joesteph

It was a good article; right to the point. I think the caution/explanation regarding moving an injured person was the most important one listed, because it's commonly done in an effort to do good--and yet it may be the worst thing to do if you're not a professional, like an EMT.

Reading the postings by DWx and Aodhan reminded me of a teacher who told me she'd been on the track team while in college. She had her track-related exercises and training, but her coach believed that athletes needed a body balance that heavy emphasis on their individual sport didn't produce. So she and other track team members visited the on-campus fitness center regularly, where they focused on upper body exercises, usually by using machines, meaning that they never over-trained the track (lower body) muscles, while strengthening (rather than neglecting) the muscles that weren't directly related to their sport. Interesting concept.

I think body balance is the key. If you're top heavy instead of centered, if you're righting yourself when you turn instead of flowing . . . I see body balance--in a sense, "Can you stand on your own two feet?"--as the key. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

There was a past question with responses about elbows and ankles, that someone may be born with a weakness in the joints, and how they dealt with this. I was thinking more in terms of a healthy joint that can become inflamed or even injured by improper martial arts practice. I think most of us have been cautioned against hyperextending the elbow when punching, that a lockout at the climax of this strike is really too much stress on the joint no matter how strong the arm muscles are. I've discovered that I have to concentrate on avoiding hyperextending the elbow when doing low blocks within a hyung. Kata/hyungs are done against air, not targets, and there can be a snapping motion on a joint like the elbow or knee at the end of the air strike or block, especially if you want to perform with speed and strength. I've found it easier to control the punch, which is me trying to bury my fist into the imaginary opponent's face or body, than to control the low block, which need only be strong enough to redirect.

I had read Taylor's article before, and when I came across it again, I thought I'd re-read it. These particular paragraphs, though separated in the text of the article, caused me to think of the non-martial artist. There are those who do not study a martial art, who do not consider self-defense, because they believe that attacks (such as the two homeless men who attacked Taylor) happen to other people. They can think of no reason(s) why they would be in need of self-defense (even though, to other people, they are other people), assume that this means no reasons exist, and so they have no need to be prepared--such as to study a martial art. This kind of thinking may come from a false sense of security about the town in which they live (even though they lock their doors and put the alarm on each night), or even a belief that the martial artist is the kind of person who is the cause of altercations, who goes to places where there's bound to be trouble--in a sense, blaming the victim for the crime.

I really found this video link very interesting. I think that if you're in a street situation you do make eye contact, but your actual focus (by quick glances?) is the chest-shoulder area, you'll be more aware of your adversary. I'd add in "hands up" at chest level, with palms out or at a 45 degree angle, to define space and be in defend/attack position, akin to the blindfolded Wing Chun practitioner having his hands placed before him. It was a drill, yes, but the blindfolded defender was "one" with his immediate, forward space, even when his partner tried snaking through--to be stopped and counter-attacked every two seconds. It was awareness and control bound together.

Thanks for including this note, Josh. It reminds me, in a "reverse" way, of how the Japanese say "kara" in karate for China and for empty, but use a different character, so "China-hand" (or Chinese-hand) became "empty-hand."

As you can see, Wa-No-Michi, no pressure at all . . . _ _ _ _ _

Definitely. And so the "martial" aspect was not a factor to her, making her comfortable and enjoying the sport. Bad person!? Wa-No-Michi, I would never think such a thing! The point I was making was that what was once martial was sport and fun to her, but though I did target-shooting instead of hunting or being in battle, she remained uncomfortable with what to her was a "true" weapon. I was referring to her perspective. When I did own firearms, I always had them put away. I live in the Northeast, and there are fewer people here who display their firearms collection than in, say, the South or Midwest.

He didn't, even when it was evident it was necessary. I paid the price for it. I'm not only introducing my sons to karate for physical and emotional health reasons, which are good in and of themselves, but they need to know how to defend themselves. They learn in the dojang and I have certain reviews at home, but not too much that they will grow to dislike it. And I believe that if I had a daughter or daughters, I'd have her/them taught by me, a professional, or most likely both. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

What frightmaster is saying is right on the mark. Here are videos that you can access to see what he says, in motion: The best one, in that it's a teaching one: http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=4j1w—TjqVY A short teaching demo: http://www.expertvillage.com/video/90392_soo-bahk-do-kicks-side.htm Another short teaching demo: http://www.expertvillage.com/video/94532_tae-kwon-do-strikes-kicks-side-kick.htm A combo, teaching both the regular and spinning versions: http://www.expertvillage.com/video/133940_kickboxing-combos-side-kick-spinning.htm

Could the students identify, as individuals, where they see themselves as strong, or as needing special concentration/help?

A past girlfriend loved archery, which she was introduced to and practiced in college, and we know that the origins of archery were for hunting and warfare. She never used (and I don't remember if she ever mentioned seeing) the large arrowheads that are still used for bowhunting, just the target arrows/arrowheads. I met her after she graduated from college, and though she no longer did the bow and arrow, she was open to fencing. She and I took fencing lessons together, and the sword was certrainly developed as a fighting tool, but the swords we used were of course designed with tips that wouldn't puncture. However, she was afraid of firearms (I used to target shoot), seeing them associated only with violence. The war/violence concept of arrows and swords were "lost in time" for her; they were sports, fun, but not martial at all in her mind. I never debated the point with her; she was comfortable with this thought and I saw no reason to make her uncomfortable.

Good point made here, Bushido Man. Very good analogy with kickboxing.

