tonydee

Sounds good Kempohands... safe and practical, especially if you keep the front leg ready to lift to protect from lower kicks, and - as you say - use that front hand to protect yourself as you perform the sweep. Gives you lots of good options for front leg kicks as well as the sweep.... Cheers, Tony

There are several legitimate variations on the side kick, involving different movement of the hips, different timing, kicking foot trajectories and supporting foot rotation. First variation: what I've commonly heard called the side 'snap' kick. Shotokan's Kagawa sensei demonstrates it here. I'll ignore it for now, as it's rarely seen in taekwondo or hapkido, and there's a separate thread asking about it. Two other variations are what the ITF calls the side thrusting kick, and the side piercing kick. They are fundamentally different. The piercing kick is specified almost exclusively throughout the hyung/tul of ITF. Despite my practice of the same patterns, I held it in contempt for many years and favoured the thrusting kick, until Hapkido GM Bong Soo Han asked everyone to perform the piercing kick at a seminar I attended, and I figured practicing an extra technique was better than being obviously unfamiliar with elementary techniques at such moments . For simplicity, I'll assume a right leg kick, and clockwise will be from the perspective of the kicker's vision. In the 'piercing' kick, the body rotates in the same direction as for a back leg turning/roundhouse kick - anti-clockwise. The movement feels similar, but the timing is very different and the leg is brought through much more linearly, the foot quickly lifted in front of the right hip, then the supporting foot and hips rotate together while the kicking leg extends, foot effectively jammed out in a slight right-to-left arc to reach the target. Note that the supporting foot does not turn early. This kick works a bit like a hammer hitting a nail, where the kick legs hip is driving from behind to jam the leg (= nail) across and through the target. If you imagine looking down from above and seeing a line through your centre of mass and the target, your kicking foot is forms an arc on the right of that line. Consequently, the kick does not travel straight in to the target - it's 10 or 20 degrees anti-clockwise of that. The supporting foot stops rotating while facing diagonally forwards, right of the target. Because the supporting heel never faces towards the target, any unexpected level of resistance from the target can unbalance the kicker. The kicker is vulnerable to a supporting-knee break. And, the supporting foot is never aligned to push the kicker further towards the target should they retreat further than expected. If they move in closer, it may be too cramped to bring the kick up and get some speed into the extension before striking the target. All up, the kick has what I call a "shallow focal range". One of the best uses of the piercing kick is as a relatively quick, untelegraphed front leg kick, from a fighting stance with front foot/knee nearly forwards, into the ribs of a charging opponent. The thrusting kick is a completely different beast. It rotates in the opposite direction: clockwise for a right leg kick. It is similar to a spinning back kick, and goes very well with stepping or gliding footwork. First the supporting foot rotates so the heel faces the target, supporting leg bent, then the kicking leg is cocked with the line from knee to ankle raised and pointed at the target, then the supporting foot jerks the non-kicking hip forwards as a kind of backswing and preparation for the kicking-side hip to be violently twisted towards the target, with that slinging the leg forwards. It is an enormously powerful kick, and because the supporting leg faces away from the target, it can contribute extra power or forward movement to increase range, or accommodate a bit to allow kicking an overly close target. The supporting leg can absorb reaction forces, keeping you stable after contact. Another bonus for this kick is that the preparation is suitable for extending a hooking kick, and the defender will have a very hard time working out which kick to prepare to block. I have some old notes for a book I was working on, with frames from video all annotated with arrows and comments, but that's probably too much to post in here. So, to answer the OP: which was the foot should face depends on which variant of side kick you're executing. Still, in general: if it hurts, kick lower and slower until you work it out. Re the youtube clips suggested: Revolution of Kicking: the action shown completes the hip rotation before the kick is extended, pushing the kick in a direct line to the target. This has very little power: only the thigh is engaged. Both the kicks mentioned above sling the foot around the hips in an arc, powering the kick from the hip movement. Geoff Sterling, Hollywood Soo Banh Do: absolutely appauling. His balance is terrible, the kicking knee twists downwards during the extension because his foot is twisted at the wrong angle (big toe pressed out). And his hip movement is twisting away from the target during the leg extension! He's effectively starting to drag the leg backwards away from the target even as it's making contact, ensuring poor power, and making it likely he'll be pushed over backwards by - rather than stopping - a charging opponent. Taekwondo Side Kick: The first part of the video is pretty useless as the supporting foot isn't shown while the kicking action is, and the camera angle is bizarre. He's a bit wonky with the hip rotation sometimes. But, close. Later on he's shows a short gliding (he calls it "step behind") side kick into the target: that's the best bit to learn from. Mike Mallon: kickboxing combos. Again, terrible camera work make much of the the video pretty useless. At about 1:45 you can actually see what he's doing. The right/supporting heel is rotated early and maybe 20 degrees to the left of the target, then the kicking leg is brought up and fairly linearly into the target. There's little hip rotation here. Some other candidates: Bruce Lee - not much hip rotation there: he's more concerned with rocking the body back about the centre of mass to kick quickly while gaining reach. Having a target focuses his mind on the power generation in the video here. Kicks from ~1:04: can't see his feet properly, but can see him falling backwards off the bag. I have looked at these videos for years - I'm a bit disappointed as I thought they're be better. lacks full hip rotation during the kick: staying too front on in the approach.... didn't find anything better than the taekwondo one above ... Cheers, Tony

