tonydee

Martial arts provide some guiding principles and experiences to enable people to fight more effectively, so rather than flailing around at random they have some higher perspective in their approach to a conflict. This includes things like psychological preparedness, better awareness of distances, timing, threat assessment, defensive and offensive options and merits. They have some fundamental movements and an understanding of their applicability and effect. As people get better at it, they should find they don't panic or freeze, nor lash out with blind anger or hatred in conflict situations, so they have more control over the engagement and outcomes both in terms of their own safety and the damage done to assailants. With this comes choice: just how gentle or forceful you want to be in a particular situation, whether to injure or restrain.... Martial arts exists to supplement any actual prior fighting experience with simulated experience, drilled techniques, a weight of additional contemplation put in to prepare psychologically and strategically, and physical conditioning. Whether the sum total worth of all this is more or less than someone else's actual fighting experience, or whatever physical activities or contemplation they've done that proves relevant, can only be determined on a case by case, situation by situation basis, but it's just common sense that it's likely to help at least a bit. Still, the gaps in natural athleticism, physical strength, speed etc. between people can be very large, so for martial arts or fighting experience to span them and affect the physical outcome of a conflict is not guaranteed. A fighter could achieve the level of control over a conflict that a martial artist trains for. They could have the same options, even the mindset that a particular martial artist would adopt. Martial arts is just a systemised way to (dramatically) increase the difficulty of scenarios you're able to control or at least "perform" to your ability in. The extra experiences and insights a MAist seeks should "help" them in a fight, but possibly in vastly different directions for different people - e.g. further determination not to lose vs finding peace with the possibility of losing. The former might help minimise actual injury, the latter minimise psychological trauma - though it could also "free" the MAist to be relaxed enough to perform better: hit harder, dodge more smoothly, avoid telegraphing, and ultimately be less injured. Anyway, there's nothing to say that someone who's not a martial artist won't end up contemplating the same issues, or having experiences that provide as good or better insights, forge steelier determination, and they may be as or even more psychologically prepared for conflict. I have been accused by some martial artists of being too focused on fighting. I reject that... to be practical is the guiding light for all martial arts, and anything that turns it back on that becomes a form of dancing, though worse for misleading students that it might be more. Some arts claim to have transcended fighting - and perhaps their founders did - but that is an individual experience, and new students can not be taken directly there without going through the hard yards and realities themselves. I vaguely remember some (Greek?) myth of a battle field where the warriors fought to the death each day, to be reborn overnight. It is interesting to ask: if that were available, should martial artists want to partake (though perhaps not for all eternity)? I'd say yes - provided the experience didn't itself produce some psychological "scarring" (for self or others). Cheers, Tony

The President et al sounds like a potentially healthy school, while the Soke et al sounds like a style that might transcend schools. So, I guess it depends on whether you expect the style to split into independent schools for financial or administrative reasons, but think there might still be enough good will to keep some loyalty and connection on a martial level.... Cheers, Tony

One thing that's surprised and shocked me about my main "style" (the tang soo do to taekwondo continuum) is the chaos, ignorance and lack of basic insight into martial arts applications, biomechanics and physics at "the top". I hate hearing "force equals mass times acceleration" followed by some unrelated or simple-minded conclusion, then a straight-faced claim that their version of the art is scientifically derived. As a junior member in a big school with instructors whose limits you can't even begin to comprehend, you can never imagine that so many taekwondo schools - including your own - not only can't agree on, but can't even begin to enumerate let alone compare, core credible body mechanical principles available to generate power. No wonder there was a void for modern ITF's sine wave to fill, but I still think it's a huge regression from Shotokan hip rotation. And - I believe - top instructors often still don't understand the alternatives and compromises in most kicking movements.... ok... time for some tai chi... Cheers all, Tony ;-P