I clicked on the link you found, Kansas City, and it says: After creating his [GM Tiger Yang's] art form Moo Yea Do, meaning Skill, Art and Philosophy, he is deemed 10th Dan Degree black belt of Moo Yea Do. MooYeaDoKid, who told you it meant "Way of Disciplined Art," since it's not what the official web site says? Josh is pretty adept at this, MooYeaDoKid. It doesn't look like what he's translating is anything like what the site says. You should be able to clear this up with your instructor. If you feel you're progressing, learning self-defense and the art of Moo Yea Do (I remember a video of you sparring; you were holding your own pretty well), then being pleased with the program, even happy with it, says to stay, at least until a dan ranking is achieved. If you don't feel this way, then you know what to do. Keep moving forward . . .

There's no arguing with the voice of experience, pittbullJudoka. I'm at a lower belt level, and there's no guarantee that I'll pass a test to a higher one just because a certain amount of time has passed by. It's probably better to skip a testing time that you're touch-and-go with, and wait for the next time, when you really feel you're ready. Thanks for sharing your experience and insights with all of us.

Really looks interesting. I voted on the photos, too.

Ki Cho Hyung Il Bu Ki Cho Hyung E Bu Ki Cho Hyung Sam Bu Pyung Ahn Cho Dan 100 Leg raises!

I was looking through past postings/topics, and found this one to be especially interesting, in that we put so much of ourselves into the martial arts, and yet sometimes I wonder if remember/think about why we became involved. Let's face it; it is a commitment. I especially looked for what applied to me, but that others had stated it first. Throwdown maintained, "I would rather have the training and never have to use it then need to use it and not have the training," and DC supported this by saying, [A]lthough I probably won't need to actually use it, it's nice to have skills to rely on in case I do, like Throwdown said." This is really "self-defense" to me; not to be looking for an altercation, and yet not to be on the receiving end, either. Tiger observed, "Growing up I've always hated feeling intimidated by people and 'not in control' of certain situations," which was actually my problem growing up as a male who was not as strong as other males, and who wasn't taught by my father how to fight--"how to take care of myself" as was said in the past. This brought me to thoughts by Brokensword, "One major thing I've gained from my training is to be more confident and sure of myself," and DC, "Karate has also affected me on a more personal level. I have more confidence in myself . . ." When I weight-trained, I gained a boost in self-esteem, and when I started studying martial arts, it was a true confidence-builder in social situations. I have to say that Johnmcc's posting, "I started because my son was desperate to try out Karate . . ." reminds me of how I returned to martial arts because of my sons, who profit in physical development and emotional stability (as they are special needs), and they can go at their own pace--you compete against yourself. They really want to go to karate class, and when I practice with them, it's a father-sons thing that I wouldn't give up for the world. Studying karate on my own (adult) days only helps me keep fit physically, and sound emotionally. My boys, David and Patrick, will receive their promotion to orange belt (from white belt with eight stripes signifying times of progress) during October, and Dad is working on getting an adult stripe on his orange belt. I'd better get that stripe or my boys will outrank me! David: Patrick: Dad:

Their fighting makes me think of them going up against Chuck Norris's World Combat League, Darth Paul, rather than MMA, which has grappling. You knock them out, no one taps out, in the WCL fights. I wonder if the PKA fighters would have adjusted just as well to the round ring as the traditional one? The heavy hitters show you're referring to does sound interesting.

Under what circumstances, Jim, are some better than others? One scenario might favor a particular martial art or group of related martial arts, and another scenario might favor completely different ones. It's sound to agree that a martial art shouldn't remain static, but evolve over time. New martial arts come into being, taking from existing knowledge, seeing existing arts in a new light, forming new applications, and producing something unique, while some older ones might no longer hold their allure if they fall behind the times, that they have stagnated. I think this might be interpreted as a "call to arms," Jim, that the martial artist with broader knowledge (and so a greater arsenal) is in a better self-defense position than one who holds to the ways of a single art, and so to a single perspective. This makes me think of the samurai in Japan and the hwa rang in Korea. Nowadays, we have an emphasis on the average citizen seeking to protect him- or herself in a street situation, especially to be able to escape from the scene and call the police. It doesn't take away from the police and the military needing their own martial arts training, but most martial artists of today are not members of these organizations, and we can't expect the police in particular to be everywhere at once to protect us. Barring everyone carrying weapons, we fall back on our own awareness and self-defense capabilities.

Martial art moves permeate the Taiji forms, tallgeese, but the questions are: does the instructor teach these moves as fighting moves to the student; does the instructor even know the fighting applications within the forms? Perhaps another question would be if students, particularly American students, of Taiji would attend a Taiji school if the "martial" in the art were emphasized? Don't most take Taiji because they're interested in "meditation in motion"? One of my fellow teachers was born in China, and he said it is true that it's practiced by great numbers of people right there in the parks, but he added that it appears to be for health, not fighting. For me, the combat applications came out when doing a two-man form; for my father, Taiji was part of his therapy after a mini-stroke. Interesting point.

A good move. Even if it's a different school, it'll be "friendlier" to you. That's why you've got us, Shoto.

Have you ever read Education of a Bodybuilder by Arnold Schwarzenegger, Ethan? He had been involved in soccer, bike-riding, and even free-hand exercises before he started lifting weights in his teenage years in Austria. He remembers the first time he tried to ride his bike home after one of the first sessions. He fell over; he couldn't ride it and had to push the thing home. The next day, his mother fretted over him, but his father just brushed it aside as that Arnold was new to it, his muscles were sore, and that's just natural. His father was right, and we all know Arnold's success story in bodybuilding. Hang in there, Ethan.

That second video, the flying triangle, looks like a video someone could study from, especially due to the camera angle. But the first video, the flying armbar, is in wickedly rapid motion. How many (or few) seconds did it take to win that bout?