I agree she's acted terribly. Being extremely charitable, one could hypothesize that this lady was in shock or upset either by the punch itself or something else in her life. For example, in my old school when a class is told to do slow sparring, experienced students will have a rough idea of the pace, and each junior pays attention to adopting the pace set by the senior they're sparring. This expectation can not hold when sparring extremely junior ranks, who haven't been acquainted with this protocol. There's a 1 in 1000 chance she had some reason to think you should have been acquainted with this protocol, and - while you might not have realised it - perhaps you sped up when she was deliberately going slow to give you time to block, and instead ran into her fist and pummelled her. Unable to think how to explain all this at the moment it all came unstuck, she may have just blurted "never hit a black belt" as an outrageous over-simplification. Or, just perhaps, she'd had some terrible personal news and couldn't just cope that day. Even if our charitable explanations were right, to do what she's evidently done without even realising the absurdity of it by the end of the class is incredible myopic. But, there are still two things to think about: 1: Was this a one-off outburst on her part, or is it typical? 2: Over the years, most people training will have had a period or two where they had to put up with someone in the dojo who was a bit of a problem: pushing excessively hard in sparring, not understanding or caring about the rules of respect that both keep sparring realistic and safe, being deliberately or unintentionally condescending or patronising etc.. Re 1: how has she been the other days you've trained with her? You could go back and make some excuse for just sitting and watching a few classes, see her and work out whether it's possible to co-exist. Or work out which classes she doesn't attend. Be ready with a neutral explaination for anyone, including her, regarding why you're not training. See if you can use any contact with her to connect in some more personal way - a smile and a few sociable comments - that get her onside. I know it's unfair to have to try, but it's a GREAT skill to have in life, and it's often easier to turn an "enemy" into a friend than you'd credit. Sometimes they know they've acted terribly, and are grateful for the opportunity, even if they'd never admit it . Re 2: A good instructor will soon pick up on problem people and put them in line. You could give this a chance to work. If she's acting like this towards other students, and you see the instructor has noticed but doesn't do anything, then you have a real problem. If the instructor seems to be unaware, you could possibly get closer monitoring indirectly, e.g.: saying you're having trouble forming an effective defense, could an eye be kept on you with a view to a tip or two after class (this sort of request is perfectly acceptable - even encouraged - in some schools, and would be considered presumptuous - for asking for special attention - in others, so use your judgement). Given your options in town are limited, it's a real shame to let one person's attitude problem ruin it. So, put up a bit of fight: at least scout the scene and work out how real the problem is. Regards, Tony