"snap" is an even more confusing term for most students . And while I intuitively understand and agree with what you're saying, someone who doesn't already understand would probably think of penetration as the amount of distance the striking tool deforms the target, or perhaps the displaced volume, but some swinging strikes may measure more against those criteria than a thrust. Further, I like to make my thrusts "snap" - a term I associate with explosive delivery of power - a transition from relaxation to sudden contraction, and well-timed and -coordinated chaining of muscular contractions throughout the body. I personally don't think of "snap" meaning limited, compromised or swinging power, though I know some people do.... Ahh... good point! Pushing techniques do generally need to be thrusts (ties in with the point in my earlier post about a rule-of-thumb test for thrusting being the ability to push). Not all strikes must start decelerating upon impact: one counter-example is a ridge hand strike... I deliver it by extending the arm about 10cms beside the target then whipping sideways, but there's enough muscles contracting - pectorals, biceps - to tug it in to the target while still gathering speed and power. It all peters out pretty quick, but it's happening inside the target's original space. It's a counter-intuitively strong technique actually (as is front kick): practice it only in the air and you'd never guess how much shock and power it can deliver into a punching bag.... 99% of the time, my palm heel strikes are also thrusts. As the thread shows, the terms thrust and strike aren't particularly clear or obvious, so we can't expect general usage of the terms to be 100% precise either, though I think in the early TKD days some effort was made to be precise.... That's more considerate of the opponent's safety - e.g. self-defense against strangle: strike just enough to distract/shock, then thrust chin up/back to push them away. May also allow that first weaker strike to make contact faster and with less telegraphing, or despite restricted shoulder movement. Sad to compromise the beauty of a full-power full-range thrust though . Cheers, Tony

Not washing the uniform is not an option - mine are soaked with sweat by the time I'm done. I buy uniforms a bit on the large side - if they shrink a touch then fine. Normally wash around 40 degrees, bit of bleach now and then. For striking arts, I only use the thicker canvas uniforms - they don't cling to you like the softer cotton ones. Canvas is a pain to iron though, but I iron them before every training session, even if I'm not attending a formal class.

I know sensei8's already said this, but the lack of anything but thigh power in that is a deal-breaker for me.... It's true that sometimes any contact is better than a strong kick that's too slow to hit, providing it does enough damage to let you follow up before the opponent shrugs it off and thumps you. Still, compromising power that badly should be the exception rather than habitual. It may sound ok on a target due to the large surface area producing a bigger clapping sound, but that can be deceptive.... Cheers, Tony

Congratulations

To me, a strike is any technique that does damage due to impact (so a block can also be a strike). A thrust is one of many sub-categories of strikes. I'll have a crack at putting my own usage into words... might not be as exact as I'd like, but I can't think of any counter-examples where it would classify something as a thrust or not in a way I'd consider inappropriate... To be a thrust, the striking tool (foot, fist, elbow) must get its power from the rotation or flex of the torso AND convey that power along a line predominantly radially outwards from there (as seen when looking down the spine), such that at impact the target is quite linearly and directly linked to the rotation or inertia of the torso and hence a good portion of the attacker's overall body weight. This can be contrasted with movements where the striking tool is prodominantly rotating around its hip, shoulder joint or neck: in these motions the momentary accumulated speed and whip of the striking tool (foot, fist, knee, elbow, head) does the damage, but there is little body weight behind it. As a test: a technique where you can start from a position in contact with the target, and without any back swing, at least powerfully push through the target driving it backwards, is necessarily a thrusting action. Using this distinction, thrusts include good linear punching and palm techniques - where the hand is travelling away from its shoulder as it hits the target, and the shoulder itself is moving towards the target. It excludes all swinging techniques: hook punches, inward/outward knife hands, back fists (even if delivered forwards from the elbow, extending them involves too much rotation around the elbow technique, compromising the power and preventing thrust). Turning kick, spinning heel/hook, axe etc. are not thrusting techniques, while a horse-style back or side kick does thrust. Front kicks are thrusts if the foot travels outwards in a fairly straight line from the hips, but not if it swings upwards like a soccer kick. Some things are close enough in to be almost a thrust, but still involve some elements of swing: forward elbow strikes, head butts. Interesting, an elbow can still be a thrust if delivered directly downwards or sideways - striking with the underside closer to the triceps - as often seen in downward breaks and close-quarters post-block strikes to the head. Cheers, Tony

