet, most seminars are (attempting to) teach some (odd form of) elaborate technique's that “I” would never attempt in the best of circumstances.
  From all that I've seen (via “U-Tube”, or in Person), the focus has been on quantity, and certainly not quality (in regards to either the instruction, or the techniques). The “goal” is evidently to provide just enough information, to make you want more (future seminars?).
  It's those “beginning/basic” techniques that students are (far) more likely to use, than any of the more elaborate ones.
  If we were to conduct a seminar covering just the fundamentals of the performance of Tuite technique's, we would (require) a minimum of a 3 hour window just to explain/demonstrate all of the principles of application (from the initiation of the technique, through the submission of the uke) for 1, maybe 2 techniques (for a 10-20 attendee seminar).
  Our L.E. Seminars commonly contained (approx.) 3-4 technique's/subjects and they were (a minimum) of 8 hours (more often those were a multiple day event).
  You speak to most of the attendee's (of what was “advertised” as being a Tuite seminar), and they're “all about” whatever was shown (at the seminar). But as soon as you begin to challenge (whatever was taught to) them, (and usually with the logistics of what was shown), it commonly all falls apart.