Sorry to be joining the discussion late, as a newbie to the forums.... I think your Church's concerns are potentially rational, and therefore it is reasonable for your Church to disapprove of your involvement with Zen. The reasons for this: Zazen is a method of clearing the mind so that deeper awareness or experience of the nature of existence may manifest; experiences of the intellect, faith, emotions etc, and potentially revelationary in nature. Such realisations tend to inform your subsequent attitudes to things like spirtuality, philosophy, and religion. It's quite easy to imagine your Church will have other methods of practice that they feel more reliably produce realisations in line with their Christian practice (e.g. prayer), whereas they may feel creating a receptive "space" for these moments and not being actively "tuned in to Christ" at the time is inviting some latitude for erroneous or irrelevent revelations. If your Church even suspect Zazen is likely to produce realisations inline with Buddhist philosophy (e.g. the courses of suffering), then they'd naturally be worried as following these ethical principals is absolutely at odds with being a Christian. Buddhism is a consequentialist ethical system ("right" action is determined by predicting consequences), while Christianity is deontological (right action is defined by absolute rules from God). They couldn't be more different. That's not to say that you can't promote one over the other, and be say first a deontological Christian, and then a consequentialist Buddhist in any wriggle room or matters on which Christianity expresses no view. Still, I would suggest that if you already have a mature and reasonably complete context for understanding your role in and expectations of life, then you have no need of Zen. Trusting that whatever happens is your god's will is just as useful and practical a way to fight courageously as believing "self" is impermanent and integral with the universe. Presupposing of course, that you believe God is ok with fighting to begin with, but that's a separate discussion. ( FWIW, I personally embrace the Buddhist ethical/psychological framework as supplying the proper logic for reasoning about such things. Still, I don't accept all the premises that guide application of that logic: most significantly, I do not have a basis for opinion as to whether reincarnation is real. Consequently, I do eat meat, though I guess I'd prefer not to if nutritionally equivalent alternatives were as easily available and physiologically satisfying. I have never been a Christian. ) Cheers, Tony

I think what the WTF has to gain is some evidence of progress, change and inclusiveness, and possible consequent increased audience/sponsor interest levels, to help encourage the Olympic committee not to ditch sports taekwondo.... It certainly could change the balance of power within the ITF forks, though it's hard to say how. Yes, the Major-General did want that, but being the cynic I am, I can't help asking whether it was more about politics. By publicly backing some reconciliation between North and South - even way back when the idea was quite unpopular - he made himself appear a spokesman of vision, above the pettiness of his own times. I think that fits in with his feeble attempts at incorporating some Confucian ethics and junior-high school physics into his teachings (as per the Encyclopedia). There're practically different arts, and I can't see students of either wanting to do the other's forms. Why would all the champions and successful instructors on either side want rule changes that might suddenly relegate them to "also rans"? Or organisational changes where they might not be at the top calling the shots? Those people are often the ones with a lot of students, and hence money flow and clout. For them to go with it, they have to be involved in the process, so that they feel they've had an inside advantage in favouring the things they're good at and saving face, having their names stamped in TKD history. Those who don't get things their way, whose names are proclaimed as pioneers of the union, will split off. Cheers, Tony