Your sempai's attitude fits in with my thinking. I see feints a bit like tai chi sensitivity (push hands) exercises... the aim is to move your attack towards them - if they tense up in resistance then you flow around it then snap power into it yourself before they recover from their attempted block... if they stay relaxed and in control then you have to bide your time. Over-commitment is dangerous in fighting... and even the possibility of a strike - without so much as a feint eventuating - limits and controls the opponent's freedom of movement through forcing them to cover or risk wearing it. Everything starts from having a good guard... for me that means fists extended to threaten the opponent's head and allow early blocking, rather than being pulled in towards my own head. Feints with the feet are just as important... for example: the opponent may take an over-deep stance to provide a foundation for a solid block of the expected attack, limiting their mobility for the alternative attack actually delivered. Cheers, Tony

Master of understatement there . In hapkido we practiced both locks and counters, for years, though it's hard enough to get good at locking and countering with another lock is a step up from that.... Cheers, Tony

One power demonstration I respect: get some good 300x300x~18mm pine boards, then break 2 or 3 with a reverse punch while they're suspended from an assistant's fingertips without spacers. It requires good focus and power. Don't hurt yourself though! Best of luck with the grading. Cheers, Tony

First, I would echo the suggestions to practice kicking at a comfortable height until you get the mechanics sorted out. You may even find the muscles you're currently struggling with aren't taxed once the technique is sorted out.... Unfortunately, there are as many variations on turning kick as there are for side kick, so it's hard to break it down to "4 steps" as you requested. Personally, I practice two things: 1) isolating the hip movement and straightening of the kicking leg, developing the power transfer and timing between the two, 2) integrating the rotation of the supporting foot. While you may find practicing your turning kick with a similar breakdown useful, I'm not sure if the specifics of how I do my turning kick will help with your MT technique. I explosively rotate and close the hips - with the kicking foot arcing past horizontal to slightly downwards, while locking the body in a straight line with the supporting heel facing the target. This is almost certainly not the way you've been taught in MT. So, while I'll run through what I do for the record, I'm afraid you may not find it useful.... I found some old video of myself executing a slow turning kick for instructional purposes: just for reference. Note especially how my body is pivoting away from the kicking leg to maintain a stretch down through the torso into the kicking leg's thigh....For 1), I move back and forth between a ready-to-kick position and a kick-completion position. The latter is practically identical to the side kick completion position shown here. The important things about this position are that: a) a line out through the belly-button (imagine someone screwing a maglite in there if it helps ) would angle downwards of horizontal (i.e. the hips are closed towards the ground), b) the kicking foot is similarly angled (for a line through centre of heel and centre of ball), and c) the supporting heel is facing the target. From that position, to return to the pre-kick position, I'm basically wanting to keep the upper body and supporting foot as they are, but open the hips and stretch the kicking knee and foot as far away from the target as possible without "breaking" the position. The idea is to stretch but be able to whip everything back into the kick with one coordinated "twitch" of muscles: predominantly closing the hips again and snapping the quadriceps. You can imagine - from the kicking position - that someone has put their hand on your knee and pushed it away from the target, and you're wanting to drive that knee back into the target but they're too strong, so you relax as much as possible - allowing the upper body and supporting foot to stay firm, flexing the supporting leg, opening the hip a bit, and stretching the quadriceps. If you pause the video when my kicking leg has just come off the ground - foot about knee high - you'll see roughly the position to which you should return (although for a back leg turning kick the supporting foot won't have rotated yet). To kick from there (as if they removed their hand) fire the hips, knee and eventually foot back in towards the target. Throughout the kick, the quadriceps of the kicking foot stay pretty much in line with the upper body... stretching out in the preparation for the kick, and contracting to power the execution. In that regard, there is a stretch much like the oft-seen standing knees-together reach-both-hands-behind-for-your-foot quadriceps stretch. That becomes more important in 2), practice of a rear-foot turning kick. For that, you want to time the rotation of the supporting foot such that it aids the upper body in rotating ahead of the lower to maintain the torso/hamstring stretch. This stretch down through your upper body into the quad connects the rotation of the upper body to the power of the kick. Sorry if the above is too confusing to follow easily (or perhaps at all). Do feel free to ask any questions.... Cheers, Tony