I'm also unimpressed by the original four efforts. kickboxing video/dodge & grasp over kicking leg: if the opponent tracks your movement you still end up wearing the power of the kick into unprotected ribs. Especially if the attacker uses a ball-of-the-foot turning kick, or aims it well (e.g. floating rib) - you're in real trouble. It's assuming the kick will come in under shoulder height too - what happens if the kick is unexpectedly high? That back palm seen in Jan-yu Weng/#3 isn't super strong, but it's infinitely better than having no backup as per this video. A good attacker will anticipate the grab attempt too, and be moving to bend the kicking leg and come into striking range, take themselves down to the ground on their own terms, try the all-or-nothing spinning heal, or do whatever else they're keen on. This #1 style of grab doesn't give the fastest movement into the counter attack, so there's more time and opportunity for the kicker to follow up. Taejoon Lee/throw: I've done something similar in Hapkido. One of those counters that relies on being massively better than your opponent, and is therefore not much use for anything but prearranged demonstrations or beating up beginners. As shown, at step 3 the front arm is bent in too close to the chest, and a strong kicking movement would go straight through it. Both arms are engaged and Mr Lee's brought his right temple into range of the kicker's jab. If you've done well enough to anticipate the kick and move early enough to pull this off, you could as easily have done some other counter that provides more "return on investment" than a throw that might not even do any damage.... Jan-yu Weng: As already commented on, the kicking hip isn't rotated in, and a stronger kick would have given more trouble. The kick has been collected on the inside of the left arm and/or shoulder: these aren't the best place to take impact. If the kick comes in waist height... it will probably knock your elbow into your own ribs and you won't get a hold. If it comes up too shoulder high, the shock travels across your shoulders and won't do your neck or head any favours. If it's high enough for the palm to come into play, then it's questionable how effective the palm can be. Getting from step 2 to 3 without collecting a jab is also uncertain, although the kicker here has been foolish enough to tuck the arms back towards his own head instead of keeping them aligned at the target. Sports jujutsu/Ernie Boggs: step 1 as shown is interesting: IF the defender has first blocked solidly with the right forearm while more side on, then slipped sideways into a more frontal position to bring the left arm under the kick and grab, then this is credible. You can absorb take enormously more kicking power from a block in front of your chest than the palm block seen from Jan-yu Weng above, especially if the block makes contact early, before the kick is locking out. BUT, if the defender first blocked a bit side on as shown, then it does indeed look like their neck and/or jaw's going to have taken a blow. The defender is still in range for a counter jab though (obvious from step 2). If the defender got to step 1 and the kicker hadn't jabbed, the defender should have pushed his right arm over the kicker's front arm, preventing the jab and gaining a grip near their right shoulder. The Aikido one posted by Joe is a bit better than any of the above, though the guy is a bit clumsy, and only when one of the kicks comes in a bit lower does he actually block first with his lower forearm before moving into the takedown. I've also trained some like this technique in Hapkido. Say I have either leg forward, and the kicker is using their right leg: I'll also dodge slightly as per the kickboxing video, though it could be inwards (catching the kick before it's had time to extend powerfully) or outwards (catching it after the focus). If my left leg is forward, I'll turn my hips to be a bit more frontal so the arms are stronger. I'll block low with my left forearm and high with my right, so my right elbow is about the same height as my left and fairly close to it: vertically over the halfway point of the left forearm. Thus, I'm covering everything from hip to head with a forearm block, and will adjust my arms to ensure the kick doesn't arrive where my elbows meet. Only after the block has taken the power out of the kick do I slip the left arm under the kicking leg and circle it clockwise until it is back in front of my left chest (if my left leg is forward) or right shoulder, palm almost towards the attacker, fingers facing between 'diagonally up/right' or 'horizontally right' respectively. While doing that, my right arm ensures the kick is trapped against the outside of my upper forearm, and prevents any secondary turning kick to the head. As my left arm circles over the kicking leg, I grab the wrist with my right hand, and pull downwards in a slight arc towards my right hip, bringing the opponent down. Despite sounding complicated, the movements are all simple, small and fast - quite minimal, you've got a distinct blocking stage's hard to penetrate and doesn't give much warning that you're going to try a take down, you're never close enough for the opponent to grab or jab, and the take down moves directly into a pinning lock. It is vulnerable to the all-or-nothing spinning heal, but that's a low percentage technique and if you look out for it you'll have time to block or avoid the worst of it. Cheers, Tony

Yes, some instructors are unnecessarily oppressive, or have their own idiosyncratic ideas that even their own students need to understand are but one of several ways to the true core of the art, or may even be unnecessary or counter productive. The ability to be independent creates opportunities for both meaningful loyalty and honourable disassociation. I think becoming a black belt is also a point where you take on more responsibility for your involvement in a school: are you loaning your presence - and the implied endorsement - to a good institution? Are you contributing? Another aspect is that an instructor wants to know if a black belt ever has to take a break from attending classes, they're typically able to maintain their standard for an extended period and won't look out of place wearing their belt when they return. But the flip side of the second-guessing-the-instructor thing is that too often junior students expect everything at once, when there's just too much information and skill to be absorbed. If an instructor teaches what they consider steps 1, 2 and 3 in their system, a student of a year or so might still hunt around youtube and find steps 6, 9 and 14 being taught to absolute beginners in another system, realise they make sense, and feel cheated. Yet another school might teach all the steps to beginners, but some will be overwhelmed and depressed they can't do everything mentioned. Different combinations can influence progression, and none of these is necessarily a better approach than others. A concrete example: my first school didn't explicitly teach new students hip rotation for the first 6 to 12 months. Students were busy enough with all the kicks, arm movements, stances, patterns, step sparring etc that they rarely noticed anything missing, but if they were clever they'd pick up a little rotation from carefully watching their seniors. Then, when it was introduced, the outward form was ready to be injected with this "engine". But, you got students being told by friends other schools "huh? you think you're punching hard but your hips aren't even moving... look at this... makes sense huh? you ought to ditch that silly school". As an instructor/school, you can't really win whichever way you do it: the important thing is for instructors to demonstrate a proficiency and attitude that's self-evident and inspires some faith, until the student's ready to assess the facts of such matters. Black belt is perhaps the time when - although no master - the expectation shifts on to them. Regards, Tony

One other thing: if you allow your opponent to get too far away from you, then when you reengage you may both be in established motion. This means the fighter with the best timing, footwork and skill will prevail. If that's you, great. If not, try to keep the distance more constant: advance slowly and cautiously on the opponent, but once they're at the edge of your range, keep them static there. If they back away, follow promptly but carefully but don't be overcommitting. This means the opponent is fairly stationary and on the edge of your striking range when they're contemplating attacking. They have to make a big deep movement to reach you. If they're inexperienced, they'll overcommit to their attack, lunging at you. You should be ready for this, pick them off, and counter. If they're more experienced, they'll never over-commit, and will feint and probe to draw your limbs into places they can cover as they close the gap. Can't help that... that's when the hard work and experience pays off. But, when you can, it's good to know how to win the easy way. (Important note: and once you're not learning anything more about winning the easy way, do it hard way just so you're challenging yourself).

Two points: * avoid over-commitment, as longer recovery time creates opportunities for the opponent to close * as you deliver one attack, look out for their block and make sure you are ready with more attacks, or at least some quick disengaging footwork For example: kicks like gliding side kick, spinning heel kick (leg straight), and most "flying" kicks are very committed - a skilled opponent will block or dodge then have time to close the gap. So, only use them if you've already got an advantage over the opponent. Don't reach excessively for a distant opponent, as you'll have to telegraph and over-commit. Instead, narrow the gap more gradually until they're really entering your effective range, and when you attack, mix up some fakes and real attacks, always keeping the hands with the line from elbow to fist pointed at their head: that ensures you can jab out quickly and strongly without telegraphing to follow in behind a kick, or frustrate any attempt to close. Keeping your balance and an appropriate angle of stance towards them is more important than any one attack. Feel the opponent out with a few probing techniques that don't compromise your position much - like front kicks - while keeping your hands up ready to combination punch if they charge or drop their guard. If they do close past your fists, be creative in bending the arms so you can use your elbows, or mixing in some knees, making that trip into your space as difficult as possible. Cheers, Tony

Hi Kez, Nasty experience, and glad to see you getting yourself together after it. Much has been said that I heartily agree with. My main other thought is this: martial arts training's higher purpose is to transcend the fear of pain, injury and death, not the possibility. To walk courageously in to an obviously hostile situation speaks volumes about your progress down that path: your character and loyalty to friends. When I was young, I looked to my training to make me invulnerable, and worried about getting caught off guard, or coming off second best in a real-life altercation (be it on the street or when visiting another martial arts venue). All that walking wide around corners. Timing the overlap of your stride and hand positions to cover any possible attacks of everyone walking past you on the street. Tuning in to the tension in others' bodies, where their attention is focused. I should never have read The Exorcist - I started dreaming about whether I could prevail in a fight against the devil incarnate, should he perchance wander down my street one night . Hey, I was young! All that stressful nonsense that typically only leaves you projecting hostile body language towards everyone around you. Now, I just don't worry about it. You could be killed or hurt by an accident while training, a drunk driver, food poisoning, a virus or any of a million other things anyway. Freedom to enjoy life comes from realising that you're doing things to improve yourself, living the life you want to be living, doing things to statistically improve your odds of influencing outcomes for the better, interacting with people in a way that is dignified and enriching and generous rather than suspicious (whether they deserve it or not). Martial arts should be liberating - even if it means accepting risk, accepting that injuries happen, accepting justice isn't always served but knowing you'll be doing what you can to be on the honourable side of things. Life passes everything into memory, but we choose what memory does to us as people. If physical injury is fleeting, we can be glad and move on. If physical injury is permanent, we must accept and move on. We've all known about humanity's history of attrocities, and understand there are mentally unbalanced and dangerous people out there, it's not worth letting personal experience of that skew things permanently. It's all relative, and these animal acts are tragically meaningless. To be dragged down to their level, or depressed by the reality of it, is a natural tendency but leads nowhere. It should be transcended through understanding the influences that create such people - domestic violence, abuse, crime, peer pressure, bullying, poverty etc. - adding any influence you can to minimise these throughout your society, and yet accepting it much as you'd accept being in the path of a hurricase is bad luck. Attitudes, effort and intent are the basis for self-judgement, not outcomes. Our attitude to others is important, not their attitude to us - which is only a random sampling of humanity reflecting their own issues. That said, we should act using our experience and insight to predict and influence outcomes positively at all levels - self defense and personal. Regards, Tony