Thanks for posting this up for us to see... quite thought provoking. I also don't charge for testing fees (even the price of boards, belts etc) for gradings, but then I have another well-paid job so am spared the practicalities of a commercial operation. Still, I agree 100% with your reasoning... it's a privilege to be asked to grade, a recognition of potential, effort and character... much of the school's true "wealth" comes with the advancement of its members, and they should be wholeheartedly encouraged without any question of being "milked".... Eliminating dan markings is also good I think. I don't wear any. I still haven't found a 100% comfortable resolution to the problem my old school grappled with 20 years ago: whether and how the instructors should be visually distinguished. The reason we considered this was so new prospective students could see at a glance which black belt they should probably approach, reassuring the head of the school that the reception they received would be as he directed (think he might have ordered a couple of those "how to grow your school" guides from Black Belt magazine ). Still, the instructor was typically pretty conspicuous for other reasons... where they were (behind a desk? apart from others while warming up?), interpersonal body language etc.. I am still a bit uncomfortable with having junior "active" instructors visually distinguished in a way that encourages juniors to perceive them as senior to old-timer non-instructors whose knowledge and practical ability may be far superior... that kind of situation requires mutual respect, and even if it doesn't happen in the junior instructor's dojo/dojang, it can happen when both are at a senior instructor's dojo. So, I'm kind of in favour of nobody showing rank/role, but that does mean that the most junior black belts have to be mature enough to make a good impression on new students and present them nicely to the dojo's instructor. Sometimes new black belts are so caught up in their warm up it's a bit of a shock to have to wind down, refocus, and handle an enquiry, but if the instructor makes them aware of the expectations and procedures all should be fine.... Cheers, Tony

I studied hapkido for 2 or 3 years (reaching 2nd gup), and aikido for 6 months. Aikido never clicked for me, but I can see some of the differences, and largely agree with what's been said already. Another difference was that Aikido movements are made with more attention to your hara, which is often kept facing the opponent, and moved directly through their position to unbalance them. Hapkido is more freeform in these aspects, turning the hips and torso in whatever direction based on the strike, throw or joint lock being employed, with the overall position of the opponent being affected without specific regard to their hara. Re aikido rolls vs hapkido takedowns & restraints - statistically true, but I think both incorporate similar elements. Interestingly, hapkido uses rolls (and breakfalls) as releases/escapes from joint locks.... Re striking: the style of Aikido I studied didn't use much striking either, but I gather that varies a bit, with some styles famous for it. In my hapkido training, strikes were indeed used as softening and distraction techniques in the lead in to joint locks or throws.... Cheers, Tony

I look 45 degrees forwards, which matches my recollection of the patterns in the Encyclopedia (though I haven't got them here to confirm). Cheers, Tony

Definitely the right attitude... the general risk is deciding a slap is enough for almost all the practice situations you're in, then being so habituated to it you can't select something appropriate to another environment (i.e. a real fight). So, good habits, with a mere slap being the exception rather than the rule....