I'm no expert on these things, but given the surprising lack of people describing this side of things, I'll chip in with what I can for whatever it's worth. For context: I have studied some internal arts: tai chi chuan, bagua, hapkido, aikido, hwarinmu. Listing hapkido might surprise many, but my master absolutely believed in chi/ki, and we spent considerable time in various exercises. He also taught me tai chi chuan, which he'd clearly been obsessively into at one stage, learning 3 or 4 different family styles and at least half a dozen major patterns culminating in the 108 (?) movement form. I study the Modern Yang style of .I can clearly feel a sensation of chi whenever I choose to do the exercises or focus my mind on it, and sometimes when/after doing external martial arts training. Subjectively, it feels like there are magnets in your body, and you can change their strength and polarity, moving your limbs to new positions by first willing the electromagnetic fields to move, then the body slides smoothly into the new positions. Still, at this very conscious level, I am unable to cause a change in these fields sufficient to provide any vaguely fast motion. You "discover" seeming trajectories of powerful motion around your body that contradict everything an external martial art teaches. For example, one such movement might start with the palm facing behind you, and held 45 degrees outwards from the front shoulder, elbow down, biceps curled, then twist into a palm strike as if hitting a target in front of your sternum. From the perspect of an external art, such a movement might at best generate a slap, and seem pretty much incompatible with efficient reconnection to strong body-mechanical support. Still, it just feels right from an internal energy perspective. Such strikes do appear to be used in the internal arts, even for brick breaking. You can also feel strangely aware of your own surface: you can slide your arms along each other with your eyes closed, and seem to have a heightened awareness of positioning so your hands glide smoothly at miniscule distances from your opposite arm. Bit silly and useless, but just mentioning it because it's a very characteristic subjective perception. Do I believe it's meaningful or useful in a mystical way? No - I've absolutely no evidence of that, and am disinclined to believe it. I haven't convinced myself that it's even vaguely significant except subjectively: if it is an electromagnetic field, wouldn't there be just a tinge of static charge to make a tiny piece of paper, or a compass needle, move? When I stand there feeling a strong energy flow between my hands - why can't I feel something change when someone else passes their hand between mine? Why can't some chi gung master do something to claim $1 million dollars from James Randi... I've checked his web site and he does accept proposals to do the kinds of things chi gung legends are made of, and only expects them to be demonstrated on the humblest scale. For example: turning a piece of paper on a table under controlled conditions. But, as KarateOx points out, chi/ki training does help one relax through a strike, giving 100% commitment, and that makes a huge difference. Where I might have struck a 60kg bag more tentatively with a tightly clenched fist in the past, I now prefer to strike with an open palm, and I force myself to approach the strike with the expectation that the arm will lock out as far as I want it to, and the bag will be flung backwards as if weightless. In general, it works - my arm is no longer an impediment in expressing the power from my legs, torso etc.. I have to swing the bag in towards me hard to get much feeling of impact. Has it got anything to do with chi/ki? No - probably not - but the training that promotes chi/ki feeling gets the body prepared for such movements. Another related observation: due to various racquet sports, an old injury to my left wrist, my own sometimes unbalanced emphasis in training, spending more time in right arm arm wrestles at high school, etc. my right arm is considerably stronger than my left. But when I strike with the palm in this fashion, both arms produce similar power, as the strikes aren't employing arm power. That's very different to my clenched-fist punches of old. It feels liberating. So, do I idolise chi/ki? No... I think martial arts training with or without converges towards the same relaxation and explosive power... different sides of the mountain, but all climbing to the top. Cheers, Tony

In these days, there's almost too much desparately needed wisdom in that to be funny... ^_^. Cheers, Tony

Many good points about the prerequisite ability, attitudes etc. and their variability. I'll chip in with another criterion that's guided me in awarding black belts... The applicant has the ability to take responsibility for their own further learning. That is, they have the foundations to be discerning in assimilating or deducing, refining and applying new knowledge and insight across all aspects of the art. They're reasonably competent in understanding why they do what they do, and how it compares to alternatives. I'm not saying they're ready to teach anyone else yet, but they no longer constantly need an instructor to guide their progress.... Cheers, Tony

Many thanks for the warm welcome. Vierna: I do hope you get a chance to try hapkido. Coming from the old-style, hard, linear TKD background - which might be similar to your Shotokan/Fundokan? - I found learning hapkido helped enormously. Guess the magic of it was that to throw or joint lock someone you have to coordinate your movements with theirs, rather than brutally imposing your movements on them. The former promotes better touch and feel (kind of like wing chun sticky hands), improves minimalism of movement and effort (less diversion from further defense or attack, and good against stronger opponents), moving more proactively to block from more advantageous angles/distances, you get used to selectively tugging or pushing your opponent's striking tools to unbalance, prevent or delay their movements: can be a huge advantage, and done subtly they won't even realise you're doing it... just think their balance is a bit wonky today . All good fun. For me, that touch/control side was more useful than the joint locks and throws - most of which I don't feel can be effectively applied against a similarly-experienced, -bodied and talented skilled hard stylist....

Sorry - didn't mean to imply that at all. Just saying, from my own experience, when comparing the hip-rotation employing sine wave to whatever hip rotation you were doing before that, the latter may not have been a great baseline. Almost everyone is doing some hip rotation, and subjectively most people think they're doing a lot of it, but it's necessary to understand and try the alternatives (preferably with someone who's mastered them to guide/correct) before being able to conclude which one's really most useful for you. Saying that, it's an open question in my mind. I'm genuinely interested in what you're comparing sine wave to. I personally haven't practiced sine wave motion enough to get used to it. A guy I trained with at my old school (profile) ended up joining ITF, and did tell me it took him a couple years to get used to but then he was sold on sine wave. I don't know if he ever understood Shotokan-style hip rotation though. Must look him up when I'm back in my old home town and compare. Cheers, Tony

I hear this a lot, but for me it's only half an equation. When you don't use sine wave - what do you use? When I started learning very old-style TKD, we were taught to raise the back heel up off the ground while keeping the leg pretty straight - lifting the body weight - then drop the heel and body weight while trying to get the hips to rotate. It kind of worked - we could punch pretty hard and break things (well, most of us ) - but in hindsight it made little sense and was hideously inefficient in generating rotational power through the hips. For people from a similar TKD background, I can understand the sine wave being an improvement. But, long time ago - through the introspection that comes with explaining techniques to beginners - I "rediscovered" Shotokan style hip rotation. Made me feel like a complete moron for not twigging to this earlier. It's so simple, strong and direct in rotating the hips into the technique that it often comes as a revelation to TKD people who've not tried it before. The best youtube video I've found on it is here. It really annoys me that I had to spend 10+ years training without understanding this just because early Korean TKD lost it amidst the scrambling political in-fighting and manic transmogrification of the 'art' into something that could be distanced from karate. Not to say that there wasn't innovatation and value added in other technical areas - all that focus on kicks did yield results - but when the fundamentals of hip rotation for hand techniques are lost, it's no wonder the death of hand techniques themselves follow... they can't be effective without support. Cheers, Tony