"slap" is a bit vague to qualify a block, but to me it suggests the technique may be being delivered without much body weight behind it, relying on the speed of the hand, and the rotation of the forearm around the elbow. The arm may be being relaxed - sticking to the target with the wrist/fingers wrapping around the blocked limb, but it's also possible that the contact is sharp and snappy and immediately withdrawn. If I understand the thread properly, the slap is being used because a solid kata-like block is considered too slow / over-committed etc.. So, the real objective is to find an alternative. When delivering a minimalist block, I still try to ensure my body is positioned behind it in such a way that I can always escalate the power in the block should the attacker manage to increase the power behind the attack. So, I wouldn't "slap" with the hand predominantly rotating around the elbow, though I might "clap" the attacking limb with my palm, keeping the arm in a position for thrusting/punching where there's power in reserve. Slapping with a relaxed follow-through (mentioned above) is dangerous as it compromises the recovery time for the limb, though in tai ji it is sometimes applied at the elbow to produce a tug back up through the blocked arm into the neck, while controlling the rotation of their shoulders and hence preventing a rear-side attack, and pulling downwards on the front shoulder preventing a front-leg kick. If you are slapping with some follow through, you want to do something like this, having the blocking arm end up somewhere useful for another block, grab or strike without leaving you too vulnerable - generally not easy to achieve. I don't believe in relying on the sparring being light- or semi-contact, trying to get away with delivering a block that wouldn't work in a fight. My take on the "traditional blocks aren't practical" aspect of the discussion: blocking traditionally teaches you the body mechanics and power generation that then allows you to block in a minimalist fashion, while keeping the blocking surface properly connected back through your body to your rotation and mass, as well as giving you the ability to increase the power in a reactive sensitivity sense (like tai chi push hands). I think the same is true of attacks: if you learn a good reverse punch in walking/forward stance, getting the muscles twitching and exploding properly, then your jab in a weaker stance will soon tap in to a lot of the muscle memory and coordination developed, and pack a wallop too. Summarily, try using your traditional blocks, but just through a smaller range of motion, still injecting power from the body for a split-second at contact if needed, all in a minimalist fashion.... Cheers, Tony

Why did the karate comedian get demoted? The punch line was weak.

Welcome Dan. Interesting background. Having spent most of yesterday's training session on hands-only mitt work, I think I can see where you're coming from with the fitness bit! Looking forward to seeing your posts. Cheers, Tony

I do the opposite of what JusticeZero recommends - I try to block or dodge absolutely every attack. I'm not training for competition fighting, not necessarily 1-on-1 or weaponless, no gloves and/or rules, nor the movement possible in any particular venue, but then I'm not normally training with someone really determined to belt me one either, so you can take it either way. But, the consequences: trying to block everything forces you to proactively manage the opponent's distance and freedom to strike. This requires good footwork, timing, guarding, proactive strikes, and appropriate strategy. From the guard, I keep the crucial elbow-to-fist line extended towards their head so I can jab very fast and hard if they try to close. I watch their guard carefully and actively practice removing or bypassing the guard while closing to strike. I make sure I'm making the most of both hands and legs for attacking and defending, and not limiting my awareness to my front or favourite side, thinking of the overall flow rather than any single technique. And crucially, I typically block early - extending my arms to deflect before the attack is focused, rather than meeting its force - coordinating with a counter-attack. It's often useful to deflect limbs to close their body, and/or grasp and tug them subtly off balance, so you are able to counter attack from their side and they can't keep attacking you freely. blackxpress is right in saying your counter has to be committed enough to force the attacker to break off the attack. Unfortunately, if the environment/people are not "respectful", that can mean you have to convince them to take your strikes seriously, one way or another. But, don't let someone think they're getting the better of you just because they're ignoring what you demonstrably could be doing to them. Cheers, Tony