Hello all, My name's Tony... and I'm a martial artist. (Sorry - couldn't resist the AA style). Been at it since '86... some type of TKD / korean-karate, with a smattering of hapkido, tai chi and other things. Not formally training with or teaching for anyone right now, but still throw my limbs around a few times a week. I consider myself a traditionalist. That's probably all (more than? ;-P) you'd want to know, but so I can refer anyone who ever asks to this post, or for anyone who finds nitty-gritty detail interesting, I'll add a few details below - maybe some conversation will come out of some of it. Feel free to PM me if you think the discussion won't interest others. Best regards, Tony I joined Rhee Chong Chul's Rhee Taekwondo school in '86. My own understanding follows - though I've never discussed it with Master Rhee and he might put things differently. Having been one of the 12 original masters sent by the KTA and Choi Hong Hi to disseminate TKD worldwide, Rhee's TKD was presumably learned back before the word "taekwondo" was coined ('55). Some time after he set up the first large scale TKD operation in Australia, he severed ties with the world wide bodies. One consequence is he's been stuck at 8th dan all the years I've been training (loyalty=promotion, discuss ;-P). Another is that the TKD practiced stayed static, in a time warp compared to most other schools. My local Chief Instructor left Rhee shortly after I joined, and we also stayed separate and tried to maintain the same training and standards. Despite learning in a "taekwondo" school, I consider what I practice to be Korean-influenced karate - and still very similar to Japanese karate - especially as I have reverted to shotokan style hip movement. The differences I consider significant are: * I exhale sharply with most blocks and strikes * when punching, I sling my arm around my body rather than jam it out in front * my fighting stances are not overly low, nor are they high or bouncy * many of my kicks have either early TKD mechanics, or what I've deduced is reasonable, which typically involves more power from the hips than most arts/styles * I still (only) practice ITF patterns in pre-sinewave form Being masterless and pretty much isolated in my style, I choose to put "kong soo do" - Way of the Empty Hand - in my profile to avoid confusion between my practice and most modern taekwondo or tang soo do (although the latter was once synonymous with kong soo do, it's been more publicly 'claimed', carries associations I lack, and creates expectations I don't fulfill). As you can probably tell, I take my training (painfully) seriously. I'm afraid I'm a bit opinionated at times too. But, always glad to discuss issues and acknowledge alternatives. The history bit above I normally spare people, but this does seem the "time and place" for it. My real interest is in body mechanics and practical fighting skills for self-defense, but in saying that, I consider formal exercises including kata/hyung to be integral to mastering both, and have no interest in competition or sport. Which is not to say I don't enjoy competitive spirit in sparring: just that the rules I find work best are those of self-knowledge and -control from both parties, coupled with awareness and respect. Within that framework you can push harder and faster than it's sustainable (medium term injury wise) to do in sports competitions with feeble padding. Again, not trying to start an argument - just sharing my perspectives so people know where I'm coming from, and anyone who's always wondered "how can anyone still believe that" knows where to come for an attempt at the other side of the issue . I very much look forward to discussions with you all.

I've also come across a few interviews where Choi Hong Hi admitted he didn't learn physical techniques of taekyon from his calligraphy teacher... at best his imagination was stirred by stories of the art, and perhaps he did try to make up for a bit in later years, changing the ITF TKD techniques in odd ways to distance it from karate, until that sine wave stuff was born. I also agree that it's very likely modern tae kyon is heavily influenced by taekwondo. I've observed the same with hapkido - the kicks are a superset of taekwondo's, and where they overlap the techniques are the same. With taekwondo being compulsorily taught to school kids in South Korea, what chance has any other art got of removing the kicking habits they form? If they try, they probably won't have many students... habits are hard to break, and most people want to be able to cross train simultaneously in taekwondo, hapkido and whatever else they're doing while having the various influences more or less accepted.

Probably not the way it started. Those instructors who trained sports champions became wealthy and famous, attracted more new students, and had something to brag about that would cement deals for books, videos and magazine articles. Junior students want to learn sports from ex champions and their instructors, and they are defined by their competition success. These people are marketable - they build the large successful schools that pump funds back into the parent body, the magazines that advertise them for free get their credibility from quoting their tournament achievements, and therefore they have the influence on the "art's" evolution. They teach what they know - and that's what they've learned to win. Their students learn more of that. Even the ones trying to incorporate real self-defense typically aren't qualified to do it. Many others who wanted at least enough success to keep teaching had to follow suit to an extent, even if their real interest or ability was in self defense. Ultimately, an art is inevitably transformed into a sport by competition rules. Where I've trained and taught, there's been aggressive but controlled sparring, and nobody's keeping score or proclaimed champion. It's about education, learning from how you were caught out and how you overcame.... No - it won't be permitted. That would make it easy for so many other hardened kickboxers to enter WTF TKD tournaments and humiliate the fighters. My bet is that the Olympic committee would resist such a change too: they let TKD but not other systems, to remove the principal rule shaping the differences is to admit a grave misjudgement. Yes, it would have a gradual affect that would benefit practitioners' self defense abilities. Still, most WTF TKD instructors wouldn't know how to teach this effectively, so they'd throw in whatever they could manage or be taught themselves in a weekend seminar. Not a good scenario.