Some things I've found useful for getting kata ingrained: - Running through them regularly: I tend to do all my patterns as part of my warm up, getting gradually faster/harder as I go. - It may seem obvious, but not everybody does this: no matter how well/long you've known your patterns, do sometimes re-examine them in detail, practicing the different sub-sequences, examining the body mechanics, imagining the scenario and application. - Facing different directions, as you - at least subconsciously - can get dependent on the room you're in as a guide to where you are in the pattern and what to do next. Changing the directions forces you to be more independent of your surroundings. - Sometimes, executing the kata as fast as possible, with a mindset focused on good form and power, though the speed will prevent you realising that fully. Whatever you think is fast: challenge yourself to do it faster, then faster again. There's just no time to think... if it's not completely automatic then you will know it. - Do the kata in reverse order (last movement through first movement). Sounds silly, but by learning the same thing in a different order the relationships are reinforced. Mirror-imaging the kata is another fun exercise, but perhaps less useful...? - Practice your kata with your awareness focused on a specific aspect each time: hip rotation, speed of footwork, crispness, height of your upper body as you move between stances, direction of gaze and awareness of things in peripheral vision, relaxation and amount of backswing, etc.... Pasta is good for sustained energy. I used to get to gradings an hour or so early (like most of the students), and running through rotations, warm-ups, stretching, patterns etc. takes a bit of energy even before the grading starts. Hydration is important, not just for gradings - for normal training too: beforehand, keep drinking at a rate that sends you to the bathroom every hour or two. At least for me, once I'm training I won't need to go again.... As for nerves, what you describe is perfectly normal. The "almost zen state" is endorphines. If your mind does go blank - nothing you can do about it - just be ready with a puzzled smile, and continue when you can. The best thing for that is just to get used to the situation: attend gradings when you're not being tested yourself, partake as much as possible, look at the event as a chance to perform what you've worked hard to achieve, and focus inwards on your own determination and keenness and not an outwards askance of the spectators. Best of luck, Tony

Well - very surprised here. Many thanks! Cheers, Tony

It's outrageous and highly offensive. Wise decision to leave.

If you look at it from the perspective of physics, and consider the body to be a distribution of mass, then you can talk about the centre of that body, but it's actually a function of distances and relative directions of parts of the body from that centre. Consequently, if you are standing with feet together and arms hanging beside you, your centre may be around the tan tien, but if you lift your arms above your head your centre of mass will move up significantly. If you sit with your legs out straight in front of you - like a two-leg hamstring stretch - and extend your arms horizontally forwards too, then your centre of mass may well be several centimeters forward of your navel, and completely outside your body. My point is just that it's not worth over-analysing male vs female etc because the idea that there's a single centre is a gross simplification anyway. As such, it is indeed more relevant if you happen to believe there's so chi energy relevance of that part of the body.... Still, one should consider how to mobilise body weight behind techniques, and to that end it's unfortunately necessary to consider much more than just where the centre of mass is: you need to understand the relative motion - including rotation - of different fixed segments of the body, the torques applied by different muscles, the timing with which all this comes together etc.. It's much easier, and reasonably effective, to apply a combination of common sense and experimentation with resistances and targets, cross-referencing with powerful, efficient motions used in weight lifting, rowing, tennis, golf, various actions of physical labour etc., and in so doing accumulate a reasonable intuition about it.... Cheers, Tony

Yes... it's wrong. If you know the gear is good enough that they're safe from injury with the techniques you'll employ, then fine, but that's not what you're asking. When you know you're risking injuring them seriously, then of course it's wrong. The crucial point is that they're probably running the course to try to make a bit of money (fair enough), but hopefully they're sincere in wanting to help people defend themselves, and prepared to take a _bit_ of a pounding to that end, so that the people who're genuinely there to learn self defence walk away more enabled and confident. They're presumably not telling students they're becoming street-lethal black belts, just improving their odds a little against a street crazy. Not only is it unethical to suddenly and unexpected unleash a different class of violence against them, it's actually cowardly. You're effectively picking a fight with someone - probably far less able than you - who's so bound up in pads they can't fight back. It's a completely different matter if you find someone advertising a martial arts system where the practice involves these pads, and they're bragging that they learn how to fight for real against other martial artists / fighters. By all means, go in and - when an instructor's wearing the padding (students aren't responsible for their instructor's bragging) - let rip. I hope you can find someone with the equipment and experience to know how to explore that safely. Rent/borrow/buy the kit and, with a MA friend, gradually escalate the attacks as you find out what's safe. Failing that, you can consider being a cage fighter, bouncer, soldier etc. where - for better or worse - life may bring you some experience. But, walking into a self defence class and overstepping the mark is just wrong. Cheers, Tony